A performance comparison of delay-tolerant network routing protocols

Networks that lack continuous end-to-end connections among their nodes due to node mobility, constrained power sources, or limited data storage space are called DTNs. To overcome the intermittent connectivity, DTN nodes store and carry the data packets they receive until they come into communication range of each other. In addition, they spread multiple copies of the same packet on the network to increase the delivery probability. In recent years, several routing protocols have been developed specifically for DTNs. These protocols vary in the number of copies they spread and the information they use to guide the packets to their destinations. There have been some reviews of those protocols, but no performance comparison has been conducted. In this article, we study four well-known DTN routing protocols: EPIDEMIC, Spray-and-Wait, PROPHET, and MAXPROP. We introduce a procedural form to present the protocols. We measure the performance of the protocols in terms of packet delivery, delivery cost, and average packet delay. We compare the protocols' performance together with the results of optimal routing using real-life scenarios of vehicles and pedestrians roaming in a city. We conduct several simulation experiments to show the impact of changing buffer capacity, packet lifetime, packet generation rate, and number of nodes on the performance metrics. The article is concluded by providing guidelines to develop an efficient DTN routing protocol. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first to provide a detailed performance comparison among the diverse collection of DTN routing protocols.

[1]  Ke Xu,et al.  A Survey of Social-Aware Routing Protocols in Delay Tolerant Networks: Applications, Taxonomy and Design-Related Issues , 2014, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials.

[2]  Cecilia Mascolo,et al.  Socially-aware routing for publish-subscribe in delay-tolerant mobile ad hoc networks , 2008, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[3]  Vinny Cahill,et al.  Sensor Network with Delay Tolerance (SeNDT) , 2007, 2007 16th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks.

[4]  Amin Vahdat,et al.  Epidemic Routing for Partially-Connected Ad Hoc Networks , 2009 .

[5]  Zhensheng Zhang,et al.  Routing in intermittently connected mobile ad hoc networks and delay tolerant networks: overview and challenges , 2006, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials.

[6]  T. Spyropoulos,et al.  Efficient Routing in Intermittently Connected Mobile Networks: The Multiple-Copy Case , 2008, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[7]  Amiya Nayak,et al.  Choosing the objective of optimal routing protocols in Delay Tolerant networks , 2010, 2010 International Computer Engineering Conference (ICENCO).

[8]  Sagar Naik,et al.  A Socially-Based Routing Protocol for Delay Tolerant Networks , 2010, 2010 IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference GLOBECOM 2010.

[9]  Alex Pentland,et al.  DakNet: rethinking connectivity in developing nations , 2004, Computer.

[10]  Brian Gallagher,et al.  MaxProp: Routing for Vehicle-Based Disruption-Tolerant Networks , 2006, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2006. 25TH IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications.

[11]  Jean-Marie Bonnin,et al.  Routing protocols in Vehicular Delay Tolerant Networks: A comprehensive survey , 2014, Comput. Commun..

[12]  Jörg Ott,et al.  The ONE simulator for DTN protocol evaluation , 2009, SimuTools.

[13]  Anders Lindgren,et al.  Probabilistic routing in intermittently connected networks , 2003, MOCO.

[14]  Ellen W. Zegura,et al.  Hierarchical power management in disruption tolerant networks with traffic-aware optimization , 2006, CHANTS '06.

[15]  Sagar Naik,et al.  SGBR: A Routing Protocol for Delay Tolerant Networks Using Social Grouping , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems.

[16]  Yong Wang,et al.  Energy-efficient computing for wildlife tracking: design tradeoffs and early experiences with ZebraNet , 2002, ASPLOS X.

[17]  Jörg Ott,et al.  Drive-thru Internet: IEEE 802.11b for "automobile" users , 2004, IEEE INFOCOM 2004.