26-06-2014, 02:53 PM
VANET Routing Protocols: Pros and Cons
VANET Routing.pdf (Size: 317.67 KB / Downloads: 11)
ABSTRACT
VANET (Vehicular Ad-hoc Network) is a new technology
which has taken enormous attention in the recent years. Due to
rapid topology changing and frequent disconnection makes it
difficult to design an efficient routing protocol for routing data
among vehicles, called V2V or vehicle to vehicle
communication and vehicle to road side infrastructure, called
V2I. The existing routing protocols for VANET are not efficient
to meet every traffic scenarios. Thus design of an efficient
routing protocol has taken significant attention. So, it is very
necessary to identify the pros and cons of routing protocols
which can be used for further improvement or development of
any new routing protocol. This paper presents the pros and cons
of VANET routing protocols for inter vehicle communication.
1. INTRODUCTION
Vehicular ad hoc network is a special form of MANET which is
a vehicle to vehicle & vehicle roadside wireless communication
network. It is autonomous & self-organizing wireless
communication network, where nodes in VANET involve
themselves as servers and/or clients for exchanging & sharing
information. The network architecture of VANET can be
classified into three categories: pure cellular/WLAN, pure ad
hoc, and hybrid [1]. Due to new technology it has taken huge
attention from government, academy & industry. There are
many research projects around the world which are related with
VANET such as COMCAR [2], DRIVE [3], FleetNet [4] and
NoW (Network on Wheels) [5], CarTALK 2000 [6], CarNet [7].
Figure-1 shows a form of vehicular adhoc network. There are
several VANET applications such as Vehicle collision warning,
Security distance warning, Driver assistance, Cooperative
driving, Cooperative cruise control, Dissemination of road
information, Internet access, Map location, Automatic parking,
Driverless vehicles.
This paper summarizes the pros and cons of unicast routing
protocols which can be used for better understanding of the
routing protocols and future improvement can be made. The
remainder of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2
describes the VANET characteristics. Section 3 discusses related
research work on routing protocol design as applied to VANET.
Section 4 & 5 presents the pros & cons of Topology based
routing protocols & Position based routing protocols. We
conclude in Section 6 and section 7 for reference.
2. CHARACTERISTICS
VANET has some unique characteristics which make it different
from MANET as well as challenging for designing VANET
applications.
2.1 High dynamic topology
The topology of VANET changes because of the movement of
vehicles at high speed. Suppose two vehicles are moving at the
speed of 20m/sec and the radio range between them is 160 m.
Then the link between the two vehicles will last 160/20 = 8 sec.
ROUTING PROTOCOLS
The characteristic of highly dynamic topology makes the design
of efficient routing protocols for VANET is challenging. The
routing protocol of VANET can be classified into two categories
such as Topology based routing protocols & Position based
routing protocols. Overall classification of VANET routing
protocols has been shown in the figure-2.
4. PROS & CONS OF TOPOLOGY BASED
ROUTING PROTOCOLS
Topology based routing protocols use link’s information within
the network to send the data packets from source to destination.
Topology based routing approach can be further categorized into
proactive (table-driven) and reactive (on-demand) routing.
4.1 Proactive (table-driven)
Proactive routing protocols are mostly based on shortest path
algorithms. They keep information of all connected nodes in
form of tables because these protocols are table based.
Furthermore, these tables are also shared with their neighbors.
Whenever any change occurs in network topology, every node
updates its routing table.
CONCLUSION
In this paper, we have investigated the pros and cons of different
routing protocols for inter-vehicle communication in VANET.
By studying different routing protocol in VANET we have seen
that further performance evaluation is required to verify
performance of a routing protocol with other routing protocols
based on various traffic scenarios. Comparison can be done
among the routing protocols in the Overlay and so on. GSR is
not compared with other position based routing protocol.
Besides, performance evaluation of PBR-DV is not done with
the non-overlay routing protocols.