Data Performance Analysis Over WLAN

Data Performance Analysis over WLAN

Megha Chahal1 Deenbandhu Chotu Ram University of Science and Technology Murthal-131039, Haryana, India

Mrs Poonam Singal2 Department Of Electronics and Communication Deenbandhu Chotu Ram University of Science and Technology Murthal- 131039, Haryana, India [email protected]

Abstract: Wireless network is a new technology that allows users to access information and services electronically, regardless of their geographical position. Wireless networks can be classified in two types: - infrastructure networks and ad hoc networks. Infrastructure networks consist of a network with fixed and wired gateways. A mobile host communicates with a bridge in the network (called base station) within its communication radius. In contrast to infrastructure based networks, in ad hoc networks all nodes are mobile and can be connected dynamically in an arbitrary manner. All nodes of these networks behave as routers and take part in discovery, maintenance and updating of routes to other nodes in the network. Ad hoc networks are very useful in emergency search-and-rescue operations, meetings or conventions in which persons wish to quickly share information, and data acquisition operations in inhospitable terrains. Performance analysis of various protocols is essential and most important before selection of a protocol for practical purposes. In this paper the performance of Fisheye State Routing (FSR) and Ad hoc On-demand Distance Vector Routing (AODV) protocols over Constant Bit Rate and FTP data type using Qualnet simulator has been evaluated. Performance of these protocols is measured on the basis of average end to end delay, average throughput and messages received.

Keywords: - WLAN, AODV, FSR, Qualnet 6.1, CBR, FTP

INTRODUCTION A wireless local area network (WLAN) is a wireless computer network that links two or more devices using a wireless distribution method (often spread-spectrum or OFDM) within a limited area such as a home, school, computer laboratory, or office building, thus giving users the ability to move around within a local coverage area and still be connected to the network, and can provide a connection to the wider Internet. Most of the modern WLANs are based on IEEE 802.11standards which is marketed under the Wi-Fi brand name. WLAN uses high frequency radio waves rather than wires to communicate between nodes. A WLAN is sometimes call a local area wireless network (LAWN).Every component that connects to a WLAN is considered a station and falls into one of two categories: access points (APs) and clients. APs which transmit and receive radio frequency signals with devices able to receive transmitted signals; they normally function as routers. Clients may include a variety of devices such as desktop computers, workstations, laptops, IP phones and other cell phones and Smartphone. All stations able to communicate with each other are called basic service sets (BSSs), which are of two types: independent and infrastructure. Different standards of WLAN are IEEE 802.11 a, 802.11 b, 802.11 g, 802.11n, 802.11ac, 802.11ad. A wireless network is any type of computer network that utilizes wireless data connections for connecting network nodes. Wireless networking is a method by which homes, telecommunications networks and enterprise (business) installations to avoid the costly process of introducing cables into a building, or as a connection between various equipment locations. Wireless telecommunications networks are generally implemented and administered using radio wave communication. This implementation takes place at the physical level (layer) of the OSI model network structure. Examples of wireless networks include cell phone networks, Wi-Fi local networks and terrestrial microwave networks, etc. Each computer, mobile, portable or fixed, is referred to as a station in 802.11 [Wireless Local Area Networks].The difference between a portable and mobile station is that a portable station moves from one point to another point but is only used at a fixed point. Mobile stations access the LAN during movement. All components that can connect into a wireless medium in a network are referred to as stations and are equipped with wireless network interface controllers (WNICs). Wireless stations fall into one of two categories: wireless access points, and clients. Access points (APs), normally wireless routers, are base stations for the wireless network. They transmit and receive radio frequencies for wireless enabled devices to communicate with. Wireless clients can be mobile devices such as laptops, PDAs, IP phones and other smartphones, or fixed devices such as desktops and workstations that are equipped with a wireless network interface. [5]The basic service set (BSS) is a set of all stations that can communicate with each other. Every BSS has an identification (ID) called the BSSID, which is the MAC address of the access point servicing the BSS. There are two types of BSS: Independent BSS (also referred to as IBSS), and infrastructure BSS. An independent BSS (IBSS) is an ad hoc network that contains no access points, which means they cannot connect to any other basic service set.[5] An extended service set (ESS) is a set of connected BSSs. Access points in an ESS are connected by a distribution system. Each ESS has an ID called the SSID which is a 32-byte (maximum) character string. [5] A distribution system (DS) connects access points in an extended service set. The concept of a DS can be used to increase network coverage through roaming between cells.DS can be wired or wireless. Current wireless distribution systems are mostly based on WDS or MESH protocols, though other systems are in use. [5]

Brief description of routing protocols (FSR, AODV)

Fisheye state routing protocol (FSR):- Fish eye is a proactive and hierarchical routing protocol. FSR uses the technique followed by a fish eye. It uses the “fisheye” technique proposed by Kleinrock and Stevens [3], where the technique was used to reduce the size of information required to represent graphical data. Fish eye normally observes and focus with high detail on the object very close to its focal point. When the distance of an object increases from the focal point the detail decreases. The same principle is used in Fisheye State routing. FSR maintains topology map at each node.FSR do not broadcast to evaluate the route. Instead, a link state table is maintained by nodes based on the updated information from the neighbour. Each node in the network has a full topology map stored in it which is utilized for route discovery and route maintenance. Shortest path will also be evaluated using topological map [2].

Ad hoc On Demand Distance Vector (AODV):- AODV Routing Protocol uses on demand approach to discover and identify a specific route. When a node needs to send data, it uses route discovery using control messages like route request (RREQ) and route reply (RREP) to find the route. In AODV protocol neighbour nodes stores the route information of its next hop neighbour. This enables AODV to evaluate the shortest distance and safe path. To discover a path, source node broadcast a route request message to its immediate neighbour. Neighbour then sends the route request packet to its neighbour. This process continues until the destination is reached. When the Route Request (RREQ) packet reaches the destination, destination node writes back with Route Reply (RREP) and window size for data transmission. Route information will be cleared after the transmission of data packets. AODV protocol discovers and identify route only when nodes demands sending or receiving data. During any kind of error like transmission failure or link failure a route error (RERR) message will be generated and send it to the source node to find an alternative path. The main advantage of this protocol is route is discovered and identified on demand. [1].

Simulation setup and environment:

Our aim is to simulate and analyze the performance of various routing protocol with the help of Simulator Qualnet 6.1[4]. There is difference between Simulation and real scenario that is in real scenario, it takes long time in setup of nodes and link creation. The accuracy of simulator is very much important factor before predicting any real scenario. Here in the simulation we compare different protocol (FSR) and (AODV) using cbr and ftp data types on the basis of throughput, avg. jitter, total packet received, avg. end to end delay etc.

Table 1. Parameters used in the Simulation

Parameters Values

Routing Protocols FSR, AODV

MAC Layer 802.11

Terrain Size 1500*1500 sq. M

Nodes 30, 30

Node placement Uniform

Data Traffic Type CBR, FTP

Antenna Type Omni Directional

Simulation Time 30 sec

Simulator QualNet 6.1

SIMULATION OF AODV AND FSR USING FTP AND CBR DATA TYPES: Fig 1: Snapshot of simulation for AODV Routing Protocol for CBR data

Fig 2: Snapshot of simulation for AODV Routing Protocol for FTP data

Fig 3: Snapshot of simulation for FSR Routing Protocol for CBR data Fig 4: Snapshot of simulation for FSR Routing Protocol for FTP data

Result of AODV protocol using CBR and FTP data types:

Fig 5: Average Jitter Using CBR

Fig 6: Throughput using CBR data

Fig 7: Average End-to-End Delay using CBR data

Fig 8: Total Data Received using CBR data

Fig 9: Total Jitter using FTP data

Fig 10: Throughput using FTP data Fig 11: Average End-to-End Delay using FTP data

Fig 12: Total Data Received using FTP data

Result of FSR protocol using CBR and FTP data types: Fig 13: Avg. Jitter using CBR data

Fig 14: Throughput using CBR data

Fig 15: Avg. End-to-End Delay using CBR data Fig 16: Total data received using CBR data

Fig 17: Total Jitter using FTP data Fig 18: Throughput using FTP data

Fig 19: Avg. End-to-End Delay using FTP data

Fig 20: Total data received using FTP data Conclusion This paper compares FSR and AODV routing protocols by considering various network parameters. The evaluation and analysis shows that in the case of CBR throughput in AODV is better than FSR, Avg. end to end delay is higher in AODV, thus proving FSR to be better. In case of Avg. Jitter FSR is better than AODV. Total bytes received are more in AODV. In case of FTP data throughput of FSR is better than AODV. Avg. end to end delay is better in FSR and avg. jitter is more in FSR. Total bytes received are more in FSR than AODV. These results provides good opportunities and also some challenges to explore these protocols further. In the future we can do a lot of research in these protocols with different parameters and can find more results.

References [1]Charles E. Perkins, Elizabeth M. Belding-Royer, and Samir Das."Ad Hoc on Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing."IETFRFC 3231. [2] sitirahayu abdul aziz1, nor adora endut2, shapinaabdullah "performance evaluation of AODV,DSR and DYMO routing protocol in MANET" conference on scientific& social research CSSR0814 - 15 march 2009.

[3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FSR.

[4]TheNetworkSimulatorQualNet2.0, [Online],Available:http://www.scalablenetwork.com/products/qualnet/.

[5]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/wlan.

[6]P.N.Renjith and E.Baburaj ”Analysis on ad hoc routing protocols in Wireless sensor networks” International Journal of Ad hoc, Sensor & Ubiquitous Computing (IJASUC) Vol.3, No.6, December 2012.

[7]Tazeem Ahmad Khan, M T Beg, M A Khan, “ Performance Analysis of WLAN Using OPNET”, International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE) ISSN: 2278- 3075, Volume-2, Issue-5, April 2013.

[8]Manoj Tolani, Rajan Mishra, “ PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF WLAN BY COMPARATIVE STUDY OF VARIOUS ATTRIBUTES USING OPNET SIMULATOR”, International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 3, Issue 6, June-2012 .

[9] Pankaj Kumar Varshney, G.S.Agrawal, Sudhir Kumar Sharma, “Impact of Pause Time on the Performance of DSR, LAR1 and FSR Routing Protocols in Wireless Ad hoc Network”, IJCSMC, Vol. 4, Issue. 2, February 2015, pg.01 – 06.