1. INTRODUCTION:

Traditional routing protocols are developed to support user communication in networks with a fixed infrastructure with reliable, high-capacity links. However, the mobile ad hoc network has the network infrastructure that is dynamically changing and links are wireless with less power capacity and more prone to errors. A MANET is a collection of wireless nodes that can dynamically form a network to exchange information without using any pre existing fixed network infrastructure. The special features of MANET bring these technology great opportunities together with huge challenges [1].

Mobile ad hoc network has the various type of protocols such as reactive, proactive and hybrid. In this paper, we mainly focused on MANET’s routing protocol and overview of OLSR, DSDV and AODV protocols. Analysis is done to know the impact of pause time. Pause time is time interval where node can stop the mobility and maintain the route information. For analysis, some parameters i.e. network throughput, packet delivery ratio are considered. In this section, we give general introduction of MANET, briefly discussion about routing protocols i.e. AODV, OLSR and DSDV [1][5]. Organisation of paper is Section 2 literatures Review, Section 3 discussed about the network performance parameters, Section 4 gives description of Experimental setup, Section 5 presents simulation results and analysis part, Section 6 is conclusion part, which concludes overall result.

1.1 ROUTING PROTOCALS:

MANET routing protocols are classified as reactive, proactive and hybrid [1]. Reactive is a source initiated on demand routing protocol. In reactive protocol when node wants to communicate or exchange the data to another node then route is discovered by source node. Proactive is a table driven protocol. In proactive protocol every node contains a routing table and the table is continuously updated. Routing information is from time to time transmitted all over the network in order to preserve routing table reliability. If the route already exists before information arrives, then transmission is done without delay. Otherwise, traffic packets should wait in queue until the node receives routing information corresponding to its destination [2]. Hybrid Protocols have the advantages of both reactive and Proactive protocols. These protocols are used in various applications.

Fig.1: Categorization of MANET Routing Protocols

Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV):

AODV is a source initiated on-demand (Reactive) routing protocol with less delay that determines the route when it’s needed. If a source wants to begin communication with another node as target in the network then AODV use control messages to find a route to the target node in the network. It is capable to operate on both wired and wireless media, although AODV has been intended predominantly for wireless domain. Route tables are used by AODV protocol to save the destination and next hop addresses as well as the destination sequence number. AODV finds route using a Route Request Query (RREQ)/ Route Reply Query (RREP) massage. When a source requires route of destination, if route is not in routing table then it broadcast RREQ packet across the network. Routing table contains destination information, number of hops, next hop, destination sequence number and active neighbours for this route and termination time [3].

Destination Sequence Distance Vector (DSDV):

DSDV is a proactive routing protocol. It maintains routing information table. Each node maintains routing table which contains all of the feasible destinations and number of nodes within the network. In DSDV protocol, shortest path is calculated through Bellman-Ford method [10]. In particular time interval DSDV protocol advertises the routing information which is either changes on topology or no any changes. Therefore, it wastes the bandwidth of network. Another disadvantage of DSDV is that it does not support multipath routing.

Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR):

OLSR is a table driven or proactive routing protocol in mobile ad-hoc network. It is defined to find optimum path of destination. OLSR has a very significant advantage over large network because, it finds the route immediately. Due to multipoint relay OLSR minimizes the flooding broadcast [7]. In this protocol all the node contains route information table, thus at any instance of time route discovery is possible when needed. For finding the information of neighbours OLSR sends the hello message. Another message is topology control message which is used for broadcasting information about self advertised neighbours which includes the multipoint relay selector list [9].

Table 1: Protocol Comparison

Protocol	AODV	DSDV	OLSR
Type	Distance Vector	Distance Vector	Link Sate
Classification	On demand or Reactive	Table Driven or Proactive	Table Driven or Proactive
Multicasting	Supports	Supports	Supports
Broadcasting	Supports	Supports	Supports
Transmission Overhead	Average	Average	Minimum

LITERATURE REVIEW:

We study the various research articles for the finding impact of pause time of MANET routing protocols. Author Gargi Pandey et al. [6] analysed the effect of network size and pause time on AODV, DSDV and DSR protocol. They found that AODV gives better performance. Ashutosh Sharma et al.[2] presented the detail study and performance comparison of various routing protocols. They found that OLSR gives better performance because it selects route that is acyclic path. Bijan Paul[4] et al. Analysed impact of pause time and node density with TCP and CBR for VANET. There analysed Result shows that when node density high and pause time is less the packet delivery ratio of reactive protocol perform better. Martin Appiah[1]compared the performance of MANET routing protocols with mobility. Analysed result shows that OLSR protocol is gives better performance. Apart from these we study more number of papers in relevant area. From the review we found that there are various key issues in MANET such as simulation tools performance, application or load dependency, number of parameters etc. Therefore we construct our basic analysis of MANET routing protocol in NS3.22 simulation tool.

3. Network Performance Parameter:

In this paper we considered some basic network performance parameters i.e. Network Throughput, Packet delivery ratio and packet loss for MANET.

Network Throughput:

Network throughput is measured by total number of packets is successfully received at destination in per unit of time.

Throughput = Received Window Size / Round Trip Time

Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR):

PDR is defined as ratio of total number of packets is received by destination node and number of data packets produced by source node.

PDR= (Total no. of packets are generated / Total no. of packets are received) x 100

Packet Loss:

The packet loss occurs when one or more packets of data travelling across network ant fail to reach their destination. Packet loss is typically caused by network congestion.

4. Experimental Setup:

Simulation and measurement are used to evaluate the performance of MANET routing protocols. Accuracy, timeliness evaluation and cost effective simulation tool NS 3.22 is used in this paper. The experimental work is carried out in the Network Simulator (NS-3.22) simulator. NS3 is a discrete event and open source simulation tool used primarily in the field of education and research. It is written in C++ language and supports python script also [11]. In our experiment, firstly we create a cpp file in NS3.22 for MANET routing protocols. Then make configuration which is shown on below table 2.

Table 2 Experimental Configuration

Protocols	AODV, DSDV and OLSR
No. of Nodes	15, 25, 35, 45,55, 65
Simulation Time	500 sec.
Mobility Model	RandomWay Point mobility
Application	UDP
Pause Time	1.0 sec, 5.0sec, 10.0 sec
Network Area	500 x 500
Maximum Speed	10 m/sec
Simulation tool	NS 3.22
Operating System	Ubantu 15.6

5. SIMULATION RESULT AND ANALYSIS:

5.1 Throughput of AODV, DSDV and OLSR:

Throughput of AODV, DSDV and OLSR are calculated by varying a number of nodes with different pause time. From the graph 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 we observed that the throughput of OLSR protocol is better as compared to others.

Fig.: 1.1 Throughput of AODV, DSDV and OLSR for pause time 1.0sec

Fig.: 1.2 Throughput of AODV, DSDV and OLSR for pause time 5.0sec

Fig.: 1.3 Throughput of AODV, DSDV and OLSR for pause time 10.0sec.

5.2 PDR of AODV, DSDV and OLSR

Packet delivery Ratio of AODV, DSDV and OLSR are calculated by varying a number of nodes with different pause time. From the graph 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 we observed that the PDR of OLSR protocol is better as compared to others.

Fig.: 2.1 PDR of AODV, DSDV and OLSR for pause time 1.0sec

Fig.: 2.2 PDR of AODV, DSDV and OLSR for pause time 5.0sec.

Fig.: 2.3 PDR of AODV, DSDV and OLSR for pause time 10.0sec.

5.3 Packet loss of AODV, DSDV and OLSR

Packet loss fraction of AODV, DSDV and OLSR are calculated by varying a number of nodes with different pause time. From the graph 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3, we observed that the Packet loss of OLSR protocol is very less as compared to others.

Fig.: 3.1 Packet loss of AODV, DSDV and OLSR for pause time 1.0sec.

Fig.: 3.2 Packet loss of AODV, DSDV and OLSR for pause time 5.0sec.

Fig.: 3.3 Packet loss of AODV, DSDV and OLSR for pause time 10.0sec.

6. CONCLUSION:

This paper evaluated the performance comparison between reactive AODV and proactive protocol i.e. DSDV, OLSR. For mobile ad-hoc network performance of routing protocol is together with many factors such as network load, communication technology etc. In this paper, we analyzed the impact of pause time on continues transmission of data between the nodes. From our result analysis we conclude that when network size is increases then OLSR protocol gives better performance as compared with others. In feature, this work will extend with other routing protocol, large size of ad hoc network with other IoT device.

7. REFERENCES:

1. Martin Appiah, ”Performance Comparison of Mobility Models In Mobile Ad Hoc Network (Manet)”, 1st International Conference on Next Generation Computing Applications (NextComp), IEEE explore, Aug 2017, pp. 47-53.

2. Ashutosh Sharma, Rajiv Kumar, “Performance comparison and detailed study of AODV, DSDV, DSR, TORA and OLSR Routing Protocols in Adhoc Networks”, 4^th International Conference on Parallel, Distributed and Grid Computing, IEEE explore, ISSN: 16851305, April 2017, pp 732-736.

3. Nirbhay Chaubey, Akshai Aggarwal, Savita Gandhi, Keyurbhai A Jani,” Effect of pause time on AODV and TSDRP routing protocols under black hole attack and DoS attacks in MANETs”, 2^nd International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global Development (INDIACom) ,IEEE Xplore, ISSN: 15110187, March 2015, pp 1807-1812.

4. Bijan Paul, Aditi Roy, Sanjit Kumar Paul ”, Comparison of DSR, AODV and DSDV Routing Protocols with varying pause time and node density over TCP and CBR Connections in VANET”, 6^th International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Communication Networks, IEEE Computer Society, ISSN: 15021477, March 2015, pp 374 – 379.

5. Dhammpal Ramtake, Sanjay Kumar, Vinod Kumar Patle, “Power Consuption of Routing Protocoals in Various Simulators: MANET”, Research J. Science and Tech., Vol . 5 No. 3, AandV publication, 2013, pp 303-306.

6. Gargi Pandey, Sanjay Kumar, V. K. Patle “Effect of Pause Time and Network Size in Various Routing Protocol: MANET”, Research J. Science and Tech., Vol . 5 No. 3, AandV publication , 2013, pp 335-339.

7. V.B.Narsimaha, “The Performance Comparison of an AODV, DSR, DSDV and OLSR Routing Protocols in Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks”, Journal of Computer Applications (JCA), ISSN: 0974-1925, Volume 5, No. 2, 2012, pp 64-67.

8. S. Mohapatraa , P.Kanungob, Performance analysis of AODV, DSR, OLSR and DSDV Routing Protocols using NS2 Simulator, International Conference on Communication Technology and System Design, Procidia Engineering, vol-30,ISBN: 1877-7058 , ELSEVIER, march 2012, pp 69-76.

9. Jacquet, Philippe and Muhlethaler, Paul and Clausen, Thomas Heide and Laouiti, Anis and Qayyum, Amir and Viennot, Laurent, “Optimized Link State Routing Protocol for Ad Hoc Networks” , Proceedings of the IEEE International Multitopic Conference, Feb 2001, 10.1109/INMIC.2001.995315, pp. 62-68..

10. P. Kuppusamy, K.Thirunavukkarasu, B. Kalaavathi, “A Study and Comparison of OLSR, AODV and TORA Routing Protocols in Ad Hoc Networks”, 3rd International Conference on Electronics Computer Technology,IEEE explore, ISSN: 12096720, July 2011, pp 143-147.

11. GNU GPLv2_Licence, “NS3 Simulation tool”, www.nsnam.org, Retrieve as date on Jan 2018

Received on 09.11.2017 Accepted on 09.12.2017

Int. J. Tech. 2017; 7(2): 113-119.

DOI: 10.5958/2231-3915.2017.00017.7