Performance evaluation of EDCA and agent based congestion control routing in mobile adhoc network

Download Full-Text PDF Cite this Publication

Text Only Version

Performance evaluation of EDCA and agent based congestion control routing in mobile adhoc network

Performance evaluation of EDCA and agent based congestion control routing in mobile adhoc network

N.VIDHYA,

M.E Communication systems, Department of electronics and communication,

Saranathan college of Engineering, Tiruchirapalli, India.

Vidhyasaro238@gmail. Com

      1. RUNMOZHI,

        Associate professor,

        Department of electronics and communication, Saranathan college of Engineering, Tiruchirapalli,India.

        arunmozhi-ece@saranathan.ac.in

        Abstract-MANET is a system of autonomous mobile nodes that communicate over wireless links without any preinstalled infrastructure. In MANET when there is too much of data traffic at a node then the channel access in the network slows down and it leads to congestion. It degrades quality of service and also leads to delay and packet loss. In proposed system congestion in a network is controlled by mobile agent. The Network Simulator (NS-2) was used for simulation.

        Keywords: congestion; MANET; AODV; Routing.

        1. Introduction

          A mobile ad-hoc network (MANET) is a self-configuring infrastructure less network of mobile devices connected by wireless. Each device in a MANET is free to move independently in any direction, and will therefore change its links to other devices frequently. Each node should be capable of communicating with other nodes that are located within its transmission range. Each must forward traffic unrelated to its own use, and therefore be a router. In ad-hoc network nodes that are in the radio range of each other can directly communicate otherwise intermediate nodes are used to route the packet in between source and destination.

          A. Congestion in mobile ad-hoc networks

          In Ad-hoc networks, since there is no fixed infrastructure there are no separate network elements called routers and hence the mobile nodes themselves act as the routers.Congestion occurs when the resource demand exceeds the capacity of a network. During congestion, the network throughput decreases and packet drop will increases. In this work took congestion control in a network is achieved by using mobile agent.

        2. PROPOSED SYSTEM

          1. IEEE 802.11E

            IEEE 802.11e MAC standard was proposed as an enhancement to the legacy IEEE 802.11 DCF in order to support quality of service in WLAN. It introduces two new access methods Hybrid Coordination channel access (HCCA) and the Enhanced Distributed Coordination Function (EDCF), renamed in latest 802.11e draft to EDCA (Enhanced Distributed Channel Access). The IEEE 802.11e EDCA

            mechanism provides differentiated, distributed access to the wireless medium .Original IEEE 802.11 treats all packets as equals and not differentiating time sensitive traffic. EDCA classifies the packets into four different classes voice(VO), video (VI), best effort (BE) and background (BK) and assigns each of these traffic types to four Access Categories.

            EDCA defines four access categories (ACs) namely AC_VO for voice, AC_VI for video , AC_BE for best effort and AC_BK for background classes of traffic to provide priority among different traffic types. EDCA provides differentiated and distributed access to the wireless medium. Each AC achieves differentiated channel access by varying the amount of time, a node would sense the channel to be idle and the length of the contention window during a back off. Each frame from the higher layer carries its user Priority(UP).Eight User Priorities(UP) identical to IEEE 802.11D priority tags are defined which can be mapped to any four Access Categories. After receiving a frame ,the MAC layer maps it into one of the four ACs .Each AC is associated with one backoff entity and some AC specific parameters called the EDCA parameter set composed of Arbitrary Inter-Frame

            Space Number (AIFSN[AC]), minimum contention window (CWmin[AC]), and maximum contention window (CWmax[AC]).

            The Channel is idle for a contention period (CP) before a node can transmit data . If the channel is idle for the whole CP, the station can transmit immediately after the CP. So with multiple stations contending for one radio channel, the shorter the CP, the higher the chance is to access the wireless medium. The CP consists of Arbitration Inter-frame Space (AIFS) and a random backoff time. The AIFS is a distinct value for each AC. After the idle duration of AIFS, the contention entity generates a random backoff period for an additional deferral time before transmitting. Basically, the smaller AIFSN[AC], CWmin[AC], and max[AC], the shorter the channel access delay for the corresponding priority. However, the probability of collisions increases when operating with smaller CWmin[AC].

          2. Agent based congestion control routing

          In MANET obstruction occurs due to packet loss and it can be reduced by congestion control. In the proposed system the mobile agent based congestion control technique is

          used. The mobile agent moves through the network and it select a less loaded neighbor node as its next hop and update the routing table. The mobile agent estimates the queue length and the channel contention of each path. Then total congestion metric is applied to the routing protocol to select the minimum congested route in the network.

          Queue length estimation:

          Where is the queue length.

          is the arrival rate. is the service rate.

          Queue length distribution:

          The channel occupation due to MAC contention is

          Step (4): Then the Mobile agent1 calculates the TCM1 of that patp and similarly Mobile agent2 calculates the TCM2 of patp ,Mobile agent3 calculates the TCM3 of patpand Mobile agent4 calculates the TCM4 of path4.

          Step (5): Now the destination D sends the total congestion metrics TCM1, TCM2, TCM3 and TCM4 of the patp, patp,patp and path4 to the source.

          Step (6): TCM is set to a threshold value. The path with TCM less than the threshold value are the active path and the path with TCM greater than the threshold value are the non active path.

          Step (7): If the TCM is above the threshold then the traffic is distributed.

          .

        3. IMPLEMENTATION

          The wireless network scenario was generated using Tcl script and it was simulated using NS-2. The simulation was carried for 20,40,60,80,100 number of nodes, for the data rate 64,128,256,512 packets/sec and for the node mobility 10, 20, 30,40,50m/s. The simulation area is 1000m×1000m, the simulation time is 50sec and the mobility model is random way point. The simulation parameters are listed in Table1.The

          performance was evaluated by calculating performance

          Total Congestion Metric:

          The Total Congestion Metric (TCM) can be estimated from the obtained queue length and the channel contention.

          The agent based congestion routing Architecture can be explained from the following figure:

          Step (1): The source S checks the number of available one hop neighbours and clones the Mobile Agent (MA) to that Neighbours.

          metrics (i.e. packet delivery ratio, throughput, packet drop, routing over head and end to end delay)

          TABLE-1 SIMULATION PARAMETERS

          SIMULATION PARAMETER

          VALUES

          Routing protocol

          AODV

          Number of nodes

          20,40,60,80,100

          Area

          1000m×1000m

          Maximum speed

          10,20,30,40,50 M/S

          Packet rate

          64,128,256,512 packets/sec

          Mobility model

          Random way point

          Simulation time

          50 sec

          Step (2): The Mobile agent estimate the queue length and

          channel contention of patp, path 2, path 3,path 4 as given in the figure1. TCM (total congestion metric) is the sum of queue length and channel contention of each path.

          Step (3): The Mobile agent1 moves towards the destination D in a hop-by-hop manner in the patp and Mobile agent2 in patp, Mobile agent3 in patp and Mobile agent4 in path4 respectively.

          0.2

          A. Performance Metrics

          Throughput: It is defined as the average number of packets successfully received per unit time. This measurement used to know how fast packets can send through the network.

          Packet delivery fraction (PDF): It is defined as the ratio of number of data packets received to the number of data packets sent.

          End-to-end delay: It is defined as the total time taken by each packet to reach the destination. Average end-to-end delay is the ratio of total time delay for all the received packets to the number of packets received.

          Routing Overhead: It is defined as the total number of routing packets transmitted during the simulation.

          Packet drop: It is defined as the failure of one or more transmitted packets to arrive at their destination.

        4. Simulation results and analysis

0.15

0.1

0.05

0

1

0.98

0.96

0.94

0.92

0.9

10 20 30 40 50

Fig 2.delay Vs mobility

EDCA

congestion controlled EDCA

EDCA

  1. Performance of EDCA at Various mobility:

    0.88 congestion

    The performances of EDCA are measured in terms of packet delivery ratio, throughput and average end-end delay , packet drop and routing overhead.

    To analyze the performance of EDCA, the number of nodes is 20, data rate is 64 packets/sec and mobility is varied

    0.86

    0.84

    10 20 30 40 50

    controlled EDCA

    as 10,20,30,40,50 m/s. Figures 1, 2 ,3,4 and 5 shows the performance of EDCA in terms of various mobility.

    Fig 3.packet delivery ratio Vs mobility

    60

    50

    40 EDCA

    30

    20

    congestion

    0.12

    0.1

    0.08

    0.06

    0.04

    0.02

    0

    EDCA

    congestion controlled EDCA

    10

    0

    10 20 30 40 50

    controlled EDCA

    10 20 30 40 50

    Fig 4.packet drop Vs mobility

    Fig 1.throughput Vs mobility

    2

    1.5

    1

    EDCA

    1

    0.98

    0.96

    0.94

    EDCA

    0.5 congestion

    controlled

    0.92

    0.9

    congestion

    0

    10 20 30 40 50

    EDCA

    0.88

    20 40 60 80 100

    controlled EDCA

    Fig 5.routing over head Vs mobility

  2. Performance of EDCA at various number of nodes:

To analyze the performance of EDCA, the mobility is 10, data rate is 64 packets/sec and number of nodes is varied as 20,40,60,80,100. Figures 6,7,8,9 and 10 shows the performance of EDCA in terms of various numbers of node.

Fig 8. packet delivery ratio Vs number of nodes

60

50

40 EDCA

30

20

0.1

0.08

0.06

0.04

EDCA

10

0

20 40 60 80 100

congestion

controlled EDCA

0.02

0

20 40 60 80 100

congestion controlled EDCA

Fig 6. throughput Vs number of nodes

Fig 9. packet drop Vs number of nodes

0.06

0.05

0.04 EDCA

0.03

0.02

2.5

2

1.5

1

EDCA

0.01

0

20 40 60 80 100

congestion

controlled EDCA

0.5

0

20 40 60 80 100

congestion controlled EDCA

Fig 7. packet delay Vs number of nodes

fig 10. routing over head Vs number of nodes

  1. Performance of EDCA at various datarate:

    To analyze the performance of EDCA, the mobility is 10, number of nodes is 20 and datarate is varied as 64,128,256,512 and 1024. Figures 11,12,13,14 and 15

    shows the performance of EDCA in terms of various datarate.

    100

    80

    1

    0.8

    0.6

    0.4

    0.2

    0

    EDCA

    congestion controlled EDCA

    60

    40

    20

    0

    64 128 256 512

    Fig 11. throughput Vs datarate

    EDCA

    congestion controlled EDCA

    1.6

    1.4

    1.2

    1

    0.8

    0.6

    64 128 256 512

    Fig 14. packet drop Vs datarate

    EDCA

    0.06

    0.4 congestion

    0.05

    0.04

    EDCA

    0.2

    0

    64 128 256 512

    controlled EDCA

    0.03

    0.02

    0.01

    0

    64 128 256 512

    congestion controlled EDCA

    Fig 15. routing over head Vs datarate

    V.CONCLUSION

    From the above analysis the performance of congestion

    1.2

    1

    Fig 12. packet delay Vs data rate

    controlled EDCA is evauated. In this technique, the Mobile agent estimates the queue length and channel contention of each path. Based on the TCM value the traffic is distributed.

    Thus the proposed technique attains high delivery ratio and throughput with reduced delay when compared with the EDCA.

    0.8 EDCA

    0.6

    0.4

    REFERENCES

    0.2

    0

    64 128 256 512

    congestion controlled EDCA

    1. S.Santhosh baboo,B.Narasimhan,A Hop-by-Hop Congestion- Aware Routing Protocol for Heterogeneous Mobile Ad-hoc Networks. Vol. 3, 2009 International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security.

    2. kazuya nishimura and Kazuko takakhashi,A Multi-Agent Routing Protocol with Congestion Control for MANET. Proceedings 21st European Conference on Modelling and Simulation Ivan Zelinka, Zuzana Oplatkova, Alessandra Orsoni

      Fig 13. packet delivery ratio Vs datarate

      ©ECMS 2007.

    3. Sujatha.P.Terdal1, Dr.V.D.Mytri, Dr.A.Damodaram, uday.s.b,Enhanced multipath routing with congestion avoidance for 802.11e based mobile adhoc networks. Vol.2, September 2011, International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing.

    4. Senthil Kumaran, T. and V. Sankaranarayanan,Congestion Free Routing in Adhoc Networks. Journal of Computer Science pg no.971-977, 2012.

    5. Mushtaq Ahmed D.M., Aslam Karjagi, Gireesh Babu C.N. and Sowmya Naik,Contention-Based Congestion Control in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks. International Conference on Computational Techniques and Artificial Intelligence.

    6. Zhen-ning kong, Danny h. k. tsang, Brahim bensaou, and Deyun gao, Performance analysis of ieee 802.11e contention-based channel access. ieee journal on selected areas in communications, vol. 22, December 2004.

    7. Vishnu Kumar Sharma1 and Dr. Sarita Singh Bhadauria,Performance Analysis on Mobile Agent Based Congestion Control Using AODV Routing Protocol Technique with Hop by Hop Algorithm for Mobile Ad-hoc Network. International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.3, April 2012

    8. Dr.V.B.Narsimha,Adaptive Congestion Control status for mobile adhoc network. International Journal of Computer Science and Network (IJCSN),Volume 1, Issue 4, August 2012.

    9. Prof. S.A. Jain, Mr. Abhishek Bande, Mr. Gaurav Deshmukh,Mr. Yogesh Rade, Mr. Maheshandhanshiv, An Improvement In Congestion Control Using Multipath Routing In Manet International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA), Vol. 2, Issue 3, May-Jun 2012, pp. 509- 514.

    10. Robin Choudhary, Niraj Singhal, A Novel Approach for Congestion Control in MANET International Journal of Engineering and Innovative Technology (IJEIT) Volume 2, Issue 5, November 2012.

    11. kazuya nishimura and kazuko takahashi, A Multi-Agent Routing Protocol with Congestion Control for MANET 21st European Conference on Modelling and Simulation Ivan Zelinka, Zuzana Oplatková, Alessandra Orsoni.

    12. S. Sbburam, P. Sheik Abdul Khader, Predictive congestion control mechanism for MANET Indian Journal of Computer Science and Engineering (IJCSE), Vol. 3 No.5 Oct-Nov 2012.

    13. Anjana, A. K. Vatsa and R. P. Agarwal, A Novel Architecture and Mechanism for Congestion Avoidance in MANETJournal of Communication and Computer 9 (2012) 328-334.

    14. Nazia Zaman, Kazi Chandrima Rahman, Syed Faisal Hasan, Explicit Rate-based Congestion Control for Multimedia Streaming over Mobile Ad hoc Networks International Journal of Electrical & Computer Sciences IJECS-IJENS Vol: 10 No: 04.

    15. Mohammad amin kheirandish fard,sasan karamizadeh, mohammad aflaki, enhancing congestion control to Address link failure loss over Mobile ad-hoc network international journal of computer networks & communications (ijcnc) vol.3, No.5, sep 2011.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *