Research Article
July
2017
Computer Science and Software Engineering
ISSN: 2277-128X (Volume-7, Issue-7)
Routing Protocols for WMNs: A Survey
Amar Singh* Shakti Kumar Sukhbir Singh Walia
Research Scholar,I.K.Gujral Punjab Technical University,
Kapurthala, Punjab, India
Computational Intelligence Laboratory, Baddi University of Emerging Sciences &
Technology, Baddi(HP) India
IK Gujral Punjab Technical University, Kapurthala, Jalandhar,
Punjab, India
DOI: 10.23956/ijarcsse/V7I7/0126
Abstract— Routing is one of the most challenging issues encountered in the Wireless Mesh Networks (WMNs) due to the dynamic nature of WMNs. The survey observes that literature is rich with wide range of routing protocols. Each protocol has its own features which we have briefly discussed. The routing protocols could be divided into three categories i.e. reactive, proactive and hybrid. In this paper we have reviewed wide range of existing routing protocols which are being applied for wireless mesh networks. The literature survey also points to the rising popularity of soft computing based approaches to the optimal cost path evaluation as compared to the classical or hard computing based approaches.
Keywords— routing, WMNs, reactive protocols, proactive protocols, hybrid protocols.
I. INTRODUCTION
Wireless Mesh Networks (WMNs) have evolved to provide better services for fixed and mobile users due to self-organizing, self-optimizing and fault tolerant capabilities [1][2]. Owing these facts WMNs have gained a widespread popularity in the recent past. The WMN infrastructure is self-organizing, self-optimizing and fault tolerant [2].A WMN consist two types of nodes i.e. Wireless Mesh Routers (WMRs) and Wireless Mesh Clients (WMCs). The mesh routers may be static or having limited mobility. The link between the WMRs is wireless thus it reduces the upfront cost of network establishment and maintenance cost after the establishment of network. The client nodes are mobile nodes. Every node on the networks has the routing capability irrespective of it is a Mesh router or a client node [3]. Due to multi-hoping communication feature the WMN can extend the capacity and coverage area of existing network [4]. The WMN technology could be applicable in many areas such as community and neighbourhood networking, wide area monitoring and sensor systems, building automation etc. [3][5] .
Routing in Wireless Mesh Networks (WMNs) is a challenging issue due to the dynamic nature of these networks. The routing protocols of WMNs fall into three categories i.e. proactive, reactive and hybrid routing protocols [1][3]. Reactive routing protocols are also called on demand routing protocols. In a reactive routing protocol, nodes discover routes only when communication is required between a given source and destination node. These types of protocols reduce the control traffic on the network but these need extra time to establish the route at the time of communication. Proactive routing approaches are also called table driven approaches. For proactive routing approaches, every node maintains and discovers the route with every node in the network regardless of whether the route is required or not. These approaches compute the routes with every other node by exchanging the routing tables periodically. The proactive routing approaches increase the control traffic and require more bandwidth as compared to reactive routing approaches. The proactive routing protocols do not need to discover the route at the time of communication. The routes will always be available. The hybrid routing protocol is the combination of both on demand and table driven approaches. It takes the benefits of both techniques.
The routing protocol could use a particular routing metric to evaluate the cost of the route from source to destination. Using the evaluated cost the routing path is decided. There are number of route cost evaluation metrics available in the literature. Some of these are; minimum hop count, per hop Round Trip Time (RTT) [6], Per-Hop Packet Pair Delay (PktPair) [7], Expected Transmission Count (ETX) [8], Expected Transmission Time (ETT), Weighted Cumulative ETT (WCETT) [9], Expected Transmission on a Path (ETOP) [10], Effective Number of Transmission (ENT) and Modified Expected Number of Transmissions (mETX) [11], Metric of Interference and Channel Switching (MIC) [12], Bottleneck Link Capacity (BLC) path metric [13] , cross layer link quality and congestion aware (LQCA) metric[14]. A novel interference aware low overhead routing metric was proposed by Liran Ma et al. [15].
Section II of this paper presents the different proactive WMN routing protocols available in the literature. Section III describes the different reactive routing protocols. The hybrid routing protocols are described in section IV. Section V concludes the paper.
II. PROACTIVEROUTINGPROTOCOLS
ISSN(E): 2277-128X, ISSN(P): 2277-6451, DOI: 10.23956/ijarcsse/V7I7/0126, pp. 1-7 [17] Presentsan anotheradhoc networks routing protocol called Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR) protocol. OLSR has optimized the link state routing protocol. This protocol uses Multipoint relays (MPRs) to forward the broadcasted messages during flooding process. Only MPR node could generate the link state information, hence it minimized the control message traffic in the network.
The clusterhead switched gateway routing (CGSR) protocol was proposed in [18].In CGSR a network is divided into number of clusters and each cluster would contain some wireless nodes. Each cluster of nodes in the network contains a cluster head. All the nodes within the cluster should be in the range of the cluster head. A cluster head would be selected using a distributed algorithm within a cluster. In CGSR the nodes send the data via clusterheads and gateway nodes. The packets are forwarded via C1, G1, C2, G2, C3, G3, C4, G4 ……Ci, Gi, Where Ci is clusterhead and Gi is gateway node. With this way the packets reach to the destination.
Murthyet al. proposed a table driven routing protocol for wireless networks named as wireless routing protocol (WRP)[19].WRP reduces the number of cases that generate the temporary routing loops in the networks. [20] Presents Global State Routing (GSR) protocol for mobile adhoc networks. The GSR protocol improves the link state routing by avoiding the flooding of routing messages. Hence, it could save the wireless network bandwidth. In GSR to maintain the global topology information, every node exchanges the link state vectors among their neighbours. By using this link state vectors the nodes optimize their routing decisions locally.
Iwataet al.Introduced two new proactive routing protocols [21] i.e. Fisheye State Routing (FSR) Protocol and Hierarchical State Routing (HSR) protocol. The authors have considered a large population of mobile nodes and each node is interconnected by multi-hop mobile network. Both FSR and HSR are the extension of link state routing protocols. FSR protocol reduces the control traffic on the network by selectively adjusting routing update frequencies whereas HSR reduces the size of the route update messages. FSR uses flat addressing scheme and topology map. This scheme makes it easy to locate the destinations but having the drawback of scalability. HSR resolved the routing table scalability problem by using the hierarchical approach but this approach has the difficulty to find the destinations.
Source tree adaptive routing (STAR) protocol [22] could be used by static or dynamic nodes in adhoc networks or internet. The STAR protocol saves the bandwidth of the network by sharing the changes with its route path tree only when it detects the new destinations, possibility of loops, possibility of node failure or it detects network portioning. The source tree of the router is a set of links used by a node in its preferred path to its destinations. The set of links used by a node in its preferred path to its destinations is called source tree of the router. The router contains the information about its adjacent nodes and source trees reported by its neighbours.
JJ Garcia-Luna-Acevesdiscusses the Wireless Internet Gateway Project (WINGS) [23]. WINGS is the part of DARPA Global Mobile (GloMo) Information Systems program. WINGS are the IP routers which are used to interconnect mobile adhoc networks and IP internet. The WINGS routers have the capability to adapt the dynamic environment of adhoc networks. The WINGS routers can frequently move. WINGS use table driven routing protocol called Wireless internet routing protocol (WIRP). The working of WIRP is divided into three components i.e., Neighbour Discovery, Reliable exchange of updates and path finding algorithm. Reliable exchange of update messages are implemented by using the concept of acknowledgement. Each update message is acknowledged by the receivers. WIRP discovers the neighboring nodes periodically. To discover the neighbours the nodes on the network send the HELLO messages if it does not have the data to send or any routing table update. For routing WIRP uses Dijkstra’s shortest-path algorithm distributed over a hierarchical graph representing the connectivity of IP networks and the adhoc networks.
Simple Opportunistic Adaptive Routing Protocol (SOAR) [24] for Wireless Mesh Networks is an opportunistic proactive link state routing protocol. In SOAR every node maintains a routing table and each routing table would contain the destination, default path and forward list. Here the default path would contain the shortest route from source to terminal node and the forward list would contain the list of nodes that may forward the data. Because it is a proactive routing protocol hence, every node will measure and maintain the network topology. The link quality would be measured by ETX [8] metric. SOAR uses priority timer based forwarding to let only the best forwarding node to be operative. It has also implemented adaptive rate control to adjust the sending rate according the dynamic conditions of the networks. The SOAR protocol performs the recovery of lost packets using a local feedback and recovery scheme.
S. Biswas describes the Extremely Opportunistic Routing (ExOR) protocol [25] for multi-hop wireless networks. The protocol assumes that the path loss rate between each link pair of nodes is contained at each node. It uses the link state flooding mechanism to distribute the loss rate information across the network. It addresses the issues of selecting the forwarding node after transmission using a distributed algorithm.ExOR works on the batches of packets. The receiving nodes buffer the packets until the end of the batch. The batch mechanism minimizes the redundant transmissions but increases the end-to-end delay and also makes the protocol unsuitable for current real time systems.[26] Discussesan approach of opportunistic proactive routing protocol.
Baumannet al. has proposed HEAT [27], an anycast routing protocol for wireless mesh networks. In the proposed protocol every node is assigned a temperature value and the packets are transmitted along the increasing temperature until they reaches to the internet gateways. The HEAT does not rely on broadcast of control messages.To establish the routing state it makes the use of local beacon exchanges. The protocol is scalable for large and dense networks.The author has compared the HEAT protocol with OLSR. The author has proved that the HEAT protocol outperforms OLSR in mobile scenarios with car mobility in the terms of packet delivery ratio.
ISSN(E): 2277-128X, ISSN(P): 2277-6451, DOI: 10.23956/ijarcsse/V7I7/0126, pp. 1-7 historical routes are favoured for route selection. This process reduces the route instabilities. It supports both IPv4 and IPv6 traffic.
A. Neumann introduced a table driven protocol to establish routes in Wireless ad-hoc mesh networks named as Better Approach to Mobile Ad hoc Networking (BATMAN) [29]. BATMAN is an adaptive and loop free routing technique. In this routing protocol each node maintains the general direction towards the terminal nodes and forwards the data to best next node accordingly. The forwarding node again forwards the data to next best node until the terminal node has been reached. For path determination each node broadcast the control messages to inform the neighbourhood nodes about its presence. The neighbourhoods then forward this information to their own neighbourhood nodes until each node is aware of all other nodes.
Secure link state protocol (SLSP) [30] and Secure Efficient Ad hoc Distance Vector SEAD [31] were proposed to secure the wireless network from attackers. The MRP protocol is discussed in [32]. MRP is suitable for MMNs used for Internet access as it requires a gateway for its correct operations.[32] Also discusses MRP beacon mode (MRP-B) routing protocol for wireless mesh networks. MRP-B is proactive version of MRP protocol [32]. To advertise the routes MRP uses the concept of beacons. If a node wants to join the WMN it simply listens the beacon messages and collects the information of the network.Some soft computing based optimal route evaluation approaches also have been proposed in [33-36]. These approaches could be used with any of the protocol that uses minimal cost routing.
III. REACTIVEROUTINGPROTOCOLS
Charles E Perkins and Elizabeth M RoyerProposed Adhoc on Demand distance vector (AODV) routing protocol for adhoc networks [37]. Being a reactive approach the routes in AODV are discovered as needed. The bandwidth requirement in AODV approach is less because it does not require global periodic routing advertisement. In AODV any source node discovers the route by sending the route request (RREQ) control message to its all neighbourhood nodes. If any of the neighbourhood node is the required destination node then the neighbour which is also the destination will send the route reply (RREP) control message back to the source node otherwise, all the neighbours will send the RREQ control message to their neighbour nodes and so on, until the destination node is found. To eliminate the loops and to maintain the freshness of the RREQ message AODV uses the concept of sequence numbers.
In AODV protocol, if source node moves out from the active path then the source node will again discover the path. If any other node, moves out from the active route then the Last Connected node (LCN), will send the route error (RERR) control message towards the source node. Here Last Connected Node (LCN), is the last connected to the source from where a link of the given route has broken. After receiving the RERR message, the source node will rediscover the path. The LCN could detect the link breakage by sending a special hello control message to the neighbor nodes. If the node does not receive the acknowledgement of the sent hello messages within the specified threshold time then the link is assumed to have failed or broken.
D. B. Johnson and his team presented the Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) [38] Protocol for multi-hop wireless ad hoc networks of mobile nodes. The protocol works in two phases i.e. route discovery and route maintenance. These two phases work together. To send the packet, the source node would insert the complete route in the header of the packet. Thus, the packet size of DSR is dynamic. The DSR routing protocol is designed for up to 200 nodes with high mobility. The source node discovers the route by broadcasting a route request (RREQ) packet to neighbourhood nodes. If any node that received the route request is not the destination node, then it inserts its address in the header of the packet and broadcast the RREQ packet to its neighbour nodes. This process is repeated until the destination node is not found.
Associativity-Based Routing (ABR) [39] Protocol was developed to support mobile computing in a conference size ad-hoc mobile network environment. The ABR discovers the route on demand basis. ABR protocol can integrate the mobile ad-hoc routing into a cellular environment. For shorter path discovery and to reduce the route repair time, the localised-query and quick-abort mechanisms are respectively incorporated into the protocol. To increase cell capacity and lower transmission power requirements, a dynamic cell size adjustment approach is proposed. ABR is free from loops, deadlocks and packet redundancy.
Flow State in the Dynamic Source Routing Protocol [40] was proposed for mobile adhoc networks. The proposed protocol is extension of Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) protocol. The route discovery and route maintenance of the proposed approach is same as that of DSR [41]. It routes the packets without an explicit source route header in the packet. It reduces the associated per packet overhead of DSR. The approach also includes the automatic route shortening mechanism.
A new optimized Adhoc on Demand Distance Vector reactive routing approach for Wireless Mesh Networks namely FW-AODV was proposed in [42]. FW-AODV uses fuzzy logic based integrated link cost based cost measure to evaluate route cost. The FW-AODV is the extension of Adhoc on Demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing protocol. The AODV routing protocol becomes unreliable as the mobility of nodes and size of Wireless Mesh Network (WMN) increases. The proposed approach is able to negotiate well with the node mobility and network size issues. FW-AODV approach has modified the least cost route evaluation approach and the maintenance phase of AODV.
ISSN(E): 2277-128X, ISSN(P): 2277-6451, DOI: 10.23956/ijarcsse/V7I7/0126, pp. 1-7 Draveset al. proposed link quality source routing protocol (LQSR) [44] for wireless mesh networks. The LQSR routing protocol is based on the DSR routing mechanism. It could use variety of route cost metrics like round trip latency (RTT), hop count, packet pair latency and Expected Transmission Count (ETX). and uses ETX as route cost metric. Instead of using link cache LQSR used the concept of route cache to improve the quality of a link.
Multi Radio link quality source routing protocol (MR-LQSR) [45] protocol is based upon LQSR protocol. MR-LQSR works on multiple radio channels and multiple interfaces. It uses WCETT (Weighted Cumulative Expected Transmission Time) metric to compute the route cost. WCETT assigns weights to individual links based on the Expected Transmission Time (ETT) of a packet over the link. The ETT is a function of the loss rate and the bandwidth of the link.
SrcRR [46] is another reactive routing protocol for multi-hop wireless networks. SrcRR discovers the routes like DSR routing approach and computes the best path using a variant of ETX. SrcRR modifies ETX by estimating the best 802.11 transmission bit-rate on each link. To compute the best path SrcRR monitors loss rate on the links of each path it is using and also monitors the loss rate on the nearby alternate paths. The proposed protocol selects the new path only if it has computed better path than the current path. MRP on-demand (MRP-OD) is the reactive version of MRP [32] approach. In MRP-OD if a node is wishing to join the network then it will ask its neighbouring nodes for a route. In contrast to another reactive routing protocols, route discovery messages (RDIS) are only received by the one-hop neighbours of the source. All connected neighbors should be aware about the route to gateway and also know the route metrics to the routes. The neighboring nodes receiving the route discovery messages will reply with a route advertisement message (RADV).
Another reactive routing protocol called Dynamic On-demand MANET routing protocol (DYMO) was proposed in [47]. It is based on AODV protocol and uses digital signatures and hash chains to ensure correctness. [48] Proposes a reactive routing protocol for mobile adhoc networks named as Location Aided Routing (LAR). Its working is same as DSR but requires additional GPS information.
Anonymouson Demand Routing with Untraceable Routes (ANODR) [49] is an on demand based routing protocol. ANODR stops strong adversaries from tracing a packet flow back to its source or destination. The design of ANODR is based on “broadcast with trapdoor information”, a novel network security concept which includes features of two existing networks and security mechanisms, namely “broadcast” and “trapdoor information”. In ANODR the routing process could be classified into two parts: anonymous route discovery and anonymous route maintenance.
IV. HYBRIDROUTINGPROTOCOLS
Haas et al. Proposes a hybrid routing protocol called the Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) [50], for Adhoc Networks. The ZRP is based on the concept of routing zone. The routing zone is defined for each node on the wireless network and includes the nodes which have distance at most some predefined number. This distance is called zone radius. By making the use of the zone radius parameter, the scheme exhibits adjustable hybrid behavior of proactive and reactive routing schemes. For routing ZRP uses two approaches i.e. Intra Zone Routing Protocol (IARP) and Inter Zone Routing Protocol (IERP). The IARP uses proactive approach to maintain the routes to all destinations in the routing zone. The IERP uses reactive approach to discover and maintain the routes to nodes beyond the routing zone.
The Secure Link State Protocol (SLSP) [51] for mobile ad hoc networks is responsible for securing the discovery and distribution of link state information. The secure neighbour discovery and the use of Neighbour Lookup Protocol (NLP) of SLSP secure the network against attacks that attempt to exhaust network and node resources.
Ramachandranet al. presents a hybrid routing protocol for Wireless Mesh Networks named as AODV-ST. The AODV-ST is the extension of AODV routing protocol. In AODV-ST, the gateways periodically broadcast RREQ messages to initiate the creation of spanning trees. AODV-ST takes the advantages of both reactive and proactive approaches. For internal networks it uses the reactive routing approach. If there is the need to perform routing between more than one network then it will make the use of proactive routing. AODV-ST uses ETT metric to compute the cost of a link.
Light Client Management Protocol (LCMP) routing protocol [53] was proposed for WMNs. LCMP supports client mobility by introducing new light approach. To calculate the cost of a route LCMP uses hop count metric. LCMP reactively searches the path toward client nodes and reduces the routing tables by adding path entries on only intermediary WMRs. The authors assumed that a routing component is deployed and routes toward all WMRs are proactively available. The hybrid version of MRP called Hybrid-AODV (H-AODV) is discussed in [32].
Oh M.proposes another hybrid routing algorithm [54], for Wireless mesh networks. The hybrid algorithm uses Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) as a proactive routing algorithm and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) as a reactive algorithm.
The zone-based hierarchical link state (ZHLS) routing protocol, is proposed in [55]. The working ZHLS routing protocol is based on GPS. ZHLS uses the hierarchical routing approach in a peer-to-peer way for large WMNs. In ZHLS, the network is divided into non overlapping zones. Each node only knows the network topology within its zone and the zone connectivity of the whole network. Here is no need to designate any node as a cluster head to manage the network zone. The node mobility could be managed easily because every node has the same role in the network.
A Neural Networks-Based Hybrid Routing Protocol for Wireless Mesh Networks was proposed in [56]. The routing approach in [56] is based upon the link state routing protocol and also proposed a new route cost metric.
V. CONCLUSIONS
ISSN(E): 2277-128X, ISSN(P): 2277-6451, DOI: 10.23956/ijarcsse/V7I7/0126, pp. 1-7 provideda short description of each routing protocol. In the survey we observed that in the proactive category of protocols DSDV or its variants have been used in most of the protocols. In the most recent literature we have observed that the soft computing based optimal cost path evaluation metrics have been found to be more appropriate than the classical shortest path computing based approaches. In the reactive front AODV and its variants have been widely tried out in most of the protocols. AODV and its variants were found to be very inefficient. Some modifications of AODV such as FW-AODV were found to be very suitable for wireless mesh networks. We also reviewed a good number of hybrid approaches. Hybrid approaches make use of features of both reactive and proactive approaches.
REFERENCES
[1] R Baumann, S Heimlicher, V Lenders , M May, “Routing packets into wireless mesh networks”, Third IEEE
International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications, 2007. WiMOB 2007, 8 Oct 2007, pp. 38-38.
[2] S Waharte, R Boutaba, Y Iraqi, B Ishibashi, "Routing protocols in wireless mesh networks: challenges and design considerations, "Multimedia tools and Applications, 29(3), July 2006, pp. 285-303.
[3] Akyildiz, Ian F., Xudong Wang, and Weilin Wang, "Wireless mesh networks: a survey”, Computer networks,
47(4), (2005), pp. 445-487
[4] Akyildiz, Ian F., and Xudong Wang, Wireless mesh networks, Vol. 3, John Wiley & Sons, 2009.
[5] M Hassan, Sajal K Das, CE Perkins, P Mohapatra, “Wireless mesh networks”, IEEE Communications Magazine,
NOV 2007, pp. 62-63.
[6] A .Adya, P. Bahl, J. Padhye, A.Wolman and L.Zhou,“A multi radio unication protocol for IEEE 802.11 wireless
networks”, International Conference on Broadcast Networks (Broad Nets), San Jose, California, USA, October 25 29, 2004, pp.344- 354
[7] R. Draves, J. Padhye, B. Zill, “Comparisons of routing metrics for static multi-hop wireless networks”, ACM Annual Conference of the Special Interest Group on Data Communication (SIGCOMM), Portland, Oregon, USA , August 30 - September 03 ,August 2004, pp. 133-144.
[8] De Couto DSJ, Aguayo D, Bicket J and Morris R , ”A high throughput path metric for multi-hop wireless routing”, InProc. ACM Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MOBICOM), San Diego, CA, USA, September 14 - 19, 2003, pp. 134-146.
[9] R. Draves, J. Padhye, B. Zill ,“Routing in multi-radio. Multihop wireless Mesh networks”, ACM annual International conference on mobile computing and networking (Mobi Con04), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 2004, pp 114-128.
[10] G. Jakllari, S. Eidenbenz, N. Hengartner, S. Krishnamurthy and M. Faloutsos,“Link Positions Matter: A Non commutative Routing Metric for Wireless Mesh Networks”,In Proceedings of IEEE Annual Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM), nPhoenix, Arizona, USA, April 13 18, 2008, pp. 744-752
[11] C.E. Koksaland H. Balakrishnan, “Quality-aware Routing Metrics forTime-varying Wireless Mesh Networks”,
IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 24(11), 2006, pp. 1984-1994.
[12] Yang Y, Wang J and Kravets, “Interference-aware load balancing for multihop wireless networks”, In Tech. Rep. UIUCDCS-R-2005-2526, Department of Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2005, pp. 1-16
[13] T. Liu and W. Liao, “Capacity-aware Routing in Multi-channel Multi-rate Wireless Mesh Networks”, In
Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), 2006, pp. 1971-1976.
[14] G. Karbaschi and A. Fladenmuller, “A Link Quality and Congestion-aware Cross Layer Metric for Multi-hop Wireless Routing”, In Proceedings of IEEE MASS05, 2005, pp 7-11.
[15] L. Ma, Q. Zhang, Y. Xiong and W. Zhu , “Interference Aware Metric for Dense Multi-hop Wireless Network”,
In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), 2005, pp. 1261-1265.
[16] Perkins, E. Charles and P. Bhagwat, “Highly Dynamic Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector Routing (DSDV)
for Mobile Computers”, In the Proceedings of the Conference on Communications: Architectures, Protocols and Applications, 1994, pp. 234-244.
[17] T.Clausen, P, Jacquet , Optimized link state routing protocol (OLSR), RFC 3626, 2003
[18] Chiang CC, Wu HK, Liu W, Gerla M., “Routing in clustered multihop, mobile wireless networks with fading
channel”, In proceedings of IEEE SICON , Vol. 97, No. 1997.4, 14 April 1997, pp. 197-211.
[19] S. Murthy, & J. J.Garcia-Luna-Aceves , “An efficient routing protocol for wireless networks”. Mobile Networks and applications, 1(2), 1996, 183-197.
[20] T. W. Chen, & M. Gerla, “Global state routing: A new routing scheme for ad-hoc wireless networks”, In Communications, ICC 98. Conference Record, 1998 IEEE International Conference on, June 1998,Vol. 1, pp. 171-175.
[21] A. Iwata, CC Chiang, G Pei, M Gerla, TW Chen, “Scalable routing strategies for ad hoc wireless networks”,
IEEE journal on selected areas in communications, 17(8), Aug 1999; pp. 1369-1379.
[22] JJ Garcia-Luna-Aceves, M Spohn, D Beyer, “Source tree adaptive routing (STAR) protocol”, In Proc. of 7th Intl.
Conf. on Network Protocols 1999 Oct 22 (Vol. 273).
[23] JJ Garcia-Luna-Aceves, CL Fullmer, E Madruga, D Beyer, T Frivold, “Wireless internet gateways (WINGS)”,
ISSN(E): 2277-128X, ISSN(P): 2277-6451, DOI: 10.23956/ijarcsse/V7I7/0126, pp. 1-7 [24] Rozner E, Seshadri J, Mehta Y, Qiu L., “SOAR: Simple opportunistic adaptive routing protocol for wireless
mesh networks”, IEEE transactions on Mobile computing, Dec 2009, 8(12), pp. 1622-35.
[25] Biswas S, Morris R, “ExOR: opportunistic multi-hop routing for wireless networks”, ACM SIGCOMM
Computer Communication Review; 01 Oct 2005, 35(4), pp.133-44.
[26] Chachulski S., Jennings M., Katti S. and Katabi D., 2007, “Trading structure for randomness in wireless opportunistic routing”, ACM, Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 169-180.
[27] Baumann R, Heimlicher S, Lenders V, May M, “HEAT: Scalable routing in wireless mesh networks using temperature fields”, In World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks, 2007. WoWMoM 2007. IEEE International Symposium on a 2007 , 18 – 21 June 2007, Espoo, Finland, pp. 1-9
[28] CHROBOCZEK J., The Babel routing protocol, RFC 6126 (Experimental). Inter-net Engineering Task Force,
Apr. 2011. URL: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc6126.txt.
[29] Neumann A., Aichele C., Lindner M. and Wunderlich S., 2008. Better approach to mobile ad-hoc networking
(BATMAN). IETF draft, pp.1-24., URL : https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-openmesh-b-a-t-m-a-n-00.
[30] Papadimitratos P, Haas ZJ, “Secure link state routing for mobile ad hoc networks”, In Applications and the Internet Workshops, 2003, Proceedings. 2003 Symposium on, IEEE, 27 Jan 2003, pp. 379-383.
[31] Hu YC, Johnson DB, Perrig A, “SEAD: Secure efficient distance vector routing for mobile wireless ad hoc networks”, Ad hoc networks, 2003 Jul 31, 1(1), pp. 175-92.
[32] Jun J, Sichitiu ML, “MRP: Wireless mesh networks routing protocol”, Computer Communications, 2008 May 9,
31(7):1413-35.
[33] Shakti Kumar, Brahmjit Singh, Sharad Sharma, “Soft Computing Framework for Routing in Wireless Mesh
Networks: An Integrated Cost Function Approach”, International Journal of Electronics, Computer and Communications Technologies (IJECCT), 2013, Vol. 3 (3), pp. 25-32, 2013.
[34] Sharad Sharma, Shakti Kumar, Brahmjit Singh, “Routing in Wireless Mesh Networks: Two Soft Computing
Based Approaches”, International Journal of Mobile Network Communications and Telematics (IJMNCT), 2013, Vol. 3 (3), pp. 29-39, 2013. DOI : 10.5121/ijmnct.2013.3304
[35] Sharad Sharma, Shakti Kumar, Brahmjit Singh, “AntMeshNet: An Ant Colony Optimization Based Routing
Approach to Wireless Mesh Networks”, International Journal of Applied Metaheuristic Computation (IJAMC), Volume 5, Issue 1, pp. 20-25.
[36] Amar Singh, Shakti Kumar, Sukhbir Singh Walia, “P3PGA: Multi-Population 3 Parent Genetic Algorithm and
its Application to Routing in WMN”, International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science, May 2017, 8(5), pp. 968 – 975.
[37] Charles E Perkins, Elizabeth M Royer, “ Adhoc on Demand Distance Vector Routing”, Second IEEE Workshop
on Mobile Computer Systems and Applications, February 25 - 26, 1999, IEEE Computer Society Washington, DC, USA, pp. 90-101.
[38] D. B. Johnson, D. A. Maltz and Y. C. Hu, “The Dynamic Source Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad hoc Networks
(DSR)”, IETF RFC 4728, July 2004.
[39] Toh CK, “Associativity-based routing for ad hoc mobile networks”, Wireless Personal Communications. 1997
Mar 1, 4(2), pp.103-39.
[40] Hu YC, Johnson DB, Maltz DA, Flow state in the dynamic source routing protocol for mobile ad hoc networks.
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-manet-dsrflow-00. txt, work in progress. 2001 Feb.
[41] Yih-Chun Hu and David B. Johnson, “Implicit Source Routes for On-Demand Ad Hoc Network Routing”,
Proceedings of the 2001 ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad Hoc Networking & Computing (MobiHoc 2001), ACM, Long Beach, CA, October, 2001, pp. 1-10.
[42] Amar Singh, Shakti Kumar, Sukhbir Singh Walia, “FW-AODV: An Optimized AODV Routing Protocol for
Wireless Mesh Networks”, International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science. 2017 April 2017, 8(3), pp. 1131-1135.
[43] Park VD, Corson MS,“A highly adaptive distributed routing algorithm for mobile wireless networks”,
InINFOCOM'97. Sixteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. Driving the Information Revolution., Proceedings IEEE 1997 Apr 7, Vol. 3, pp. 1405-1413.
[44] R. Draves, J. Padhye, and B. Zill, “The architecture of the Link Quality Source Routing Protocol”, Technical
Report MSR-TR-2004-57, Microsoft Research.
[45] Draves R, Padhye J, Zill B, ”Routing in multi-radio, multi-hop wireless mesh networks”, In Proceedings of the
10th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking 2004 Sep 26 (pp. 114-128). ACM.
[46] Aguayo D, Bicket J, Morris R. SrcRR: A high throughput routing protocol for 802.11 mesh networks (DRAFT).
MIT, Tech. Rep. 2005 Nov.
[47] Chakeres ID, Perkins CE. Dynamic MANET on-demand routing protocol. ETF Internet Draft,
draft-ietf-manet-dymo-12. txt. 2008 Feb.
[48] Ko YB, Vaidya NH., “Location-aided routing (LAR) in mobile ad hoc networks”, Wireless networks. 2000 Jul 1,
6(4), pp. 307-21.
[49] Kong J, Hong X.,“ANODR: anonymous on demand routing with untraceable routes for mobile ad-hoc
ISSN(E): 2277-128X, ISSN(P): 2277-6451, DOI: 10.23956/ijarcsse/V7I7/0126, pp. 1-7
[50] Haas ZJ., “A new routing protocol for the reconfigurable wireless networks”, InUniversal Personal
Communications Record, 1997. Conference Record., 1997 IEEE 6th International Conference on 1997 Oct 12, Vol. 2, San Diego, CA, USA , pp. 562-566.
[51] Papadimitratos P, Haas ZJ,“Secure link state routing for mobile ad hoc networks”, InApplications and the Internet Workshops, 2003. Proceedings. 2003 Symposium on 27 Jan 2003, pp. 379-383.
[52] Ramachandran K, Buddhikot M, Chandranmenon G, Miller S, Belding-Royer E, Almeroth K.,“On the design
and implementation of infrastructure mesh networks”, InProceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Wireless Mesh Networks (WiMesh), 26 September 2005,pp. 4-15.
[53] Wehbi B, Mallouli W, Cavalli A, “Light client management protocol for wireless mesh networks”, InMobile Data Management, 2006. MDM 2006. 7th International Conference on 2006 May 10, Nara, Japan,pp. 123-123
[54] Oh M., “A hybrid routing protocol for wireless Mesh Networks”, InBroadband Multimedia Systems and
Broadcasting, 2008 IEEE International Symposium on 2008 Mar 31, Las Vegas, NV, USA, pp. 1-5
[55] Joa-Ng M, Lu IT. ”A peer-to-peer zone-based two-level link state routing for mobile ad hoc networks”, IEEE
Journal on selected areas in communications, Aug 1999, 17(8), pp. 1415-25.
