International Conference on VLSI, Communication & Instrumentation (ICVCI) 2011

Proceedings published by International Journal of Computer Applications® (IJCA)

MAC Vs Routing Protocols in Mobile Adhoc Network

B.Uma V.R.Sarma Dhulipala
M.E., Pervasive Computing Technologies Assistant Professor, Pervasive computing Technologies
Anna University of Technology, Tiruchirappalli Anna University of Technology, Tiruchirappalli
Tamil Nadu, India Tamil Nadu, India

ABSTRACT eliminates all periodic routing updates. The Intermediate nodes

The Mobile adhoc network (MANET), is a collection of mobile use the source route included in a packet to determine to whom a
wireless nodes that self-organize without the aid of centralized packet should be forwarded. AODV (Adhoc on demand distance
control or any preexisting infrastructure. This paper presents the vector) is a reactive, distance-vector routing protocol suitable for
effect of MAC protocols (MAC 802.11, MAC/TDMA) on various highly dynamic networks. Like in DSDV, each node in AODV
routing protocols in order to choose the best routing protocol and maintains a routing table but the routing table only contains active
MAC protocol to enhance the performance. The simulation routing entries. Its route construction process and maintenance
compared three adhoc routing protocols on various routing mechanisms are similar to those in DSR.
protocols named DSDV,DSR and AODV implemented through
NS2.With the help of performance metrics such as throughput and 3. MAC PROTOCOLS
average delay it is shown that MAC 802.11 gives better 3.1 IEEE 802.11
performance than MAC/TDMA. The IEEE 802.11 MAC protocol specifies a Distributed
Coordination Function (DCF) which is based on the same
General Terms RTS/CTS message exchange for unicast data transmissions as the
Calculation of Throughput, Average Delay, IEEE 802.11, TDMA previous MAC protocols. Where 802.11 differs, however, there is
. a use of collision avoidance before RTS transmission, and its
requirement of an acknowledgment (ACK) transmission by the
Keywords: MANET, DSDV, MAC, DSR, AODV receiver after the successful reception of the data packet. The
inclusion of the ACK allows immediate retransmission if
1. INTRODUCTION necessary by verifying that the data packet was successfully
A mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is comprised of mobile hosts
received. In the case of node mobility, the ACK may also aid in
that communicate with each other using wireless links and based
the detection of hidden-terminal interference that was not
on the peer-to-peer paradigm. A MANET is a self-configuring
detectable when the CTS message was sent. Main functions of
network that can have an arbitrary topology along the time. Each
802.11 MAC layer are scanning, Authentication, Association,
mobile host works as a router and it is free to move randomly and
RTS/CTS, power save mode.
connect to other host arbitrarily. Thus, the network topology can
change quickly and unpredictably since there may exist a large 3.2 TDMA MAC Protocol
number of independent ad hoc connections. In fact, it is possible Unlike contention based MAC protocol (802.11, for example), a
to have different applications running on the same MANET. In a TDMA MAC protocol allocates different time slots for nodes to
MANET a route between two hosts may consist of hops through send and receive packets. The superset of these time slots is called
one or more nodes. An important problem in a MANET is finding a TDMA frame. With this protocol, a TDMA frame contains
and maintaining routes since host mobility can cause topology preamble besides the data transmission slots. Within the preamble,
changes. Several routing algorithms for MANETs have been every node has a dedicated sub slot and uses it to broadcast the
proposed in the literature such as ad hoc on-demand distance destination node id of outgoing packet. Other nodes listen in the
vector routing (AODV), dynamic source routing protocol (DSR). preamble and record the time slots to receive packets. Like other
These algorithms differ in the way new routes are found and common TDMA protocols (GSM, for example), each node has a
existing ones are modified. To analyse the performance of MAC data transmission slot to send packets. To avoid unnecessary
protocol for various routing protocol, three protocols were power consumption, each node turns its radio on and off. The
selected for study such as Destination Sequence Distance Vector radio only needs to be on when: in the preamble phase (takes one
(DSDV), Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) and Adhoc On demand slot time) and there is a packet to send and receive.
Distance Vector.
4. RELATED WORK
2. ROUTING PROTOCOLS Royer and Perkins[4] has presented the performance comparison
An easy way to comply Destination Sequence Distance Vector of WRP,FSR,AODV routing protocols when combined with
(DSDV) routing is an enhancement to distance vector routing for varying MAC protocols .The performance of these protocols
ad-hoc networks. Each node exchanges its neighbour table doesn’t show notable variation when run over different MAC
periodically with its neighbours. protocols.
Abdul Hadi and Ahmed [1] has presented the performance of
Dynamic Source Routing performs route Discovery and route AODV, DSDV, I-DSDV protocol were measured with respect to
Maintenance. The basic principle of source routing is also used in metrics like packet delivery fraction, end to end delay and routing
fixed networks; e.g. token rings. Dynamic source routing

10
 International Conference on VLSI, Communication & Instrumentation (ICVCI) 2011
Proceedings published by International Journal of Computer Applications® (IJCA)

overhead. Here it is proved that I-DSDV has improved PDF and

end to delay when the node is high still it has lower performance
compared to AODV.
Aaron and jieWeng [2] showed that network lifetime is
significant issue for the performance of a multihop adhoc network
.DSR outperforms DSDV at high node density. It is obvious that
this is not a complete study of all the major protocols.
V.C.Patil and V.Biradar [8] has presented that the use of a
particular routing protocol in mobile adhoc networks depends
upon factors like size of the network, load, and mobility
requirement etc.It is showed that the choice of DSDV is
preferable which uses source routing.
T.G.Basavaraju and Shankar [7] has presented the performance
evaluation of routing protocol over three kinds of MAC protocol
for adhoc networks IEEE 802.11, E-TDMA, CSMA.This showed
that table driven protocols act similarly with different MAC
protocols .DSR suffers with more control overhead packets when
compared to AODV. It also showed that the end-to-end delay is
very less in case of AODV and generated less control overhead.

5. SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT
We simulated three different protocols (AODV, DSDV,
DSR).This study is necessary to choose the best routing protocol
for particular MAC protocol. We have compared and analyze the
MAC 802.11, MAC TDMA for each routing protocol. This study
outperforms six combination of routing protocols. From that we
can choose the appropriate combination to enhance the
performance of a network. The Fig1 depicts the system model of
the study. In addition to above assumption we defined adhoc
network with certain attributes. Throughput is the measure of how
fast we can actually send through network. The number of packets
delivered to the receiver provides the throughput of the network.
The Table 1 shows that parameters and the values used for
simulation. The entire simulations were carried out using NS2
network simulator which is a discrete event driven simulator
developed at UC Berkeley as a part of the VINT project. The goal
of ns2 is to support research and education in networking. It is
suitable for designing new protocols, comparing different Fig 1: System Model
protocols and traffic evaluation.NS2 is developed as a
collaborative environment. It is distributed as open source
software. A large number of institutes and researchers use Table 1. Simulation Parameters
maintain and develop NS2. NS2 versions are available for Linux,
Parameters Values
Solaris, windows and MAC os.NS2 is built using object oriented
language c++ and otcl. NS2 interprets the simulation script written Bandwidth 11MB
in otcl. The user writes his simulation as an otcl script. Results are Data Rate 11MB
obtained by NS2 . It has to be processed further by other tools like
network animator (NAM), Perl, awk script etc. Interval 0.005s
Packet Size 1000
Propagation Model Two Ray Ground
Maximum Packet 50

11
 International Conference on VLSI, Communication & Instrumentation (ICVCI) 2011
Proceedings published by International Journal of Computer Applications® (IJCA)

6. RESULTS 7. REFERENCES
To determine whether the selection of MAC protocols affect the [1] Abdul Rahman and Abdul Hadi, Ahmed zukarnain
relative performance of the protocols two results were examined. “Performance comparison of DSDV, DSR, I-DSDV”
European journal of scientific Research
[2] “Performance Comparison of Adhoc Routing Protocols for
Networks with Node Energy Constraints” class project
spring 2000-2001.
[3] C. S. R. Murthy and B. S. Manoj, Ad Hoc Wireless
Networks: Architecture and Protocols, ch.Routing Protocols
for Adhoc Wireless Networks,pp.Prentice Hall
Communications Engineering and Emerging Technologies
Series, New jersey Prentice Hall Professional Technical
Reference,2004Tavel, P. 2007 Modeling and Simulation
Design. AK Peters Ltd.
[4] Elizabeth M.Royer, Sung je Lee, Charles E.Perkins ”The
Effects of MAC Protocols on Adhoc Network
Fig 2:Routing Protocol Vs Throughput Communications”
[5] Jyoti,Jain, Mahajabeen, Fatima, Dr.Roopan Gupta,
Dr.k.Bandhopadhyway, “Overview and Challenges of
Routing Protocol and MAC layer in Mobile ad-hoc
Network”
[6] R.Rozovsky and P.R. Kumar, “Seedex: A MAC protocol
for ad hoc networks,” in Proceedings of ACM MobiHoc
2001, October 2001
[7] T.G.Basavaraju, Subir Sankar“Impact of MAC layer on the
performance of Routing Protocols in mobile adhoc Network”
International journal of information and communication
engineering
[8] V.C.Patil, V.Biradar, Dr.R.R.Mudholkar, Dr.S.R.Sawant
“Performance comparison Of Multihop Wireless Mobile
adhoc routing protocols” special issue on ubiquitous Security
Systems Staub.T., (2004).” Ad-hoc and Hybrid Networks:
Fig 3: Routing Protocol Vs Average Delay Performance Comparison of
[9] Staub.T ,(2004)” Adhoc and Hybrid Networks:Performanc
Throughput and average delay. The protocols DSDV, DSR,
comparison of MANET Routing Protocols in Ad-hoc and
AODV prove to be sensitive to the functionality of the MAC
hybrid Networks.” Institute of Computer Science and
protocol. Fig 2 illustrates the throughput of DSDV, DSR, and
Applied Mathematics, University of Berne Switzerland pp.1-
AODV for MAC 802.11 and MAC TDMA.DSR outperforms
38 for Distributed Systems ,Integration, Technical report,
maximum throughput when compared to others. Fig 3 illustrates
Global Grid Forum(2002)
the average delay of three protocols for both MAC protocols.DSR
also outperforms the minimum delay. Hence DSR protocol has [10] T.S. Rapport. Wireless Communications, Principles &
better overall performance using MAC 802.11 than using TDMA. Practices, chapter 3, pages 70,74. Prentice Hall,1996.
This results shows that there is a increase in throughput and
decrease in delay. The collision avoidance mechanism [11] R.Rozovsky and P.R. Kumar, “Seedex: A MAC protocol for
incorporated in to IEEE 802.11 for the transmission of RTS ad hoc networks,” in Proceedings of ACM MobiHoc 2001,
packets aids in the reduction of the number of collisions. This October 2001
mechanism includes three control packets for a transmission. [12] Carlos de Morais Cordeiro, Hrishikesh , and Dharma P.
Hence it gives better performance than TDMA. Agrawal, University of Cincinnati, “Multicast over Wireless
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks: Present and Future Directions”.

12