On-demand Routing in MANETs:
The Impact of a Realistic Physical Layer Model
Liang Qin, Thomas Kunz
Department of Systems and Computer Engineering
Carleton University, Canada

Motivation
Mobile Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols:
Limited radio transmission range and node mobility
Problems:
Most existing performance comparisons based on ideal propagation model (free space model, two-ray ground model)
Our simulation results with shadowing model show severe performance degradation

Propagation Models
Ideal Models
Free space model and two-ray ground reflection model
Shadowing Model
b: loss exponent, corresponding to mean transmission range
s:shadowing deviation

Impact on Routing Protocols
Signal strength fluctuates in shadowing model
Ideal model (left) and shadowing model (right) over the same distance between two nodes
Fluctuation at least 2 orders of magnitude

Impact on Routing Protocols
Signal strength fluctuation causes active links to “break”
Simulations of AODV & DSR show that
Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR) decreases significantly
Broken links introduce more Route Discovery processes
Cause more control messages and longer packet delay

One Example in DSR
Transmitter did not receive an ACK from the receiver and salvaged the packet
Result in duplicated packets and increased traffic

Improving Performance
Based on AODV and DSR
Apply new signal strength threshold during Route Discovery Process
Higher than the threshold used in NS2
In order to select more stable links to resist to signal strength fluctuation
DSR: Route Request & Route Reply, AODV: Route Request only
Different from other proposals (e. g, SSA):
Power strength only applying on Route Discovery

Improving Performance in DSR
Reduce unnecessary control messages in DSR
Turn the “shortening” option off to prevent “weak link” joining the route again
No Route Request for undeliverable Route Error and Route Reply messages
No salvage for Route Error and Route Reply messages

Simulation Environment
The Network Simulator (NS2)
Simulation metrics:
Packet Delivery Ratio
Total number of control messages
Average hop count
Average packet latency
Simulation parameters
1500x300 m area, 4 data packets/s, 20 sources, 64 Bytes/packet, 20m/s max node speed
Equal node coverage (Equals to 50 mobile nodes in ideal model)

Simulation Results
Performance Comparisons with Different b values

Simulation Results
Performance Comparisons with Different Mobility Patterns

Conclusion
Selecting reliable links by using higher signal strength threshold can significantly improve performance
PDR increases
Total number of control messages and average packet delay decrease
Future work
Route maintenance
Appropriate signal strengths threshold for different node density and b values