Fault-Tolerance Evaluation of VANET Under Different Data Dissemination Models

Fault-Tolerance Evaluation of VANET Under Different Data Dissemination Models

Awadh Moqbel Gaamel (King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia), Barakat Pravin Maratha (King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia), Tarek Rahil Sheltami (King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia) and Elhadi M. Shakshuki (Acadia University, Wolfville, Canada)
DOI: 10.4018/ijvtis.2017010104


Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANETs) is a collection of wireless mobile nodes, which form temporary networks over infrastructure-less environments. Over the last few years, Vehicular Ad hoc Network (VANET) technology has been considered as an active research area. VANET is a sub class of MANET with some unique characteristics such as fast vehicle speed, frequent topology changes and restricted mobility on roads. The communication between vehicles provides a new avenue for different types of applications such as safety, traffic management, entertainment, etc. These applications are categorized based on how data is transmitted from source to destination. The performance of such applications does not only depend on routing protocols, but also on the data dissemination mechanism. Data dissemination in VANETs is a significant factor, which can be accomplished using four different models: Dynamic Source Dynamic Destination (DSDD), Dynamic Source Static Destination (DSSD), Static Source Dynamic Destination (SSDD), and Static Source Static Destination (SSSD). Each one of these models is suitable for specific types of applications. In this paper, the authors study and evaluate the fault-tolerance of VANET under different data dissemination techniques in terms of throughput, average End-to-End delay, and percentage of packet loss. the authors used NCTUns 6.0 network simulator and IEEE 802.11p wireless communication standard. Their findings show that DSDV is more fault-tolerant than both DSR and AODV in terms of packet loss percentage for all dissemination techniques. However, AODV shows better performance in average End-to-End delay and throughput under DSDD and SSDD techniques.
Article Preview

1. Introduction

Vehicular Ad hoc Network (VANET) is a specific class of Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANETs) where mobile nodes are represented as vehicles. Nodes’ movement at different speeds creates a dynamic topology with different scenarios (Olariu & Weigle, 2009). In VANET, vehicles are able to exchange data by using either Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I) or Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) communications (Rondinone et al., 2013), as shown in Figure 1. Nevertheless, due to the unstable nature of such networks, packet delivery is a significant challenge, especially in sparse traffic scenarios. Furthermore, in scenarios that are totally disconnected (e.g. in highways during night hours), data can be delivered depending on the available network infrastructure. Many efforts are aimed to enable inter-vehicle communications supplied by existing network infrastructure to provide efficient propagation of data and seamless connectivity (Lupi, Palma, & Vegni, 2012).

A smart new way of using the connectivity of vehicles is defined by Intelligent Vehicular Ad hoc Networking (InVANET). InVANET uses the combination of multiple wireless technologies (e.g. IEEE 802:11p, 3G cellular systems, IEEE 802:16e, etc.) to provide efficient V2I communications (Moustafa & Zhang, 2009). Moreover, V2I and V2V communication technologies are expanded as a portion of the initiative of Vehicle Infrastructure Integration, which always considers the infrastructure of the network as collected Road Side Units (RSUs). The RSUs are supplied with transceivers of 5.9 GHz Dedicated Short Range Communication (DSRC) and a High-Speed Downlink Packet Access (HSDPA) interface to transmit messages to the backbone networks (Bhalla & Bhalla, 2010; Papadimitratos, De La Fortelle, Evenssen, Brignolo, & Cosenza, 2009). Data delivery and dissemination is still considered a challenge in heterogeneous network environments.

In this study, the authors present the fault-tolerance evaluation of VANET under four data dissemination techniques (DSDD, DSSD, SSDD, and SSSD) using three MANETs routing protocols namely: AODV, DSR and DSDV. They use different scenarios that support both V2I and V2V connectivity.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. First, the authors review the related work. Then they introduce three MANETs routing protocols, VANET characteristics and data dissemination mechanisms in VANETs. Afterward they present four dissemination techniques and introduce the performance evaluation metrics. The authors highlight the simulation tool used and their achieved results. Finally, they provide their conclusions and planned future work.

Figure 1.

VANET architecture


Many research groups, using short range Vehicle-to-Vehicle communication, have explored the idea of data dissemination. Flooding is one of the most popular mechanisms used for broadcasting in MANETs without any explicit information from neighbors. Other studies (Lipman, Liu, & Stojmenovic, 2009) present the problem of broadcast storm that degrades the performance of the network, particularly with a high density. Researchers in (Lou & Wu, 2003) propose how to enhance the flooding mechanism by avoiding the broadcast storm problem. Nevertheless, their proposed model needs knowledge about both the network topology and the nodes’ neighbors.

There are several forwarding-based protocols such as opportunistic forwarding protocol that have been suggested to deal with data dissemination. Researchers in (Chen, Kung, & Vlah, 2001; Niculescu & Nath, 2003) propose an opportunistic forwarding technique and trajectory-based routing scheme. Moreover, the study in (Wu, Fujimoto, Guensler, & Hunter, 2004) suggests using a combination of a trajectory-based scheme and opportunistic routing trying to specifically address vehicle mobility and to enhance the fault-tolerance. The forwarding mechanism is considered more suitable for applications, which have reliable requirements of delivery than for latency-sensitive message dissemination (Nadeem, Shankar, & Iftode, 2006). The latter study shows that broadcast is the preferable message dissemination technique.

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Open Access Articles: Forthcoming
Volume 2: 1 Issue (2018)
Volume 1: 2 Issues (2017)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing