Mobile Networks and Applications

, Volume 15, Issue 6, pp 786–801 | Cite as

Simulation of Ad Hoc Routing Protocols using OMNeT++

A Case Study for the DYMO Protocol
  • Christoph Sommer
  • Isabel Dietrich
  • Falko Dressler


Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANETs) have evolved in the last years into standards in the communication world. By definition, they do not need any network infrastructure to facilitate communication between participating nodes. Therefore, MANETs are dealing with new challenges in the context of ad hoc routing. Simulation techniques are one of the fundamental methodologies to support the protocol engineering process, especially in the early stages of ad hoc network protocol design. In this paper, we set out common criteria that may serve as guidelines for meaningful simulative evaluations of ad hoc routing protocols. We present typical and necessary measures for ad hoc routing in general and MANET routing in particular. As a case study, we demonstrate a comprehensive performance evaluation of the Dynamic MANET On Demand (DYMO) routing protocol using a model we implemented for the popular OMNeT+ + discrete event simulation environment.


MANET protocol simulation OMNeT+ + ad hoc routing performance evaluation 


  1. 1.
    Akkaya, K. & Younis, M (2005). A survey of routing protocols in wireless sensor networks. Ad. Hoc. Netw., 3(3), 325–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bai, F. & Helmy, A (2004). A survey of mobility models in wireless adhoc networks. In, Wireless ad hoc and sensor networks. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Camp T, Boleng J, Davies V (2002) A survey of mobility models for ad hoc network research. Wirel Commun Mob Comput 2(5):483–502 (Special Issue on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking: Research, Trends and Applications)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chakeres I, Perkins C (2007) Dynamic MANET on-demand (DYMO) routing. Internet-draft (work in progress) draft-ietf-manet-dymo-11.txt, IETFGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clausen TH, Dearlove C, Dean JW (2007) MANET neighborhood discovery protocol (NHDP). Internet-draft (work in progress) draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-05.txt, IETFGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clausen TH, Dearlove CM, Dean JW, Adjih C (2007) Generalized MANET packet/message format. Internet-draft (work in progress) draft-ietf-manet-packetbb-11.txt, IETFGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dressler F (2007) Self-organization in sensor and actor networks. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Drytkiewicz W, Sroka S, Handziski V, Köpke A, Karl H (2003) A mobility framework for OMNeT+ +. In: 3rd international OMNeT+ + workshop, at Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Department of Telecommunications, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ewing G, Pawlikowski K, McNickle D (1999) Akaroa2: exploiting network computing by distributed stochastic simulation. In: European simulation multiconference (ESM 1999), Warsaw, pp 175–181Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Galvez JJ, Ruiz PM (2007) Design and performance evaluation of multipath extensions for the DYMO protocol. In: 32nd IEEE conference on local computer networks, Dublin, pp 885–892Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haas ZJ, Pearlman MR (2001) The performance of query control schemes for the zone routing protocol. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw (TON) 9:427–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hong X, Xu K, Gerla M (2002) Scalable routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks. IEEE Netw 16:11–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Iwata A, Chiang C-C, Pei G, Gerla M, Chen T-W (1999) Scalable routing strategies for ad hoc wireless networks. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 17(8):1369–1379 (Special Issue on Ad-Hoc Networks)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Johnson DB (1994) Routing in ad hoc networks of mobile hosts. In: Workshop on mobile computing systems and applications. IEEE, Santa Cruz, pp 158–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Murthy CSR, Manoj BS (2004) Ad hoc wireless networks. Prentice Hall PTR, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pawlikowski K, Jeong H-D, Lee J-SR (2002) On credibility of simulation studies of telecommunication networks. IEEE Commun Mag 40:132–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pawlikowski K, Yau VWC, McNickle D (1994) Distributed stochastic discrete-event simulation in parallel time streams. In: 26th winter simulation conference (WSC ’94). Society for Computer Simulation International, San Diego, pp 723–730Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Perkins CE, Bhagwat P (1994) Highly dynamic destination-sequenced distance-vector routing (DSDV) for mobile computers. Comput Commun Rev 24:234–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Perkins CE, Royer EM (1999) Ad hoc on-demand distance vector routing. In: 2nd IEEE workshop on mobile computing systems and applications, New Orleans, pp 90–100Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rajaraman R (2002) Topology control and routing in ad hoc networks: a survey. ACM SIGACT News 33(2):60–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sargent RG (2007) Verification and validation of simulation models. In: 39th winter simulation conference (WSC 2007). IEEE, Washington, DC, pp 124–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sommer C, Dietrich I, Dressler F (2008) A simulation model of DYMO for ad hoc routing in OMNeT+ +. In: 1st ACM/ICST international conference on simulation tools and techniques for communications, networks and systems (SIMUTools 2008): 1st ACM/ICST international workshop on OMNeT+ + (OMNeT+ + 2008). ACM, MarseilleGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sommer C, Dressler F (2007) The DYMO routing protocol in VANET scenarios. In: 66th IEEE vehicular technology conference (VTC2007-Fall). IEEE, Baltimore, pp 16–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sommer C, Yao Z, German R, Dressler F (2008) On the need for bidirectional coupling of road traffic microsimulation and network simulation. In: 9th ACM international symposium on mobile ad hoc networking and computing (ACM Mobihoc 2008): 1st ACM international workshop on mobility models for networking research (MobilityModels’08). ACM, Hong Kong, pp 41–48Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sroka S, Karl H (2002) Using Akaroa2 with OMNeT+ +. In: 2nd international OMNeT+ + workshop, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Varga A (2001) The OMNeT+ + discrete event simulation system. In: European simulation multiconference (ESM 2001), PragueGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Varga A, Hornig R (2008) An overview of the OMNeT+ + simulation environment. In: 1st ACM/ICST international conference on simulation tools and techniques for communications, networks and systems (SIMUTools 2008). ACM, MarseilleGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christoph Sommer
    • 1
  • Isabel Dietrich
    • 1
  • Falko Dressler
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Networks and Communication Systems, Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of ErlangenErlangenGermany

Personalised recommendations