V-GRADIENT: A Density-Aware Geocast Routing Protocol for Vehicular Delay-Tolerant Networks

  • Henrique Nascimento
  • Paulo Rogério PereiraEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 553)


Vehicular Delay-Tolerant Networks (VDTNs) are networks of vehicles that communicate wirelessly, where there are no permanent end-to-end connections. VDTNs have a highly variable topology, with frequent partitions, and possibly low node density. Thus, delay-tolerant routing adopts a store-carry-and-forward message transfer paradigm, where messages have a useful Time To Live (TTL) and are stored until a good contact opportunity arises. Multiple message replicas can be generated to improve delivery probability at the cost of increasing network congestion. In this paper, we propose the V-GRADIENT geocast routing protocol that monitors node density and buffer occupancy, to adapt dynamically the forwarding techniques used to disseminate messages within the geographic region of interest. Simulation results show that V-GRADIENT is capable of controlling network congestion and efficiently deliver messages resulting in better delivery ratios (13–99%) and lower latencies when compared with existing protocols.


Wireless communications Geocast routing Vehicular delay-tolerant networks 



This work was supported by national funds through Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT) with reference UID/CEC/50021/2019.


  1. 1.
    Spyropoulos, T., Psounis, K., Raghavendra, C.S.: Single-copy routing in intermittently connected mobile networks. In: First Annual IEEE Communications Society Conference on Sensor and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks (SECON), pp. 235–244. IEEE, October 2004Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Spyropoulos, T., Psounis, K., Raghavendra, C.S.: Spray and wait: an efficient routing scheme for intermittently connected mobile networks. In: ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Delay-Tolerant Networking (WDTN), pp. 252–259. ACM, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vahdat, A., Becker, D.: Epidemic routing for partially-connected Ad Hoc networks. Technical report, CS-200006. Department of Computer Science, Duke University, Durham, NC (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rajaei, A., Chalmers, D., Wakeman, I., Parisis, G.: GSAF: efficient and flexible geocasting for opportunistic networks. In: IEEE 17th International Symposium on A World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks (WoWMoM), pp. 1–9. IEEE, June 2016Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lu, S., Liu, Y.: Geoopp: geocasting for opportunistic networks. In: IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), pp. 2582–2587. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ott, J., Hyytiä, E., Lassila, P.E., Vaegs, T., Kangasharju, J.: Floating content: information sharing in urban areas. In: IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PerCom), pp. 136–146. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Keränen, A., Ott, J., Kärkkäinen, T.: The ONE simulator for DTN protocol evaluation. In: SIMUTools 2009: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Simulation Tools and Techniques. ICST, New York (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.INESC-ID, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de LisboaLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations