Wireless Personal Communications

, Volume 87, Issue 3, pp 869–895 | Cite as

BIIR: A Beacon Information Independent VANET Routing Algorithm with Low Broadcast Overhead

Article

Abstract

Most of the existing VANET routing protocols rely on information collected from beacons for making routing decisions such as next neighbor selection. Beacons are very small size hello messages that each vehicle broadcasts periodically. Owing to very small payload size of beacons as compared to the payload size of a data message, they can easily pass through even very weak links, through which a data message could never pass. Therefore, the use of beacon information for making routing decisions in a highly dynamic scenario such as VANETs may cause selection of routes through which data message can never be sent. Several researchers have given solutions that do not use beacon information for making routing decisions. But most of these solutions incorporate a large number of broadcasts to forward the data packets, causing wastage of bandwidth. In this paper, we present a beacon information independent geographic routing algorithm called BIIR, which reduces the number of broadcasts to forward the data packets by making intelligent use of information collected by the vehicle during previous route discovery attempts for a destination. Our simulation results have shown that the proposed algorithm outperforms the existing beacon less routing protocols in terms of the average number of broadcasts per data packet forwarding, packet delivery ratio and end to end delay experienced by the data messages.

Keywords

Beacon information independent routing Geographic routing Vehicular ad hoc networks Intelligent transportation system Inter vehicle communication 

References

  1. 1.
    Toor, Y., Muhlethaler, P., & Laouiti, A. (2008). Vehicle ad hoc networks: Applications and related technical issues. IEEE Communication Surveys and Tutorials, 10(3), 74–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sharef, B. T., Alsaqour, R. A., & Ismail, M. (2014). Vehicular communication ad hoc routing protocols: A survey. Elsevier’s Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 40, 363–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gerla, M., & Kleinrock, L. (2011). Vehicular networks and the future of the mobile internet. Elsevier’s Computer Networks, 55(2), 457–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Li, F., & Wang, Y. (2007). Routing in vehicular ad hoc networks: A survey. IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine, 2(2), 12–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sanchez, J. A., Ruiz, P. M., & Perez, R. M. (2009). Beacon less geographic routing made practical: Challenges, design guidelines and protocols. IEEE Communications Magazine, 47(8), 85–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ruiz, P.M., Cabrera V., Martinez, J.M., & Ros, F.J. (2010). BRAVE: Beacon less routing algorithm in vehicular environments. In IEEE 7th International Conference on Mobile Ad hoc and Sensor System (ICMASS’10), (pp. 709–714).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Füßler, H., Hannes, H., Jörg, W., Martin, M., Wolfgang, E., et al. (2004). Contention based forwarding for street scenarios. In Proceedings of International Workshop on Intelligent Transport (IWIT), (pp. 155–160), Humburg, Germany.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heissenbuttel, M., Braun, T., Bernoulli, T., & Walchli, M. (2004). BLR: Beacon less routing algorithm for mobile ad-hoc networks. Elsevier’s Computer Communications, 27(11), 1076–1086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Braun, T., Heissenbüttel, M., & Roth, T. (2010). Performance of the beacon-less routing protocols in realistic scenarios. Elsevier’s Ad Hoc Networks, 8(1), 96–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lochert, C., Hartenstein, H., Tian, J., Fussler, H., Hermann, D., Mauve, M., et al. (2003). A routing strategy for vehicular ad hoc networks in city environments. In Proceedings of IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, (pp. 156–161).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lee, K. C., Cheng, P. C., & Gerla, M. (2010). GeoCross: A geographic routing protocol in the presence of loops in urban scenarios. Elsevier’s Ad Hoc Networks, 8(8), 474–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Carnejo, A., Newport, C., Gollakota, S., Rao, J., & Giulli, T. J. (2013). Priortized gossip in vehicular ad hoc networks. Elsevier’s Ad Hoc Networks, 11(1), 397–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Behrisch, M., Bieker, L., Erdmann,J., & Krajzewicz, D. (2011). SUMO-Simulation of urban mobility: An overview. In 3rd International Conference on Advances in System Simulation ICASS’11, (pp. 63–69).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sommer, C., German, R., & Dressler, F. (2011). Bidirectionally coupled network and road traffic simulation for improved IVC analysis. IEEE Transcations on Mobile Computing, 10(1), 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stanica, R., Chaput, E., & Beylot, A. L. (2011). Simulation of vehicular ad hoc networks: Challenges, review of tools and recommendations. Elsevier’s Computer Networks, 55(14), 3179–3188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    http://www.omnetpp.org/. Accessed 30 Nov 2014.
  17. 17.
    http://veins.car2x.org/. Accessed 30 Nov 2014.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computer Engineering DepartmentNIT KurukshetraKurukshetraIndia
  2. 2.Vill Brahman MajraPanipatIndia

Personalised recommendations