International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology Volume 71 Issue 5, 251-258, May 2023

ISSN: 2231–5381 / https://doi.org/10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V71I5P226 © 2023 Seventh Sense Research Group®

Original Article

An Adaptive Hybrid Routing Protocol for Efficient Data

Transfer and Delay Control in Mobile Ad Hoc Network
Augustine Chidiebere Onuora1, Eyo Edmund Essien2, Felix Ukpai Ogban3
1
Department of Computer Science, Akanu Ibiam Federal Polytechnic, Unwana, Ebonyi State, Nigeria.
2, 3
Department of Computer Science, University of Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria.
1Corresponding Author : [email protected]

Received: 21 February 2023 Revised: 02 April 2023 Accepted: 03 May 2023 Published: 25 May 2023

Abstract - Research is gaining significant attention over the potential of wireless ad hoc networks in different domains of life.
As a new gadget connects to an available network, the network grows. If the size of the network grows, the likelihood of node
congestion grows as well, with an increase in packet delivery delay. This then gives rise to the complexity and unpredictability
of network load. Therefore, the call for efficient routing protocols has become imperative as days go by in an ad hoc network.
Available ad hoc networks can be MANETs (Mobile Ad hoc NETworks), WMNs (Wireless Mesh Networks), WSNs (Wireless
Sensor Networks) or VANETs (Vehicular Ad Hoc NETworks). This research advocates a hybrid protocol that integrates AODV
and OLSR. AODV was used for initiating the route selection and routing to the destination, but in the event of route congestion
or link failure, the OLSR uses "multipoint relays" (MPR) to complete the packet routing to the target node. The performance
of the novel “Responsive Hybrid Routing Protocol” (RHR) was tested on NS3 with several simulations for nodes between 20
to 200 and results compared to other individual protocols like AODV and OLSR. The test was conducted against network
metrics like the ratio of the number of packets delivered, the ratio of end-to-end delay, the jitter delay and the ratio of packet
throughput. This novel hybrid protocol RHR outperformed OLSR and AODV in the percentage of end-to-end and jitter delays.
This research showed that RHR has the potential to mitigate delay and improve the transfer of packets in MANETs.

Keywords - Ad hoc, Delay, Hybrid, Performance, Protocol, Simulation.

1. Introduction
As wireless devices and gadgets grow more and more perform an increasingly important part to both civilians and
prevalent, wired networks have become inefficient and have the military, where wireless access to the network backbone
ushered in a new age of networking known as Ad Hoc is either insufficient or unavailable. Mobile Ad hoc networks
networks. Ad Hoc Network is composed of two or more are made up of stations (nodes) that interact wirelessly
wireless gadgets, terminals, or connecting points that without needing a permanent network infrastructure [3-4].
communicate with each other without the assistance of an
administrator or central server. In addition, it is self- When the size of an ad hoc network grows above a
sufficient, configurable and linked by mobile wireless certain threshold, any single routing system may become
networks that act as routers at any point in data transmission ineffective. As a result, the condition for utilization, the total
[1]. connected nodes on the network, and the occupancy of a
node's buffers all play a role in deciding which routing
They have a dynamic topology, low-bandwidth protocol to use [5].
connections, a lack of resources in the nodes, and additional
route choices (every node is a router). Its use can be Mobile Ad hoc networks provide a significant barrier to
advantageous in military situations (tanks, soldiers, and infrastructural maintenance. So, for example, the mobility of
planes), meeting rooms, emergency and rescue operations, nodes affects the network architecture and results in frequent
personal area networking such as Wireless home networking, route breaks and service interruptions; the radio spectrum is
Bluetooth, Special applications, and industry controls [2]. restricted and prone to error, resulting in a data rate
significantly lower than that of a wired network. Another
As wireless networking technology advances and the difficulty for MANET is managing power on the nodes,
number of portable computing devices increases, wireless which is limited by battery life and data delivery delays,
and mobile ad hoc networks will become valuable and especially when there is congestion on a channel [6].

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

 Augustine Chidiebere Onuora et al. / IJETT, 71(5), 251-258, 2023

Small and sophisticated network systems have always In their study, [13] designed a Zone-based Hierarchical
relied on routing as the basis for communication. Routing Link State Routing Protocol (ZHLS) from LSR (Local) and
protocols are frequently unable to provide essential stability LSR (Global). The hierarchical routing structure is what
within a complex communication infrastructure when ZHLS uses. Non-overlapping zones are used to segment this
plagued with problems such as the mobility of nodes, network protocol. Only the connected node inside its non-
dynamic communication difficulties, and node movement on overlapping zone and the network's zone connectivity are
devices with resource constraints [7]. The Problems that known to each node. Global zone levels and Local nodes are
routing protocols in MANETs are confronted with, which the used for link-state routing.
researcher hopes to find answers to, are:
• Frequent path breakage Also, [14] proffered the hybrid protocols named
• Delay in data delivery Distributed spanning tree (DST). It was a combination of
• High packet loss HTF + DST. It uses a hierarchical routing structure. They
suggested a distributed technique that adjusts to topology
This research aims to produce a hybrid routing protocol while using spanning trees in regions with stable topology. In
comprising the combination of the strength of AODV (a regions where the topology is very dynamic, an intelligent
reactive protocol) with that of OLSR (a proactive protocol). flooding-like approach is used. The hold-and-forward
Some related works were explored, and the following were method or the shuttling technique is used when routing
discovered. packets in s.

2. Literature Review According to [33], ZRP referred to as Zone Routing

There is no need to establish any infrastructure in a Protocols, is a hybrid protocol that combines IARP and IERP.
MANET to allow nodes to connect with one another. It uses a flat routing structure. Every network node in the
MANETs have special properties that make congestion Zone Routing protocol employs the hybrid routing
control more difficult. The typical TCP congestion control mechanism, which involves proactively preserving routing
technique is incapable of dealing with the unique peculiarities knowledge about its local surroundings, known as the routing
of a shareable wireless multi-hop network. The shared nature zone, and reactively establishing routes to target areas outside
of the wireless network and the frequent changes in network the routing zone.
topology poses substantial challenges [8]. This is why hybrid
protocols play an important role in solving this challenge. Besides, ZRP and DSV were combined to form
HOPNET, which uses the hierarchical routing structure of
Major challenges observed by [9] are Spectrum soldier ants moving from one area to another. The HOPNET
allocation, Medium access control, routing protocols Self- algorithm comprises a native proactively sourced path inside
configuration, Energy efficiency, Security & Privacy QoS, a node's neighbourhood and a reactive broadcast across
and Mobility management. These were highlighted as issues neighbourhoods [16].
in wireless ad hoc networks.
From different studies [17-18], the Independent Zone
The constantly changing characteristics of network Routing Protocol (IZRP) was proposed. It was a modification
topology cause some network links to be established while to the Zone Routing Protocol that permits distributed
others are dropped. The routing techniques developed for configuration and responding to changes as regards the
wired networks cannot be employed in a professional setting increase of node size of the network and zone on a per-node
for wireless networks. Here are a few innovative routing basis. As a hybrid routing protocol, the Zone Routing
techniques for wireless ad hoc grids that are fit for the Protocol (ZRP) enables every network node to proactively
energetically changing ad hoc wireless scenario. [10] store routing data about its routing zone while reactively
examined the QoS metrics of throughput, minimum, acquiring routes to locations beyond the routing zone.
maximum, and average delay, as well as packet delivery
ratio, for the two on-demand routing protocols AODV and Furthermore, [34] in their work recommended a hybrid
DSR. Moving forward, let us take a look at hybrid protocols. bio-inspired protocol called HACOR. It uses some
characteristics from proactive and reactive protocols (ACO +
The researcher in [32] opined that the term "hybrid Swarm intelligence). Data is sent to the destination using
protocol" refers to protocols created by combining reactive multiple paths because HACOR is established and relies on
and proactive routing protocols. In general, [12] affirmed the multipath during operation. It is also adaptable because it
Distance Vector was used by the routing protocol to discover adjusts to the varying movement of nodes and network
the shortest path and information about routes is sent as an situations as it utilizes the ant agent structure.
update request to the rest of the neighbour nodes if the
network topology changes. Recently, [20] made an Improved Hybrid Routing
Protocol with AODV + DTN. It uses a flat routing structure.

252
 Augustine Chidiebere Onuora et al. / IJETT, 71(5), 251-258, 2023

This protocol uses simulated foundation nodes that are The Responsive Ad Hoc Hybrid (RHR) Protocol is
carefully chosen due to their ability to deliver to the target another hybrid protocol for MANETs that coalesces the
node if a successful routing path cannot be established in the reactive and proactive routing approaches. When building a
MANET. routing table, information is extracted from the packets with
the headers RREQ and RREP to create the routing table. For
An improved quality of service (QoS) routing for instance, it changes to a proactive routing protocol
MANETs that converts problems of packet routing into a mechanism in case of loss of a network link. MPR is used to
problem of resource scheduling in a hybrid network. Various acquire the path to the destination from OLSR. As the
routing algorithms were employed at various stages to network changes, OLSR refreshes its database. To see
achieve this [21]. whether there is a path to the destination, a node first checks
its routing database. As long as the packet has a destination
Examples of other hybrid protocols, as highlighted by entry, it will be sent to the next node on its way to the
[12, 22], are Sharp Hybrid Adaptive Routing Protocol destination.
(SHARP) and Zone-based Hierarchical Link State Routing
Protocol (ZHLS). The proposed hybrid routing protocol, named
Responsive Ad Hoc Hybrid (RHR) Protocol routes by,
3. Materials and Methods utilizing the advantages of proactive and reactive routing.
In this work, prototyping methodology was used. A The routing table is built by extracting the necessary
prototype was constructed, tested, and revised using the information from the RREQ and RREP packets. In the event
iterative technique as needed until a satisfactory result was that a link fails, it switches to the proactive routing protocol.
reached, from which the full system was developed [23]. An It uses the OLSR’s MPR to find out how to get to the
important part of the model approach was to build up an destination. OLSR constantly discovers the network and
abstract model of the real system. This enables the updates its table. A node checks its routing record to see if
researchers to have a deeper understanding of the system and there is a path to the destination when it wants to transfer a
run experiments that would be difficult or impossible to do in packet. If a destination entry exists, packets are sent to the
the real system because of cost or accessibility. It was following node on the path to the destination. As a result of
common to combine this model technique with congestion and delays, or if a route is no longer available, the
experimentation [24]. proactive system selects a new route. The protocols are more
sensitive and can readily adapt to the mobile network's
3.1. Approach changing topology. Below is the highlight of its phases.
This study took an analytical and exploratory approach,
combining research methodologies like qualitative and 3.3. Reactive Phase
quantitative methods. Design, model simulation, data AODV protocol comes into action during the reactive
gathering, and visualization were part of the study process. phase. Routing requests (RREQ) are normally sent from the
source to the target node, while route responses (RREP) are
The research was conducted using the following sent in reverse from the destination back to the sender. From
procedures. then, the sending node transmits data through the RREP
message's reverse path to the destination node, which
The First thing to do was to download Network receives it. Route Error (RERR) notifications are sent when a
Simulator 3 (NS3) was installed and connected. The second link is broken or inaccessible. New nodes are discovered via
step was the selection of the reactive and proactive routing RREQ and RREP messages based on the AODV's route
protocols Models, which are AODV and OLSR. These discovery.
protocols were examined to understand their working and
how it can be hybrid. Thirdly, the hybrid files were written; If a node's stability is regularly poor. It has a sideline
for the simulation of these protocols, a scenario file was label. When determining the total attempt made to get to the
written in C++, followed by system configuration and setup target node, the total attempts are considered. Nodes marked
based on various parameters. as unhealthy nodes achieve a maximum limit of attempts to
reach the destination. Data delay control on the network is
3.2. Proposed Hybrid Protocol (RHR) made easier using this method. The data delay algorithm is
The methodology that was adopted was prototype shown below;
modelling. AODV protocol [25,35] was used for initiating
the route selection and routing to the destination, but in the • RREPs with destination sequence numbers less than or
event of route congestion and failed links, the OLSR protocol equal to the Max value are regarded to be sent by a "good"
[27] uses "multipoint relays" (MPR) to complete the packet node, and vice versa.
routing to the destination node. • As soon as the RREP's destination sequence number
exceeds the Max value, the RREP is tagged as Unhealthy,

253
 Augustine Chidiebere Onuora et al. / IJETT, 71(5), 251-258, 2023

and the transmitting node becomes an unhealthy node. to the destination node when the reactive protocol (AODV)
• So, the RREQ and RREP routing packets are used to is unable to do that. This reduced delay in sending packet data
propagate information about misbehaving nodes to other as there is an immediate switch to proactive protocol when
nodes in the network. the reactive cannot get the job done.

3.4. Proactive Phase 3.5. Materials Used

The Hello messages are intended to find out about local In the past, network testbeds were used to evaluate
connections and neighbours. As a result of the Hello message network models. It was extremely problematic, but network
broadcasting, the link is detected as well as the neighbours, simulators arrived on the scene and changed the game. Any
are detected, and the MPR is selected. To maintain the defects in the test bed have no effect on the simulators.
network's topology, nodes communicate with each other via Simulators can be said to be easier to use and monitor because
messages called Topology Control Messages. they allow the entire network to be managed in one place.
Experiments can also be duplicated because they are
By employing neighbour information and topology specified as scenario files.
information, which are updated regularly, each node may
calculate the paths to all known destinations. The shortest The simulated size of the network is only constrained by
path algorithm is employed to determine these paths, and way of the capacity of the computer used for the simulation.
most hops are used as a result of this technique. The routing Simulators make use of a repertoire of techniques to optimize
table is usually kept up to date whenever details about the their accuracy, scalability, speed and usability [28-29].
neighboring network or the network topology change.
3.6. Simulation Scenario and Parameters
During the switch from the reactive to proactive phase, In a simulation environment, different parameters exist
the protocol uses the topology discovery mechanism to for describing the typical performance of MANET protocols;
update its routing table. It can initiate the failed route from the settings were changed in a variety of ways. This
the reactive phase. The constant topology discovery keeps the simulation is dependent on the following factors, which are
OLSR routing table updated. This helps to route packet data listed in the table below.

AODV (Reactive Phase) OLSR (Proactive Phase)

prV RREQ NEIGHBOUR
SENSING
RREP
RERR HELLO

HELLO TC
MPR Routing
Table

RREQ TC
RREP MPR

RERR

Fig. 1 Component diagram of the proposed hybrid protocol

254
 Augustine Chidiebere Onuora et al. / IJETT, 71(5), 251-258, 2023

Table 1. Simulation settings

S. NO SETTINGS VALUE
1 OS Linux OS
2 Network Simulation tool NS3
3 Protocols OLSR, AODV, RHR (Hybrid)
4 Simulation Nodes 20, 50, 100, 150, 200
5 Simulated Time for nodes 200 s
6 Size of Map 300×1500 meters
7 Speed of Nodes 20 m/s
8 Mobility Model Random Way Point
9 Type of Traffic Constant bitrate (CBR)
10 Size of Packet 512 bytes
11 Node Pause Time 0s
12 Mac Adhoc Wifi MAC
13 Bandwidth of links 2Mbit
14 Allocator Position: Random Rectangular Position Allocator
15 Mac Standard 802.11
16 Physical mode DsssRate11Mbps
17 Propagation Model: Constant Speed Propagation Delay
18 Propagation Loss Model Friis
19 No of Sinks 10
Table 2. Simulation Result for total sent packets of 20, 50, 100, 150,
and 200 nodes Total packets sent
Protocols / 25000
AODV OLSR Hybrid (RHR)
No. of Nodes
20 Nodes 958 341 1103 20000
50 Nodes 2624 353 3853
100 Nodes 4548 714 7795 15000
150 Nodes 8532 727 13326
200 Nodes 19457 772 19020 10000
In terms of performance output, different protocols will
be compared. Finally, the results and related analyses will be 5000
displayed using a visualization graph [30-31].
0
4. Results and Discussion 20 50 100 150 200
The data were gotten from the simulation of the Nodes Nodes Nodes Nodes Nodes
protocols for 20, 50, 100, 150 and 200 nodes. The simulation
was carried out as shown in Table 2 above. Discussion shall AODV OLSR Hybrid
be made below based on the number of nodes simulated. We
shall be looking at how the number of nodes affects how well Fig. 2 Chart for total packets sent for 20, 50, 100, 150 and 200 nodes
various MANET protocols perform when they are
investigated. 4.2. Discussion for 50 Nodes
The chart above showed that the new Hybrid (RHR) lost
4.1. Discussion for 20 Nodes fewer packets than OLSR and AODV. OLSR lost the most
The figure 2 showed that OLSR lost more packets than packets. Furthermore, in packet delivery, the new hybrid
Hybrid (RHR) and AODV. AODV lost fewer packets. performed better for 50 nodes than AODV and OLSR.
Furthermore, the new Hybrid protocols (RHR) have the The new Hybrid protocols (RHR) have the highest number of
highest number of packets sent (1103) from Table 2. AODV packets sent (3553) from Table 2. AODV followed behind
followed behind with a value of 958, and OLSR sent the least with a value of 2624, and OLSR sent the least total packets
total packets of 341. Out of the total sent packets, the hybrid of 353. Out of the total sent packets, the hybrid has the
has the highest received, followed by AODV, and OLSR highest received, followed by AODV, and OLSR received
received the least packets. This result showed that OLSR has the least packets. This resulted that the new hybrid having the
the highest total packet loss and was followed by AODV and best delivery ratio, followed by AODV and then OLSR. In
then followed by the hybrid RHR. In this light, RHR has a this light, RHR has a better packet transfer than OLSR and
better packet transfer than OLSR and AODV. AODV.

255
 Augustine Chidiebere Onuora et al. / IJETT, 71(5), 251-258, 2023

Table 3. Throughput data for network sizes 20, 50, 100, 150, and 200 Table 4. End-to-end delay data for network sizes of 20, 50, 100, 150,
nodes and 200 nodes
Protocols Protocols
20 50 100 150 200 20 50 100 150 200
/Nodes /Nodes
AODV 11.3782 31.3477 12.8241 13.0469 7.65861 AODV 9.69298 21.4647 50.1019 11.9321 30.2728
OLSR 1.8084 0.871654 1.50603 0.883071 0.810549 OLSR 0.288301 0.118705 3.07469 2.17495 4.33002
Hybrid 29.242 22.8114 9.32391 9.21641 8.79644 Hybrid 0.428433 0.262357 1.06323 2.1313 3.55244

THR OUGHP UT DATA FOR END TO END DELAY FOR

NETW OR K S IZE 20, 50, 100, NETW OR K S IZE 20, 50, 100,
150 AND 200 NODES 150 AND 200 NODES
40 AODV OLSR Hybrid AODV OLSR Hybrid
60

30 50
40
20 30
20
10
10
0 0
20 50 100 150 200 20 50 100 150 200
NODES NODES NODES NODES NODES NODES NODES NODES NODES NODES
Fig. 3 Network throughput chart Fig. 4 End-to-end delay chart

4.3. Discussion for 100 Nodes Table 5. Jitter delay data for network sizes of 20, 50, 100, 150, and 200
nodes
The new Hybrid protocols (RHR) have the highest
number of packets sent (7795) from Table 2. AODV followed Protocols
20 50 100 150 200
behind with a value of 4548, and OLSR sent the least total / Nodes
packets of 714. Out of the total sent packets, the hybrid has AODV 60.5647 70.1164 234.614 547.863 1420.09
the highest received packets, followed by AODV and OLSR. OLSR 2.26782 7.01784 49.4914 30.2224 43.3002
Furthermore, in packet delivery, the new hybrid performed Hybrid 2.19979 1.52903 5.08029 9.24784 14.8703
slightly better than AODV for 100 nodes, and OLSR
performed poorly in packet delivery in this category. In this
light, RHR has a better packet transfer than OLSR and END TO END J ITTER FOR
AODV. NETW OR K S IZE 20, 50, 100,
150 AND 200 NODES
4.4. Discussion for 150 Nodes
AODV OLSR Hybrid
From Table 2, the new Hybrid protocols (RHR) have the 1600
highest number of packets sent (13326). AODV followed
behind with a value of 8532, and OLSR sent the least total 1400
packets of 727. Out of the total sent packets, the hybrid has 1200
the highest number of received packets, followed by AODV,
and OLSR receives the least packets. This resulted that the 1000
new Hybrid protocol (RHR) having the best packet delivery
ratio, followed by AODV and then OLSR. 800
600
4.5. Discussion for 200 Nodes
From Table 2 (200 nodes), the AODV protocols have the 400
highest number of packets sent (19457). The new hybrid
followed behind with a value of 19020, and OLSR sent the 200
least total packets of 772. Out of the total sent packets, Hybrid 0
(RHR) has the highest number of received packets, followed 20 50 100 150 200
by AODV and OLSR received the least packets. This resulted NODESNODESNODESNODESNODES
in the AODV protocol having the highest total packet loss
while the new hybrid followed OLSR. Fig. 5 Jitter delay chart

256
 Augustine Chidiebere Onuora et al. / IJETT, 71(5), 251-258, 2023

4.6. Throughput (RHR), knowing that OLSR is a delay-intolerant protocol.

The figure 3 shows that the new Hybrid protocols have The new hybrid protocols have shown from a series of
an improved throughput for simulations of 20 and 200 nodes. simulations that it reduces delay and increases throughput
For 50, 100, and 150 nodes, AODV has better throughput. compared to other hybrid protocols like ZRP and DST. The
This, after careful examination, is connected to the fact that hybrid’s data delivery was better than OLSR and AODV.
the novel hybrid protocol sends a higher number of packets RHR sends a higher number of packets during the simulation,
for nodes 50, 100, and 150 than AODV. This affected the and thus is the reason for its performance better than the state-
throughput ratio and thus gave a better result. of-the-art protocols (AODV, OLSR). As mobile ad hoc
network usage grows around the world, researchers are
4.7. End to End Delay encouraged to find better ways of routing that will remove
The chart from Figure 4 clearly showed that the new the current bottlenecks routing protocols have. With more
hybrid was better in end-to-end delay than the rest protocols and more research on ad hoc networks, breakthroughs have
(AODV and OLSR). The amount of delay from the hybrid become inevitable for MANET.
routing protocol is the smallest among the rest. Producing a
routing protocol that uses a minimal delay to route packet Some questions that keep begging for answers include
data is one of the objectives of this research. From the how node mobility affects packet delivery in MANETs. Can
statistics above, it was achieved. OLSR has the second-best the proposed hybrid algorithm RHR be applied to VANETs
end-to-end delay, while AODV didn’t perform well. to ascertain suitability? These are areas of future research.

4.8. Jitter Delay

Funding Statement
The variety of delays that packets traveling across a
The authors funded the research with support from
network connection experience before they reach their
Akanu Ibiam Federal Polytechnic, and the authors funded the
destination is known as Jitter delay. For end-to-end jitter
publication of their article.
delay, the new hybrid protocol (RHR) has the best jitter
delay. Figure 5 clearly shows that the new hybrid protocol
has a jitter lesser than the constituent protocols AODV and Acknowledgments
OLSR. OLSR followed as second best, while AODV has the The authors wish to thank the Head of Department,
worst jitter delay among the protocols compared. Computer Science, Akanu Ibiam Federal Polytechnic, for
providing the Lab for the Network Simulation. TETFUND is
also acknowledged for sponsoring this research paper.
5. Conclusion
The authors acknowledge and, with a deep sense of gratitude,
This research identified the areas of strength of AODV
thank all that were very helpful during the period this
and OLSR and combined them to produce a hybrid protocol
research was conducted.

References
[1] Saleh Ali K.Al-Omari, and Putra Sumari, “An Overview of Mobile Ad Hoc Networks for the Existing Protocols and Applications,”
International Journal on Applications of Graph Theory In wireless Ad Hoc Networks and Sensor Networks, vol. 2, no.1, pp. 87-110, 2010.
[CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[2] Ako Muhammad Abdullah, and Roza Hikmat Hama Aziz, “The Impact of Reactive Routing Protocols for Transferring Multimedia Data
Over MANET,” Journal of Zankoy Sulaimani - Part A, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 9-24, 2014. [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[3] Azzedine Boukerche, Algorithms and Protocols for Wireless and Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, John Wiley & Sons, 2008. [Google Scholar]
[4] M. H. Hassan et al., “Mobile Ad-Hoc Network Routing Protocols of Time-Critical Events for Search and Rescue Missions,” Bulletin of
Electrical Engineering and Informatics, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 92-199, 2021. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[5] Gargi Parashar, and Manisha Sharma, “Congestion Control in Manets using Hybrid Routing Protocol,” IOSR Journal of Electronics and
Communication Engineering, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 10-15, 2013. [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[6] Reza Fotohi, Roodabe Heydari, and Shahram Jamali, “Hybrid Routing Methods for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks,” Journal of Advances in
Computer Research, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 93-103, 2016. [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[7] Shraddha Kamble, B.K Mishra, and Rajesh Bansode, “Detection of Routing Misbehaving Links in MANET by Advance EAACK
Scheme,” International Journal of P2P Network Trends and Technology, vol. 6, no. 3, pp.1-5, 2016. [CrossRef] [Publisher Link]
[8] D. Kanellopoulos, “Congestion Control for MANETs: An overview,” ICT Express, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 77-83, 2019. [CrossRef] [Google
Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[9] Priyanshu and Ashish Kumar Maurya, “Survey: Comparison Estimation of Various Routing Protocols in Mobile Ad-Hoc Network,”
International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems (IJDPS), vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 87-96, 2014. [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[10] Analia Ermengild, and Tristessa, “Presentation Assessment of Routing Protocols in MANETS,” International Journal of P2P Network
Trends and Technology, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 5-8, 2018. [Publisher Link]

257
 Augustine Chidiebere Onuora et al. / IJETT, 71(5), 251-258, 2023

[11] Farithkhan Abbas Ali, and E. D. Kanmani Ruby, “Clustering Metric Algorithm for Cost-Effective Routing in Flying Ad-hoc
Networks,” SSRG International Journal of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, vol. 9, no. 12, pp. 101-108, 2022. [CrossRef]
[Publisher Link]
[12] Alagan Ramasamy Rajeswari, A mobile Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols: A Comparative Study, Recent Trends in Communication
Networks, 2020. [Google Scholar]
[13] M. Joa-Ng, and I. T. Lu, “Peer-to-Peer Zone-Based Two-Level Link-State Routing for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks,” IEEE Journal on
Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 1415-1425, 1999. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[14] S. Radhakrishnan et al., “DST-A Routing Protocol for Ad Hoc Networks Using Distributed Spanning Trees,” IEEE Wireless
Communications and Networking Conference, pp. 1543-1547, 1999. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[15] Saripalli Vinod Manikanta, and Dhavala Sailaja, "A Hybrid Efficient Routing Protocol in Wireless Sensor Networks,” International
Journal of Computer and Organization Trends, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 13-15, 2019. [Publisher Link]
[16] Jianping Wang et al., “HOPNET: A hybrid ant Colony Optimization Routing Algorithm for Mobile Ad Hoc Network,” Ad Hoc Networks,
vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 690-705, 2009. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[17] Dilli Ravilla, V. Sumalatha, and P. Chandra Reddy, “Performance Comparisons of ZRP and IZRP Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc Wireless
Networks,” International Conference on Energy, Automation and Signal, pp. 1-8, 2011. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[18] Dilli Ravilla, V. Sumalatha, and P. Chandra Reddy, “Hybrid Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc Wireless Networks,” International Journal of
Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 79-96, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[19] S. Rajini, B. S. Gowrishankar, and M. Ramakrishna, “A Review on Different Routing Protocols for UWSN,” SSRG International Journal
of Computer Science and Engineering, vol. 7, no. 9, pp. 14-17, 2020. [CrossRef] [Publisher Link]
[20] Min Wook Kang, and Yun Won Chung, “An Improved Hybrid Routing Protocol Combining MANET and DTN,” Electronics, vol. 9, no.
3, pp. 439, 2020. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[21] R. Navinkumar, and N. Prabaharan, “Improve Routing Process with Feature Based Packet Transmission Technique in MANET using
GRBR Algorithm,” International Journal of P2P Network Trends and Technology (IJPTT), vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 1-11, 2016. [CrossRef]
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[22] Kiran Rampurkar et al., “Study of Routing Overhead and Its Protocols,” International Journal of Advanced Engineering and Management,
vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 52-55, 2017. [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[23] Nia Alexandrov, and Vassil Alexandrov, “Computational Science Research Methods for Science Education at PG level,” Procedia
Computer Science, vol. 5, no.1, pp. 1685-1693, 2015. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[24] J. S. Amaral et al., About Computing Science Research Methodology, 2006. [Online]. Available:
https://webdocs.cs.ualberta.ca/~c603/readings/research-methods.pdf.
[25] C. Perkins, E. Belding-Royer, and S. Das, “RF C3561: Ad Hoc on-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing,” 2003. [Google Scholar]
[26] B Anjanee Kumar, N. Anuradha, and M. Supriya, “Routing and Securing the Clustered Step Sized Wireless sensor Networks,” SSRG
International Journal of Mobile Computing and Application, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 13-20, 2017. [CrossRef] [Publisher Link]
[27] T. Clausen, and P. Jacquet, “RFC3626: Optimized link-state Routing Protocol (OLSR),” IETF MANET Working Group, 2003. [Google
Scholar]
[28] Mohammed Humayun Kabir et al., “Detail Comparison of Network Simulators,” International Journal of Scientific & Engineering
Research, vol. 5, no. 10, pp. 203-218, 2014. [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[29] Augustine Chidiebere Onuora et al., “A Comparative Study of Simulation Tools for Ad hoc Networks,” School of Engineering Technology
(SET), AIFPU International Conference, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[30] Subhrananda Goswami et al., Performance Analysis of Three Routing Protocols in MANET using the NS-2 and ANOVA Test with Varying
Speed of Nodes, Ad Hoc Networks, Intech Open, 2017. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[31] Augustine Chidiebere Onuora, Eyo E. Essien, and Felix U. Ogban, “Network Size Simulation-Based Study of Routing Protocols in
Wireless Ad Hoc Network,” International Journal of Information System and Computer Science (IJISCS), vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 133-140, 2021.
[Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[32] Mohammad Ali Mostafavi, Ayyoub Akbari Moghanjoughi, and Hamid Mousavi, “A Review and Performance Analysis of Reactive and
Proactive Routing Protocols on MANET,” Network and Communication Technologies, vol. 1, no. 2, 2012. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
[Publisher Link]
[33] P. Samar, M. Pearlman, and Z. Haas, “Independent Zone Routing: An Adaptive Hybrid Routing Framework for Ad Hoc Wireless
Networks,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 595-608, 2004. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[34] D. Rupérez Cañas et al., “Hybrid ACO Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks,” International Journal of Distributed Sensor
Networks, vol. 2013, pp. 1-7, 2013. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]
[35] Prashant Kumar Maurya et al., “An Overview of AODV Routing Protocol,” International Journal of Modern Engineering Research
(IJMER), vol. 2, no. 3, pp.728-732, 2012. [Google Scholar] [Publisher Link]

258