Adhoc routing (AODV, DSR) between two adhoc nodes through an intermediate wired link
211 views
Skip to first unread message
Kushan Sudheera
Sep 15, 2016, 3:58:52 AM9/15/16
to ns-3-users
Hi,
I'm trying to simulate a small vehicular network and get delay results using adhoc routing protocols.
In the network, the communication between Road Side Units (RSUs) is wired (P2P or csma).
So the RSUs have 2 interfaces, i.e. 802.11p and csma.
When I install the existing adhoc routing protocol such as AODV or DSR, neither of them works over the wired link.
It works among the adhoc nodes. But when the adhoc networks are only reachable through a wired link as shown in below, the data do not reach the destination.
But I can see the aodv header files been transmitted as shown in topo.JPG.
(wired) (wired)
n1----------n2-----------n3
/ \
/(wireless) \ (wireless)
n0 n4
Basically I want to route packet from n0 to n4 through the wired link using existing adhoc routing protocol such as AODV, DSR.
Can anyone please point out any mistakes that I have made in the code. or isn't it possible to route packet through wired links using adhoc routing protocols?
I have attached the code here with.
Thank you.
Kushan Sudheera
Sep 15, 2016, 6:14:42 AM9/15/16
to ns-3-users
I found that OLSR works with the given topology after giving a considerable time to converge. But AODV, DSR, DSDV nothing seems to work.
I need to get results with AODV and DSR specially. Anyone knows why other routing protocols does not work with this type of network?
Kushan Sudheera
Sep 16, 2016, 11:12:41 PM9/16/16
to ns-3-users
I believe this is a bug in AODV (bug 1911). Can some one please tell me whether it is fixed in ns-3.25? or Am I doing something wrong?
Tommaso Pecorella
Sep 19, 2016, 6:20:31 PM9/19/16
to ns-3-users
Bug 1911 has been fixed in 3.21. There was a minor bug involving 1911 example script, but it's being fixed.
The main problem is... you didn't read the posting guidelines. As a consequence, you forgot to mention what is the problem you're experiencing. Simply stating that you don't receive any packet is not enough.
As a side note, using ns-3-dev, the result is this:
DATA 5 sent...
Received one Data packet..!!
Node 4 received data = hello
!!................................................!!
!!..............SDN ADHOC TEST PASSED.............!!
!!................................................!!
DATA 4 sent...
Received one Data packet..!!
Node 4 received data = CONSECUTIVEMESSAGES
!!................................................!!
!!..............SDN ADHOC TEST PASSED.............!!
!!................................................!!
DATA 3 sent...
Received one Data packet..!!
Node 4 received data = CONSECUTIVEMESSAGES
!!................................................!!
!!..............SDN ADHOC TEST PASSED.............!!
!!................................................!!
DATA 2 sent...
Received one Data packet..!!
Node 4 received data = CONSECUTIVEMESSAGES
!!................................................!!
!!..............SDN ADHOC TEST PASSED.............!!
!!................................................!!
DATA 1 sent...
Received one Data packet..!!
Node 4 received data = CONSECUTIVEMESSAGES
!!................................................!!
!!..............SDN ADHOC TEST PASSED.............!!
!!................................................!!
00:16:50:~/Development/workspace/ns-3-dev pecos$
T.
Kushan Sudheera
Sep 19, 2016, 11:04:53 PM9/19/16
to ns-3-users
Thank you very much for your answer.
I tested the example script in bug 1911 and the above script(my one) in ns-3-dev. In both, the receiver node receives data over the wired link using AODV successfully. So it works in ns3-dev version.
But both do not work in ns3.25 official version. There is no any errors in the code (I commented printing stuff, etc.). Both codes build successfully. But simply the receiver is not receiving any data.
Looks like the fixed bug1911 in ns3.21 somehow exists in ns3.25.
For me, I can work now with ns-3-dev version.
Thank you.
Tommaso Pecorella
Sep 20, 2016, 7:54:59 PM9/20/16
to ns-3-users
Hi,
there was a line that was not fixed in 3.25 and it has been fixed in 3-dev.
It will be definitely fixed starting from 3.26.
Cheers,
T.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages