Volume 116 No. 10 2017, 375-380 ISSN: 1311-8080 (printed version); ISSN: 1314-3395 (on-line version) url: http://www.ijpam.eu ijpam.eu The General Analysis of Proactive Protocols DSDV, FSR and WRP 1 Dr. V. Umadevi, Director/Research Supervisor Department of PG and Research in Computer Science Jairams Arts and Science College, Karur 2 K.V. Nithya Ph.D Research Scholar, Department of PG and Research in Computer Science, Jairams Arts and Science College, Karur. Abstract: In the field of communication technology, in need of efficient and dynamic topological protocols is important task. Numerous protocols are available in MANET, analysis of the research, particularly focus on Proactive Protocols and its characteristics. Each proactive protocols have their individual better performance depends on the number of nodes, distance of the destination and traffic load. Some protocols will give better performance with less nodes and some others with short distance. Using Different parameters in Proactive protocol measures some positive and negative results depends on the above mentioned criteria. The research discuss about the Table-driven protocols such as Dynamic Sequence Distance Vector (DSDV), Fisheye State Routing (FSR) and Wireless Routing Protocol (WRP) and their characteristics. Key words: MANET, PROACTIVE, TABLE DRIVEN, DSDV, FSR and WRP. 1. Introduction The MANET don t have any centralized device or Access point to connect the network. It is a self configured, independent, structure less and multihop wireless network [1]. The routing information of nodes are upgraded and kept in Proactive protocol, hence known as Table-Driven and the nodes are broadcasted in the wireless network [2]. Within the restricted, small available power the nodes have increased or decreased the data exchange rate [3]. Some challenging factors should be increase or decrease as follows: Increase Packet delivery ratio, Mobility and Throughput Decrease Overhead, End-to End Delay, Latency, Bandwidth and Jitter 375
Both the traditional distance-vector and as well as link-state protocols based proactive protocols enables the immediately available path hence there was no delay to send the packets. Proactive protocols are interactive protocols, which adopted the three main mechanism such as more topology information stored in nodes, updating of frequency and size of route, flooding optimization in comparison of DV and LS[4]. In route discovery process Manet commences the sending message to its neighbors and getting acknowledge from source [5]. Based on link breakage prediction algorithm, New Proactive Routing Protocol (NPRP) has been developed in recent years to focus packet loss reduction, eliminate the retransmission and power saving.[6]. Distribution Randomized Algorithm has been proposed for the better power management in Proactive protocols [7],[8]. 2. Dynamic Sequence Distance Vector (DSDV): Dynamic Sequence Distance Vector is a Bellman Ford Algorithm based protocol, hence its guaranteed for loop free routes, It follows Shortest Path Algorithm to reach the destination. Periodically each nodes exchange with it neighbor to reduce the overhead in transmission. The routing information are carried by Full Dump Packets and changing information are carried by Incremental Packets. The Packet transmission is according to the destination address, destination sequence number, next hop, hop count, Install time. Figure 1: Routing in DSDV 3. Fisheye State Routing (FSR) Global State Routing is the ancestor of Fisheye State Routing. The modification of GSR provides the reduced update message size. It leads to nearer node with high frequency while 376
compare with the remote node. All nodes no need to contain the update message information. Each node is having accurate information of its neighbor. The accuracy may be decreases while the distance from the node increases, when the packets moves very closer to the destination the accuracy level of route information increases more and more.fsr is better for small networks and scalable to large networks. Increment in accuracy and decrement in mobility needs in FSR. Figure 2: Routing in FSR In FSR philosophy is Proactive, the routing metric is shortest path, Frequency of update is periodical and it use sequence number, loop free nodes, multipath but there is no worst case exists. 4. Wireless Routing Protocol (WRP) Wireless Routing Protocol used the Predecessor information and its guaranteed for loop free environment, hence it is avoiding the temporary loops[a].with the help of neighbor, WRP is avoiding the count infinity problem, each nodes regularly has to check the predecessor information. Each node in WRP is maintaining destination table, Routing table, link cost table, MRL (Message Retransmission List) table.the network size and memory overhead increases because each node are constantly update the above mentioned four tables. Hello messages are used to ensure the connections between nodes, thus there is a requirement that all the nodes always stay in active. It leads to increase bandwidth and power. 377
Figure 3: Routing in WRP 5. Comparison of DSDV, FSR and WRP Protocol Feature Algorithm Packet Forwarding Flooding Control Overhead Reduction DSDV Periodic updates FSR Multi Scope Routing WRP Periodic updates DBF Algorithm Hop-by- hop Exchange the information with neighbor Incremental updates DBF Hop-by- hop Grades Fish-eye Algorithm Frequency technique Mechanism Bellman-Ford Distance Vector routing algorithm. Hop-by- hop Eliminates Count Looping infinity Mechanism Problem DSDV has two types of route updates; full dump packets, incremental packets, to send packet it forwards to neighbors using routing table to reach destination. FSR divide nodes neighborhood to zones. Exchanges information to closer node more frequently. The amount of bandwidth, size of message small. It is suitable smaller networks than larger networks. WRP Maintains four tables to send packet to the destination; distance table, routing table, link cost table, MRL table for the packet transmission. 6. Conclusion The important task in MANET is Routing, but it is a challenging and crucial one. The research has detailed that all the time, all the nodes tend to maintain routes in Proactive 378
protocols. It leads to overhead memory. The advantage is immediate routing with neighbor nodes and the drawback is overhead. Therefore definitely need improvement in proactive protocol with less Overhead, Latency and Bandwidth. The researches has to work with different algorithms for better routing solution in Proactive protocols. REFERENCES [1] S. A. Ade& P.A.Tijare, Performance Comparison of AODV, DSDV, OLSR and DSR Routing Protocols in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, International Journal of Information Technology and Knowledge Management, 2010, Volume 2, No. 2, pp. 545-548. [2] Z Wang, Y Chen, C Li, A Lightweight Proactive Source Routing Protocol For Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, IEEE Transactions On Vehicular Technology, VOL. 63, NO. 2, 2014. [3] Jieying Zhou ; Wenjun Ye ; Xiaona Li ; Jiajia Zhang, Cluster-Based Gateway-Aided Multicast Routing Protocol in MANET, Published in: Wireless Sept. 2007, Page(s): 1524 1527. [4] T. Prasanna venkatesan, P. Rajakumar, Overview of Proactive Routing Protocols in MANET, Fourth International Conference on Communication Systems and Network Technologies, IEEE computer Society,2014. [5] Chandni, Sharad Chauhan, Kamal Kumar Sharma, Routing Protocol In MANET A Survey Chandni al. International Journal of Recent Research Aspects, Vol. 1, Issue 2, 2014, pp. 48-52. [6] M. H. Mamoun, A new proactive routing protocol for MANET Journal published by International Journal of Computer Information Systems, vol. 3, no. 2, March 2011. [7] Mahesh.V and S. S.K, An optimized version of coordination algorithm for topology maintenance. [8] Wireless Embedded Systems, Computer Science Department, University of California at Berkeley, Self-organized wireless sensor network, August, 2001 [9] S. murthy and J.J. Garcia, A Routing Protocol for Packet Radio Networks, in proc. of ACM MOBICOM, Nov. 1995. 379
380