Dymo is worse than Aodv?

[Oli Hül]

Hi,

i would like to compare the ad hoc protocols Aodv and Dymo. For this I took the following model: inet / showcases / routing / manet. I add Dymo by adding the following in the .ini:

[Config Dymo]

extends = MobileNodesBase

# routing protocol parameters

*. *. routing.typename = "Dymo"

As a comparison serve the end-to-end delay and PDR.

Strangely enough, Dymo always performs worse than Aodv. That can not really be, right? Finally, Dymo is the successor of Aodv and the path accumulation is improved.

Do I add Dymo incorrectly in the .ini file? Is the model wrong? Or is Dymo really worse than Aodv?

[amrcg]

The DYMO implementation seems to be buggy. When a node broadcasts an RREQ and then receives it back from a neighbor, it does not check if its address in already in the address list, and so it rebroadcasts the RREQ. This positive feedback causes the network to become congested with redundant RREQ packets and the simulations become slower and slower.

Regards,

António Grilo 

[Alfonso Ariza Quintana]

Yes, this is an error that Dymo has, I have included a path some time ago in inetmanet 4, you can use it.

---

De: omn...@googlegroups.com <omn...@googlegroups.com> en nombre de amrcg <amr...@gmail.com>
Enviado: viernes, 29 de mayo de 2020 18:09
Para: OMNeT++ Users <omn...@googlegroups.com>
Asunto: [Omnetpp-l] Re: Dymo is worse than Aodv?

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OMNeT++ Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to omnetpp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/omnetpp/a21baa3b-30b4-4ab6-a2aa-10bf389f2460%40googlegroups.com.