Abstract:
Now a day’s, due to the popularity of portable computers and the increasing demands of users to access computing services in a better way, an alternative way of network service access is required. Thus, mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is one of the alternatives to achieve this requirement by providing infrastructure less services with self-configuring and reduced cost set up capability. Due to the rapid growing rate of multimedia applications (voice, video) in MANETs, quality of service (QoS) support has also grownup to be supplementary and more important. Particularly, QoS related with latency is very interesting, because latency is the most critical QoS metrics in mobile ad hoc networks mainly for delay sensitive applications.
However, many of an existing MANETs routing protocols are not QoS aware specifically in terms of latency which should be considered as the main design requirement of the routing protocol. Hence, a QoS supporting routing protocol that finds the optimal routing path between two or more mobile devices is needed. Therefore, in this thesis, we evaluated three well known MANET routing Protocols, Dynamic Source Routing Protocol Routing (DSR), Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV), and Ad Hoc on Demand Distance Vector Routing (AODV), from the perspectives of delivering QoS efficiently based on QoS metrics and designed an efficient routing protocol for (MANETs) that mitigate latency by modifying the header fields of the original AODV routing protocol to consider path delay during path selection using node queue length. The proposed QLAODV routing protocol is simulated using Network Simulator-2.35 and comparisons are made to analyze its performance based on packet delivery ratio, normalized routing overhead, and average end to end delay for different network scenarios.
As the simulation results reveal that in terms of end to end delay and packet delivery ratio the proposed QL-AODV achieves relatively better performance than both ad hoc ondemand distance vector protocol (AODV) and hop count and time based AODV (HTAODV) at the expense of higher normalized routing overhead. For instance, the simulation results of QL-AODV when compared to AODV showed an average improvement of 5.43 % and 2.65% in end to end delay and packet delivery ratio, respectively.
