Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence 2017
DOI: 10.1145/3168390.3168403
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance Comparison of MANET Routing Protocol based on RandomWaypoint Mobility Model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
2
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…They both perform poorly under high density and load. In [19], three routing protocols (DSR, DSDV and AODV) that are based on the Random Mobility Model are investigated from the viewpoint of how they work with the QoS, such as the Normalized Routing Load (NRL) and other metrics. DSDV, a proactive protocol, was also shown to exceed all other reactive protocols for end-to-end latency, while the reactive protocols exceeded those for other QoS measures.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They both perform poorly under high density and load. In [19], three routing protocols (DSR, DSDV and AODV) that are based on the Random Mobility Model are investigated from the viewpoint of how they work with the QoS, such as the Normalized Routing Load (NRL) and other metrics. DSDV, a proactive protocol, was also shown to exceed all other reactive protocols for end-to-end latency, while the reactive protocols exceeded those for other QoS measures.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All along these lines, the organization will contain allotments or various zones. Examples: ZRP [36] is a MANET zone-based progressive directing protocol [37].…”
Section: Zone-based Hierarchical Routing Protocolmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Authors in [6] compared three MANET routing protocols (DSR, DSDV and AODV) based on Random Waypoint Mobility Model, they studied how the protocols compare in some selected QoS metrics like normalized routing load (NRL) amongst others. It was also concluded that DSDV, which is a proactive protocol has best performance in end-to-end delay while the other reactive protocols performed better in other QoS metrics.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%