On the Impact of Fading and Interference on Contention-Based Geographic Routing in VANETs

Evaluation of Greedy and CBF for ETSI non-area GeoNetworking: The impact of DCC

“…The ETSI Area CBF algorithm has been evaluated in recent works [14,15,25]. The work in [14,15] identifies several phenomena affecting CBF due to the interaction between layers in the architecture that make ETSI CBF inefficient, and proposes improvements to solve the detected problems.…”

“…In particular, the performance of ETSI Area CBF is affected by the interaction between the Network & Transport (where GeoNetworking resides) and Access layers. The difference between the time a packet is expected to be transmitted and the actual time it occurs -since a transmission can be delayed by DCC -causes different phenomena explored in [14,15,25], which in turn affects the behavior of CBF, drifting away from what it is expected toward a highly inefficient performance. For example, the optimal forwarder might see its transmission delayed by DCC, and then sub-optimal forwarders do not cancel their CBF timers, send their packets to the Access layer and, given a set of circumstances, forward a message that breaks the expected system behavior.…”

“…Then, a node can unknowingly forward the same message several times. The works in [14,25,12] describe this phenomenon and propose the inclusion of a DPD mechanism.…”

Studying and improving the performance of ETSI ITS contention-based forwarding (CBF) in urban and highway scenarios: S-FoT+

“…The works in [35] and our GPC mechanism (see above and [10]) tackle the problem of two close forwarders transmitting at almost the same time (without cancelling each other) which leads to the cancellation of all future forwarders, resulting in poor dissemination coverage. [35] proposes two possible solutions: (1) using a probabilistic cancellation of packets in the CBF buffer, or (2) incorporating a progress check, with the idea that a packet cancels a packet in the CBF buffer only if the new forwarder represents more progress to the destination than itself, otherwise the CBF timer is updated according to the position of the new transmitter. However, this work only discusses CBF as a non-area forwarding mechanism (i.e., to reach a distant Destination Area), and it does not consider the use of a DCC mechanism or delivery to the application layer.…”

Forwarding Angles and the Trade-Off Between Reliability, Latency and Unicast Efficiency in Content-Based Beaconless Forwarding

“…The work in [19] illustrates the possible shortcomings of a well-known receiver-based routing protocol called contention-based forwarding (CBF) [24] through both analytical descriptions and simulations. Specifically, the impact of fading and interference on the performance of CBF in terms of delivery rate and communication overhead is studied.…”