A SURVEY ON TCP (TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL) AND UDP (USER DATAGRAM PROTOCOL)

OVER AODV ROUTING PROTOCOL

26

International Jornal o! Re"ear#$ (IJR) Vol%&' I""e%(' A)"t 2*&+ ISSN 2348-6848

A Survey on TCP (Transmission Control Protocol)
and UDP (User Datagram Protocol) over AODV
Routing Protocol

Robin Singh
1
, Praveen Tripathi
2
, Rahul Singh
3
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Kanpur Institute of Technology, Kanpur
[email protected]
1
, [email protected], [email protected]
3



Abstract: A mobile Ad-hoc network
(MANET) is a collection of wireless nodes
aimed at information exchange and
resource sharing. The Ad hoc On-Demand
Distance Vector (AODV) a well-known and
widely used protocol for MANETs. This
paper presents the study of TCP and UDP
(two transport layer protocols) over AODV
in a Mobile Ad hoc Network. The study is
done on the TCP and UDP transport
layer protocol and performance metrics
l i k e QoS defines a guarantee given by the
network to satisfy a set of predetermined
service performance constraints for the user
in terms of end-to-end delay, jitter, and
available bandwidth. Therefore, routing
protocols must be feasible for all kinds of
constrained applications to run well in a
MANET. However, it is a significant
technical challenge to define a
comprehensive framework for QoS support,
due to dynamic topology, distributed
management and multi-hop connections for
MANETs.

Keywords: TCP, UDP, AODV, MANET, QoS.


INTRODUCTION

The Mobile Ad-hoc Network (MANET) is a
collection of wireless nodes communicating
over the wireless medium without any
infrastructure. Working in ad-hoc mode
allows all wireless devices within range, to
discover and to communicate in peer-to-
peer fashion without involving any base
station. These nodes form a random
topology, where the routers are free to
move arbitrarily and arrange themselves
as required. In MANET communication
between two mobile nodes is made
possible by providing a multi-hop path due
to shorter range of radio signals. They offer
transmission speeds of several Mbps,
making possible the support of multimedia
applications and real-time communications
in MANETs. Since the area that must be
covered may exceed the transmission
range of the wireless devices, suitable
routing protocols must be used to
permit multi-hop communication, where
as a hop is considered each wireless
device. As the ad-hoc network has
limited bandwidth, frequent topology
changes and the energy limitations of the

A SURVEY ON TCP (TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL) AND UDP (USER DATAGRAM PROTOCOL)
OVER AODV ROUTING PROTOCOL
2(

International Jornal o! Re"ear#$ (IJR) Vol%&' I""e%(' A)"t 2*&+ ISSN 2348-6848
mobile hosts, the protocols used for
wired networks are considered
inappropriate for MANETs. Therefore, for
this highly dynamic environment new
routing protocols have been designed.
These protocols are classified as either
proactive or reactive. The proactive (or
table-driven) protocols maintain their
routes through periodic updates and each
node locally maintains routing tables. On
the other hand, in the reactive (or on-
demand) protocols the routes are
established when required. The
proactive approach provides fast response
to route requests, but consumes more
bandwidth since the network
connectivity information must be
continuously updated to reflect topology
changes [1].
Many Researchers have gone
through TCP and UDP for different routing
protocols using various mobility models.
The Random Waypoint mobility
model is particularly popular for TCP as
its performance may be affected by the basic
initialization of other mobility models such
as Reference Point Group mobility models
(RPGM), Freeway model, Manhattan
Model (MM) [2].
We have selected AODV as a
routing protocol. This protocol is widely
used in wireless environment and has
numerous implementations available. The
main focus of our paper is the comparative
analysis of TCP and UDP over AODV
protocol with respect to mobility, with
varying pause time, node speed and node
density. Our work participates to show
that in which environment AODV works
better for different QoS metrics.


RELATED WORK

The AODV routing protocol is developed in
1994 by C. Perkins. It uses a modified
version of Bellman-Ford algorithm. For each
node a sequence number is maintained
which is generated from the destination,
Bellman-Ford is usually used only when
there are negative edge weights. The
algorithm was developed by Richard
Bellman and Lester Ford, Jr [3].
Authors discussed the performance
and comparison of wireless routing
protocols including DSDV [4]. They
simulate fixed size network with varying
pause time and velocity. They used
simulation model with dynamic network
size and pause time remained zero. The
simulation measures all the QoS of the
routing protocols, e.g. delay, jitter,
throughput, loss ratio.
In [5], authors have discussed the
performance evaluation of DSR, AODV and
DSDV in grid environment to evaluate
which routing protocol gives best
performance in target mobile grid
application. According to author,
performance of DSR decreases with
mobility with high rate as compare to DSDV
and AODV.
The major issues of Ad hoc
environment has discussed by authors in [6],
it concern with energy consumption due to
mobility. Mobile nodes are battery operated
is a well known fact. OLSR and DSDV
conserve less energy as compare to DSR and
AODV.
The performance evaluation of,
AODV, DSDV, DSR and TORA ad hoc
routing protocols focusing on their
suitability to support real time applications
[1]. Simulations are done for a wide range of
mobility and traffic scenarios.

A SURVEY ON TCP (TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL) AND UDP (USER DATAGRAM PROTOCOL)
OVER AODV ROUTING PROTOCOL
2,

International Jornal o! Re"ear#$ (IJR) Vol%&' I""e%(' A)"t 2*&+ ISSN 2348-6848
MANET reactive and proactive
routing protocols comparison evaluations
has studied [7]. The protocols that use in
MANET are DSDV, AODV, DSR, TORA,
TORA, WRP ZRP and many more. The
performance of these protocols are
compared in term of packet delivery
fraction, end-to-end delay normalized
routing load routing overhead for 50 nodes
and 100 nodes network model with different
number of sources.
Most of the related work has done
experiments on DSDV with TCP or UDP
connection individually, but not on both
comparatively. Our approach is novel on the
basis of both TCP and UDP combine
evaluation. All our effort is to identify in
which environment TCP work well and UDP
as well.
TRANSMISSION CONTROL
PROTOCOL (TCP)
The Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) is
one of the core protocols of the Internet
protocol suite (IP), and is so common that
the entire suite is often called TCP/IP. TCP
provides reliable, ordered and error-checked
delivery of a stream of octets between
programs running on computers connected
to a local area network, intranet or the public
Internet. It resides at the transport layer.
Web browsers use TCP when they
connect to servers on the World Wide Web,
and it is used to deliver email and transfer
files from one location to another. HTTP,
HTTPS, SMTP, POP3, IMAP, SSH, FTP,
Telnet and a variety of other protocols are
typically encapsulated in TCP.
The protocol corresponds to the
transport layer of TCP/IP suite. TCP
provides a communication service at an
intermediate level between an application
program and the Internet Protocol (IP). That
is, when an application program desires to
send a large chunk of data across the
Internet using IP, instead of breaking the
data into IP-sized pieces and issuing a series
of IP requests, the software can issue a
single request to TCP and let TCP handle
the IP details.
IP works by exchanging pieces of
information called packets. A packet is a
sequence of octets (bytes) and consists of
a header followed by a body. The header
describes the packet's source, destination
and control information. The body contains
the data IP is transmitting.
Due to network congestion, traffic
load balancing, or other unpredictable
network behavior, IP packets can be lost,
duplicated, or delivered out. TCP detects
these problems, requests retransmission of
lost data, rearranges out-of-order data, and
even helps minimize network congestion to
reduce the occurrence of the other problems.
Once the TCP receiver has reassembled the
sequence of octets originally transmitted, it
passes them to the receiving application.
Thus, TCP abstracts the application's
communication from the underlying
networking details.
TCP is optimized for accurate
delivery rather than timely delivery, and
therefore, TCP sometimes incurs relatively
long delays (on the order of seconds) while
waiting for out-of-order messages or
retransmissions of lost messages. It is not
particularly suitable for real-time
applications such as voice over IP. For such
applications, protocols like the Real time
transport Protocol (RTP) running over
the User Datagram Protocol (UDP) are
usually recommended instead.

A SURVEY ON TCP (TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL) AND UDP (USER DATAGRAM PROTOCOL)
OVER AODV ROUTING PROTOCOL
2-

International Jornal o! Re"ear#$ (IJR) Vol%&' I""e%(' A)"t 2*&+ ISSN 2348-6848
TCP is a reliable stream delivery
service that guarantees that all bytes
received will be identical with bytes sent
and in the correct order. Since packet
transfer over many networks is not reliable,
a technique known as positive
acknowledgment with retransmission is used
to guarantee reliability of packet transfers.
This fundamental technique requires the
receiver to respond with an acknowledgment
message as it receives the data. The sender
keeps a record of each packet it sends. The
sender also maintains a timer from when the
packet was sent, and retransmits a packet if
the timer expires before the message has
been acknowledged. The timer is needed in
case a packet gets lost or corrupted.
While IP handles actual delivery of
the data, TCP keeps track of the individual
units of data transmission, called segments
that a message is divided into for efficient
routing through the network.
TCP protocol operations may be
divided into three phases. Connections must
be properly established in a multi-step
handshake process (connection
establishment) before entering the data
transfer phase. After data transmission is
completed, the connection
termination closes established virtual
circuits and releases all allocated resources.

USER DATAGRAM PROTOCOLS
(UDP)
The User Datagram Protocol (UDP) is one
of the core members of the Internet protocol
suite. With UDP, computer applications can
send messages, in this case referred to as
datagrams; to other hosts on an Internet
Protocol (IP) network without prior
communications to set up special
transmission channels or data paths. The
protocol was designed by David P. Reed in
1980 and formally defined in RFC 768.
UDP uses a simple transmission
model with a minimum of protocol
mechanism. It has no
handshaking dialogues, and thus exposes
any unreliability of the underlying network
protocol to the user's program. As this is
normally IP over unreliable media, there is
no guarantee of delivery, ordering, or
duplicate protection. UDP
provides checksums for data integrity,
and port numbers for addressing different
functions at the source and destination of the
datagram.
UDP is suitable for purposes where
error checking and correction is either not
necessary or is performed in the application,
avoiding the overhead of such processing at
the network interface level. Time-sensitive
applications often use UDP because
dropping packets is preferable to waiting for
delayed packets, which may not be an option
in a real-time system.
[2]
If error correction
facilities are needed at the network interface
level, an application may use
the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)
or Stream Control Transmission Protocol
(SCTP) which are designed for this purpose.
A number of UDP's attributes make it
especially suited for certain applications.
It is transaction-oriented, suitable for
simple query-response protocols
such as the Domain Name System or
the Network Time Protocol.
It provides datagrams, suitable for
modeling other protocols such as
in IP tunneling or Remote Procedure
Call and the Network File System.

A SURVEY ON TCP (TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL) AND UDP (USER DATAGRAM PROTOCOL)
OVER AODV ROUTING PROTOCOL
.*

International Jornal o! Re"ear#$ (IJR) Vol%&' I""e%(' A)"t 2*&+ ISSN 2348-6848
It is simple, suitable for
bootstrapping or other purposes
without a full protocol stack, such as
the DHCP and Trivial File Transfer
Protocol.
It is stateless, suitable for very large
numbers of clients, such as
in streaming media applications for
example IPTV.
The lack of retransmission
delays makes it suitable for real-time
applications such as Voice over
IP, online games, and many
protocols built on top of the Real
Time Streaming Protocol.
Works well in unidirectional
communication, suitable for
broadcast information such as in
many kinds of service discovery and
shared information such as broadcast
time or Routing Information
Protocol.
COMPARISON OF TCP AND UDP
Transmission Control Protocol is a
connection-oriented protocol, which means
that it requires handshaking to set up end-to-
end communications. Once a connection is
set up, user data may be sent bi-directionally
over the connection.
Reliable TCP manages message
acknowledgment, retransmission and
timeout. Multiple attempts to deliver the
message are made. If it gets lost along the
way, the server will re-request the lost part.
In TCP, there's either no missing data, or, in
case of multiple timeouts, the connection is
dropped.
Ordered If two messages are sent over a
connection in sequence, the first message
will reach the receiving application first.
When data segments arrive in the wrong
order, TCP buffers delay the out-of-order
data until all data can be properly re-ordered
and delivered to the application.
Heavyweight TCP requires three packets
to set up a socket connection, before any
user data can be sent. TCP handles
reliability and congestion control.
Streaming Data is read as a byte stream,
no distinguishing indications are transmitted
to signal message (segment) boundaries.
UDP is a simpler message-
based connectionless protocol.
Connectionless protocols do not set up a
dedicated end-to-end connection.
Communication is achieved by transmitting
information in one direction from source to
destination without verifying the readiness
or state of the receiver. However, one
primary benefit of UDP over TCP is the
application to VoIP where latency and jitter
are the primary concerns. It is assumed in
VoIP UDP that the end users provide any
necessary real time confirmation that the
message has been received.
Unreliable When a message is sent, it
cannot be known if it will reach its
destination; it could get lost along the way.
There is no concept of acknowledgment,
retransmission, or timeout.
Not ordered If two messages are sent to
the same recipient, the order in which they
arrive cannot be predicted.
Lightweight There is no ordering of
messages, no tracking connections, etc. It is
a small transport layer designed on top of IP.

A SURVEY ON TCP (TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL) AND UDP (USER DATAGRAM PROTOCOL)
OVER AODV ROUTING PROTOCOL
.&

International Jornal o! Re"ear#$ (IJR) Vol%&' I""e%(' A)"t 2*&+ ISSN 2348-6848
Datagrams Packets are sent individually
and are checked for integrity only if they
arrive. Packets have definite boundaries
which are honored upon receipt, meaning a
read operation at the receiver socket will
yield an entire message as it was originally
sent.
No congestion control UDP itself does not
avoid congestion, unless they implement
congestion control measures at the
application level.

AD-HOC ON-DEMAND DISTANCE
VECTOR ROUTING (AODV)
In AODV, the network is silent until
a connection is needed. At that point the
network node that needs a
connection broadcasts a request for
connection. Other AODV nodes forward this
message, and record the node that they heard
it from, creating an explosion of temporary
routes back to the needy node. When a node
receives such a message and already has a
route to the desired node, it sends a message
backwards through a temporary route to the
requesting node. The needy node then
begins using the route that has the least
number of hops through other nodes.
Unused entries in the routing tables are
recycled after a time.
When a link fails, a routing error is
passed back to a transmitting node, and the
process repeats. Much of the complexity of
the protocol is to lower the number of
messages to conserve the capacity of the
network. For example, each request for a
route has a sequence number. Nodes use this
sequence number so that they do not repeat
route requests that they have already passed
on. Another such feature is that the route
requests have a "time to live" number that
limits how many times they can be
retransmitted. Another such feature is that if
a route request fails, another route request
may not be sent until twice as much time has
passed as the timeout of the previous route
request.
The advantage of AODV is that it
creates no extra traffic for communication
along existing links. Also, distance vector
routing is simple, and doesn't require much
memory or calculation. However AODV
requires more time to establish a connection,
and the initial communication to establish a
route is heavier than some other approaches.
The AODV Routing Protocol uses an
on-demand approach for finding routes, that
is, a route is established only when it is
required by a source node for transmitting
data packets. It employs destination
sequence numbers to identify the most
recent path. The major difference between
AODV and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR)
stems out from the fact that DSR uses source
routing in which a data packet carries the
complete path to be traversed. However, in
AODV, the source node and the
intermediate nodes store the next-hop
information corresponding to each flow for
data packet transmission. In an on-demand
routing protocol, the source node floods
the RouteRequest packet in the network
when a route is not available for the desired
destination. It may obtain multiple routes to
different destinations from a
single RouteRequest. The major difference
between AODV and other on-demand
routing protocols is that it uses a destination
sequence number (DestSeqNum) to
determine an up-to-date path to the
destination. A node updates its path
information only if the DestSeqNum of the

A SURVEY ON TCP (TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL) AND UDP (USER DATAGRAM PROTOCOL)
OVER AODV ROUTING PROTOCOL
.2

International Jornal o! Re"ear#$ (IJR) Vol%&' I""e%(' A)"t 2*&+ ISSN 2348-6848
current packet received is greater or equal
than the last DestSeqNum stored at the node
with smaller hop count.
A RouteRequest carries the source
identifier (SrcID), the destination
identifier (DestID), the source sequence
number (SrcSeqNum), the destination
sequence number (DestSeqNum),
the broadcast identifier (BcastID), and
the time to live (TTL) field. DestSeqNum
indicates the freshness of the route that is
accepted by the source. When an
intermediate node receives a RouteRequest,
it either forwards it or prepares a
RouteReply if it has a valid route to the
destination. The validity of a route at the
intermediate node is determined by
comparing the sequence number at the
intermediate node with the destination
sequence number in the RouteRequest
packet. If a RouteRequest is received
multiple times, which is indicated by the
BcastID-SrcID pair, the duplicate copies are
discarded. All intermediate nodes having
valid routes to the destination, or the
destination node itself, are allowed to send
RouteReply packets to the source. Every
intermediate node, while forwarding a
RouteRequest, enters the previous node
address and its BcastID. A timer is used to
delete this entry in case a RouteReply is not
received before the timer expires. This helps
in storing an active path at the intermediate
node as AODV does not employ source
routing of data packets. When a node
receives a RouteReply packet, information
about the previous node from which the
packet was received is also stored in order to
forward the data packet to this next node as
the next hop toward the destination.

PERFORMANCE METRIC
QoS defines a guarantee given by the
network to satisfy a set of predetermined
service performance constraints for the user
in terms of end-to-end delay, jitter, and
available bandwidth.
Therefore, routing protocols must be
feasible for all kinds of constrained
applications to run well in a MANET.
However, it is a significant technical
challenge to define a comprehensive
framework for QoS support, due to dynamic
topology, distributed management and
multi-hop connections for MANETs.

Throughput: It is one of the dimensional
parameters of the network which gives the
fraction of the channel capacity used for
useful transmission selects a destination at
the beginning of the simulation i.e.,
information whether or not data packets
correctly delivered to the destinations.

Packet Delivery Ratio: Number of Data
Packets Delivered over Number of Data
Packets Generated. Number of Data
Packets Delivered is the total number of
received data packets by destinations;
Number of Data Packets Generated is the
total number of generated data packets by
sources.

Average End to End Delay: average packet
delivery time from a source to a destination.
First for each source-destination pair, an
average delay for packet delivery is
computed. Then the whole average delay is
computed from each pair average delay.

Drop Ratio: Packet Drop rate is one of the
indicators for network congestion. In
wireless environment, due to the physical

A SURVEY ON TCP (TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL) AND UDP (USER DATAGRAM PROTOCOL)
OVER AODV ROUTING PROTOCOL
..

International Jornal o! Re"ear#$ (IJR) Vol%&' I""e%(' A)"t 2*&+ ISSN 2348-6848
media and bandwidth limitations, the chance
for packet dropping is increased. Therefore
we choose it as one metric.

CONCLUSION

In this paper we have studied the
AODV routing protocols over TCP and
UDP Transport Layer. TCP is connection
oriented protocol while UDP is connection
less protocol. The study of the protocols was
done with respect to metrics like
Throughput, Packet delivery ratio, end to
end delay and Drop Ratio.

REFERENCES

[1] Stavroulopoulos, T. Antonakopoulos and
V. Makios, 2001. Performance evaluation
of mobile ad hoc network routing protocols
for real time applications support, in
Proceedings of COMCON 8, Crete, Greece,

[2] Divecha, B., A. Abraham, C. Grosan and
S. Sanyal, 2007. Impact of node mobility on
MANET routing protocols models.
Presented at JDIM, pp: 19-23.

[3] Perkins, E. and P. Bhagwat, 1994.
Highly dynamic Destination- Sequenced
Distance-Vector routing (DSDV) for mobile
computers, in Proceedings of the
SIGCOMM 94 Conference on
Communications Architectures, Protocols
and Applications, pp: 234-244.

[4] Yuan, Peiyan and L.I. Layuan, 2006.
Performance evaluation and simulations of
routing protocols in ad hoc networks. In
Proceedings of the 2006 workshop on
Broadband wireless access for ubiquitous
networking (BWAN '06). ACM, New York,
NY, USA, Article 2. DOI=
10.1145/1189186.1189189 http://
doi.acm.org/ 10.1145/1189186.1189189.

[5] Usop, N.S.M., A. Abdullah and A.F.A.
Abidin, 2009. Performance evaluation of
aodv, dsdv and dsr routing protocol in grid
environment. IJCSNS, 9(7): 261-268.

[6] Ouakil, L., S. Senouci, G. Pujolle and
V.I. University de Paris, 2002. Performance
comparison of ad hoc routing protocols
based on energy consumption. In Ambience
Workshop.

[7] Azad, S., A. Rahman and F. Anwar,
2007. A performance comparison of
proactive and reactive routing protocols of
mobile ad-hoc network (manet). Journal of
Engineering and Applied Sci., 2(5): 891-
896.

[8] The CMU Monarch Project, Wireless
and Mobility Extensions to ns-2,
www.monarch.cs.cmu.edu/cmu-ns.html.

[9] Rai, R. M., & Kumar, M. M. (2014).
Implementation and Performance Evaluation
of Energy Constraint AODV Routing.
International Journal of Research, 1(5),
368-374.