Telecommunication Systems

, Volume 58, Issue 4, pp 329–348 | Cite as

Enhancing robustness of vehicular networks using virtual frameworks



Vehicular ad-hoc network (VANET) is one of the most transforming technologies for Intelligent Transportation Systems today. In particular, wireless mesh network is widely used for VANETs due to its scalability, flexibility, and low maintenance cost. When a mesh node in such a network fails, one can simply replace it with a new mesh node, and the network automatically reconfigures itself. However, due to the environment or limited resources, it may not be feasible to replace a failed node immediately. We have witnessed over the last few years many disasters in the globe. One thing that all of those natural disasters have in common, besides the tremendous loss of life, is that they are immediately followed by an almost total loss of the ability to communicate with outside world. In the recent event of natural disaster in Japan, the communication network was still not fully recovery after weeks of the disaster. However, communication is the key to post-disaster survival. Therefore, it is important to have an alternate communication during time of disaster. In this paper, we introduce two techniques, virtual router approach and virtual link approach, for designing failure-resilient VANET’s that can retain almost their original coverage and capacity until the failed mesh nodes can be repaired or replaced, i.e., we are able to retain 80 % of original capacity with only 50 % working mesh nodes. We give simulation results, validated by analytical analysis, to show that this desirable property can be achieved, using virtual routers and/or virtual links, with minimal overhead. These virtual frameworks also balance the workload among the mesh nodes even when the mesh clients are not uniformly distributed over the application terrain. This characteristic helps improve the overall end-to-end delay and communication throughput of the network.


Communication protocols VANET  Wireless mesh network 


  1. 1.
    Bai, F., Sadagopan, N., Krishnamachari, B., & Helmy, A. (2004). Modeling path duration distributions in manets and their impact on reactive routing protocols. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 22(7), 1357–1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Biswas, S., & Morris, R. (2004). Opportunistic routing in multi-hop wireless networks. SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 34(1), 69–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brinkhoff, T. (2002). A framework for generating network-based moving objects. GeoInformatica, 6(2), 153–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cacciapuoti, S., Caleffi, M., & Paura, L. (2009). A theoretical model for opportunistic routing in ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of IEEE SASN ’09: The international workshop on scalable ad hoc and sensor networks, St. Petersburg (RU), October 11–12 2009.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Caleffi, M., Ferraiuolo, G., & Paura, L. (2008). A reliability-based framework for multi-path routing analysis in mobile ad-hoc networks. International Journal of Communication Networks and Distributed Systems, 1(4-5-6), 507–523.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chandran, K., Raghunathan, S., Venkatesan, S., & Prakash, R. (2001). A feedback-based scheme for improving TCP performance in ad hoc wireless networks. IEEE Personal Communication, 8(1), 34–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen, K., Xue, Y., & Nahrstedt, K. (2003). On setting TCP’s congestion window limit in mobile ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of IEEE ICC.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, X., Jones, H. M., & Jayalath, A. D. S. (2007). Congestion-aware routing protocol for mobile ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of IEEE conference on vehicular technology (pp. 21–25).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen, Y. S., Lin, Y. W., & Pan, C. Y. (2011). DIR: Diagonal-intersection-based routing protocol for urban vehicular ad hoc networks. Telecommunication System, 46, 299–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Corson, S., & Macker, J. (1999). Mobile ad hoc networking (MANET): Routing protocol performance issues and evaluation consideration. Internet Enginerring Task Force RFC 2501, January 1999.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fu, Z., Zerfos, P., Luo, H., Lu, S., Zhang, L., & Gerla, M. (2003). The impact of multihop wireless channel on TCP throughput and loss. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fubler, H., Hartenstein, H., Widmer, J., Mauve, M., & Effelsberg, W. (2004). Contention-based forwarding for street scenarios. Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on intelligent transportation (WIT), March 2004 (pp. 155–160). Hamburg, Germany.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ghafoor, K. Z., Bakar, K. A., Eenennaam, M. V., Khokhar, R. H., & Gonzalez, A. J. (2013). A fuzzy logic approach to beaconing for vehicular ad hoc networks. Telecommunication Systems, 52, 139–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ho, H., Ho, Y. H., & Hua, K. A. (2005). A connectionless approach to mobile ad hoc networks in streets environment. In IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV) : Las Vegas, NV.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ho, Y. H., Wu, Y. C., & Chen, M. C. (2010). PLASH: A platform for location aware service with human computation. IEEE Communication Magazine: Consumer Communications and Networking Series, December Issue.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ho, Y. H., Ho, A. H., Hua, K. A., & Hamza-Lup, G. L. (2004). A connectionless approach to mobile ad hoc networks. Proceedings of ISCC 2004. Ninth International Symposium on Computers and Communications, 2004. (vol. 1, pp. 188–195) Alexandria, Egypt, 28 June-1 July 2004.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ho, Y. H., Ho, A. H., & Hua, K. A. (2008). Routing protocols for inter-vehicular networks: A comparative study in high-mobility and large obstacles environments. Computer Communications Journal, 31(12), 2767–2780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Holland, G., & Vaidya, N. H. (1999). Analysis of TCP performance over mobile ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of ACM MOBICOM.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Johnson, D. B., & Maltz, D. A. (1996). The dynamic source routing protocol for mobile ad hoc network. In T. Imielinski & H. Korth (Eds.), Mobile computing (Chapter 5 (pp. 153–181). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kranakis, E., Singh, H., & Urrutia, J. (1999). Compass routing on geometric networks. In Proceedings 11th Canadian conf. computational geometry (pp. 51–54.). Vancouver, BC, August 1999.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kuhn, F., Wattenhofer, R., & Zollinger, A. (2002) Asymptotically optimal geometric mobile ad hoc routing. In Proceedings of 6th international workshop on discrete algorithms and methods for mobile computing and communications (DIAL-M) (pp. 24–33).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kuhn, F., Wattenhofer, R., & Zollinger, A. (2003). Worst-case optimal and average-case efficient geometric ad hoc routing. In Proceedings of ACM MobiHoc.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Le, A., Kum, D., & Cho, Y. (2009). An efficient hybrid routing approach for hybrid wireless mesh networks. In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference and workshops on advances in information security and assurance. Seoul, Korea, June 25–27, 2009.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Liu, J., & Singh, S. (2001). ATCP: TCP for mobile ad hoc networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 19, 1300–1315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
    Ming, G., Wu, Y., Li, K., & Al-Dubai, A. Y. (2010). Preformance modeling and optimization of integrated wireless LANs and mult-hop mesh networks. International Journal Commmunication System, 23(9–10), 1111–1126.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mir, S., Pirzada, A. A., & Portmann, M. (2008). HOVER: Hybrid on-demand distance vector routing for wireless mesh networks. In Proceedings of the31st Australasian conference on computer science (Vol. 74). Wollongong, January 01–01, 2008.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Monks, J. P., Sinha, P., & Bharghavan, V. (2000). Limitations of TCP-ELFN for ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of MOMUC.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Perkins, C.E., & Royer, E. M. (1999). Ad hoc on demand distance vector (AODV) routing. Second IEEE workshop on mobile computer systems and application (pp. 90).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Naumov, V., & Gross, T. (2007) Connectivity-aware routing (CAR) in vehicular ad hoc networks. In IEEE international conference on computer communications (INFOCOM) (pp. 1919–1927). Anchorage, AK, May 2007.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Perkins, C. E., Bhagwat, P. (1994) Highly dynamic destination-sequenced distance-vector routing (DSDV) for mobile computer. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM (pp. 234–244), October 1994.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rezaei, S., Sengupta, R., Krishnan, H., & Guan, X. (2007). Reducing the communication required by dsrc-based vehicle safety systems. In IEEE intelligent transportation systems conference (ITSC) (pp. 361–366).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sayer, T. (2007). Critical analysis of sunshine skyway bridge. Proceeding of bridge engineering 2 conference. Bath, May 4th.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wang, F., & Zhang, Y. (2002). Improving TCP performance over mobile ad hoc networks with out-of-order detection and response. In Proceedings of ACM MobiHoc.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wu, J., & Li, H.-L. (2001). A dominating-set-based routing scheme in ad hoc wireless networks. Telecommunication System, 18(1–3), 13–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Xu, K., Gerla, M., Qi, L., & Shu, Y. (2003). Enhancing TCP fairness in ad hoc wireless networks using neighborhood RED. In Proceedings of ACM MobiCom.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zeadally, S., Hunt, R., Chen, Y.-S., Irwin, A., & Hassan, A. (2012). Vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETS): Status, results, and challenges. Telecommunication Systems, 50(4), 217–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zeng, X., Bagrodia, R., & Gerla, M.: GloMoSim: A library for parallel simulation of large-scale wireless network. In Proceedings of the 12th workshop on parallel and distributed simulation (pp. 154–161). Banff, AB, May 1998.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zhao, L., Al-Bubai, A. Y., & Min, G. (2011). An efficient neighbourhood load routing metric for wireless mesh network. Journal of Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 19, 1415–1426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zubow, A., Kurth, M., & Redlich, J.-P. (2008). Considerations on forwarder selection for opportunistic protocols in wireless networks. In 14th European wireless conference (EW) (pp. 1–7), June 2008.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Information EngineeringNational Taiwan Normal UniversityTaipeiTaiwan (R.O.C.)
  2. 2.Institute of Information ScienceAcademia SinicaTaipei Taiwan (R.O.C.)

Personalised recommendations