Mobility Versus Density Metric for OLSR Enhancement

  • Cholatip Yawut
  • Beatrice Paillassa
  • Riadh Dhaou
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4866)


In order to improve network performance, adaptive protocol would adapt to different aspects of the network dynamic exhibited by the wireless systems and more particularly by the ad hoc networks. In this paper we consider the adaptation to the ad hoc network dynamic through two parameters: mobility and density. We study the impact part of the density metric and of the mobility metric. Considering the Optimized Link State Routing protocol (OLSR), our work focus on the Multipoint Relays (MPR) selection. A new approach to select a MPR by using a simple modification and no additional packet header is proposed. It introduces the idea of Link Duration criterion as mobility metric for MPR selection. From simulation results it appears that the protocol performance can be enhanced by mobility adaptation after the density one. The proposed scheme outperforms the standard protocol for large number of nodes.


OLSR MPR Selection Link Duration Mobility Metric 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Yawut, C., Dhaou, R., Paillassa, B.: On Cross-Layer Mobility Indicators in Mesh Networks, Euro-NGI deliverable for the LEO-MESH-NET specific research project (November 2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yawut, C., Paillassa, B., Dhaou, R.: On Metrics for Mobility Oriented Self Adaptive Protocols. In: ICWMC 2007. 3rd International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Communications, Guadeloupe, France (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jaddi, F., Paillassa, B.: Mobility and density self-adaptative routing strategies in adhoc Networks. In: 3rd IEEE International Conference on Mobile Ad-hoc and Sensor Systems, LOCAN, Vancouver, Canada (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clausen, T., Jacquet, P.: Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (OLSR). RFC3626 (2003), Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Obilisetty, S., Jasti, A., Pendse, R.: Link stability based enhancements to OLSR (LS-OLSR). In: IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference, VTC-2005-Fall, 62nd, pp. 306–310 (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boleng, J., Navidi, W., Camp, T.: Metrics to enable adaptive protocols for mobile ad hoc networks. In: ICWN 2002. Proceedings of the International Conference on Wireless Networks, pp. 293–298 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ghassemian, M., Friderikos, V., Aghvami, A.H.: A Novel Algorithm for Supervisory Control by Monitoring Mobility and Traffic in Wireless Ad-hoc Networks. In: Wireless World Research Forum 12 meeting (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghassemian, M., Mostafavi, M., Friderikos, V., Aghvami, A.H.: On Mobility Applied for Ad-hoc Network Protocol Evaluation. In: MWCN 2005. The 7th IFIP International Conference on Mobile and Wireless Communications Networks (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Benzaid, M., Minet, P., Agha, K.A.: RR-4510 - Integrating fast mobility in the OLSR routing protocol. INRIA research report, p. 12 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ren, Z., Zhou, Y., Guo, W.: An adaptive multichannel OLSR routing protocol based on topology maintenance. In: Mechatronics and Automation, IEEE International Conference (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Qu, Y., Lung, C.H., Srinivasan, A.: Multi-channel OLSR with Dedicated Control Interface. In: SPECTS 2006, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, pp. 155–162 (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Goto, M., Yoshida, S., Mase, K., Clausen, T.: A Study of Link Buffering for OLSR. In: The OLSR Interop & Workshop 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Haerri, J., Filali, F., Bonnet, C.: On the Application of Mobility Predictions to Multipoint Relaying in MANETs: Kinetic Multipoint Relays. Eurecom Technical Report, Institut Eurecom, France (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gerharz, M., de Waal, C., Frank, M., Martini, P.: Link Stability in Mobile Wireless Ad Hoc Networks. In: LCN 2002, Proceedings of 27th Annual IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks, Tampa, Florida (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Perkins, C.E., Loyer, E.M., Das, S.R.: Performance comparison of two on-demand routing protocols for ad-hoc networks. IEEE Personal Commun. Mag., 16–28 (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Clausen, T., Jacquet, P., Viennot, L.: Comparative study of routing protocols for mobile ad-hoc networks. In: Proceeding of the First Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking Workshop. MindPass Center for Distributed Systems, Aalborg University and Project Hipercom, INRIA Rocquencourt, The First Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking Workshop (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    The Network simulator-ns-2,
  18. 18.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cholatip Yawut
    • 1
  • Beatrice Paillassa
    • 1
  • Riadh Dhaou
    • 1
  1. 1.IRIT laboratory – ENSEEIHT, Network & Telecommunication Department, ToulouseFRANCE

Personalised recommendations