MANET Routing Protocols Taxonomy

Nagham H. Saeed, Maysam F. Abbod, and Hamed S. Al-Raweshidy

Wireless Network Computing Group (WNCG), School of Engineering and Design,
Brunel University, West London, Uxbridge, UK. UB8 3PH.
{Nagham.Saeed, Maysam.Abbod, Hamed.Al-Raweshidy}@brunel.ac.uk

Abstract—This paper provides researchers many structures for routing protocols, as these classifications are more beneficial
mobile Ad hoc protocol that also could be implemented in VANET than a lengthy listing of previous routing protocols alongside
protocols. In the literature, there are numerous mobile Ad hoc the updated ones. Another important point should be
network (MANET) routing protocols aiming to find the most mentioned here, that is the taxonomies in this paper are also
suitable path from source to destination. Therefore these protocols adoptable for VANET protocols [3].
should be categorized and classified. This classification helps in
In Section II, different routing protocols taxonomies are
understanding, analyzing, comparing, and evaluating the routing
protocols. Also, the classification can assist researchers and presented; MANET routing protocol are classified according to
designers to differentiate the characteristics of the routing the design philosophy in Section A whereas in Section B they
protocols and to find the relationships between them. The routing are classified according to the network structure, in Section C
protocols cannot be included under one category or one the protocols are classified according to the packets casting.
classification, therefore, the known characteristics should be listed Section D presents a new classification for MANET protocol
and the MANET routing protocols classified according to these depending on routing metric. Finally, Section III consists of the
attributes. In this paper, varies routing protocol classifications are summary and conclusions from this paper.
presented that depend on design philosophy, on network
structure, or on the routing protocol characteristic (packet casting II. MANET ROUTING PROTOCOLS TAXONOMY
and network routing metrics).
In MANET, each node has the freedom to join, leave, and
Keywords MANET routing protocols, MANET design move around the network. This movement creates a highly
philosophy, network structure, packets casting and MANET routing dynamic environment that effects packet routing. Therefore,
metric. efficient packet routing is one of the most challenging
problems in MANETs. The objective of routing is to guide
packets through the communication subnet to their final
I. INTRODUCTION destinations. As a result of working on this problem, numerous
routing protocols [4]-[9] have been proposed in the literature.
In recent years, network structure has changed significantly;
The aim is to find the most suitable path from source to
40 years ago the only known and available network was the
destination, with the ultimate goal being to establish efficient
wired network. However, as mobility needs continue to grow,
route and efficient message exchange within MANET.
wireless networks have appeared as an efficient solution to
This section, as shown below, classified the routing
increasing service demands. The development in wired
protocol depending on design philosophy, on network
networks has paled in comparison to the tremendous increase
structure, or on the routing protocol characteristic (packet
in wireless networks. This has happened in spite of the
casting and network routing metrics).
limitations of wireless network techniques, such as the changes
in network topology, a high error rate, power restrictions,
bandwidth constraints, and issues with link capacity [1]-[2]. A Design Philosophy
These limitations are the result of the freedom of movement Design philosophy is the most popular method to
in mobile wireless networks, as mobile wireless networks are distinguish MANET routing protocols. It is based on how
dynamic and feature multi-hop topology. As such, researchers routing information is acquired and maintained by mobile
have stepped forward to solve these challenges, putting nodes. Depending on design philosophy, Ad hoc routing
substantial effort behind inventing new technologies. They protocols are represented by three main categories; proactive
have hence addressed the problems with innovative solutions to (also called Table Driven routing or Source routing), reactive
support the robust and efficient operation of mobile wireless (the other names are On Demand and Distributed routing), and
networks. One of the main areas of research has been routing hybrid (or Hierarchical routing), as shown in Figure 1.
technology which will route packets from source to destination. References [6] and [7] present surveys of the current routing
The focus of this paper is the presentation of different protocols based on routing philosophy structure.
classifications of Ad hoc routing protocols according to
different criteria. The various classifications give a better
overview of the MANET routing protocols. The classifications
also show the researchers’ settings before designing a routing
protocol and, at the same time, give an overview for existing
 Ad hoc Routing Algorithms

Hybrid Reactive Proactive

Figure 1. MANET routing protocol classifications depending on design philosophy.

1 Proactive Routing Algorithm whenever a new path needed. The Dynamic Source Routing
The proactive routing algorithm is the new version of the (DSR) protocol [11] and Ad hoc On Demand Distance Vector
Internet Link State algorithm. The proactive routing algorithm (AODV) Routing Protocol [12] are examples of reactive
[7] maintains routing tables that contain the information and routing protocols.
the update for each node in the network. In order to maintain a 3 Hybrid Routing Algorithm
consistent network view, for each topological change in the Hybrid routing algorithms combine the two previous
network, nodes should propagate updates throughout the techniques (the proactive and the reactive) in an attempt to
network. Proactive routing protocols share a common feature— bring together the advantages of the two approaches. As such,
that is, background routing information can be exchanged hierarchical architecture is utilized in that these algorithms
regardless of communication requests. For example, if node A require an addressing system wherein the proactive and the
wants to send data to node D, then node A should search in a reactive routing approaches are implemented at different
previously prepared topology table (stored on node A itself) to hierarchical levels.
find D. The Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR) Protocol Such algorithms are designed to increase scalability by
[10] is an example of the proactive routing protocol. allowing the nodes closest to each other to connect and form a
The proactive algorithm has many desirable properties, number of groups and then assigning the group nodes different
especially for applications that include real-time functionalities, both inside and outside the group, to reduce the
communications and QoS guarantees, such as low latency route Route discovery overhead. This is mostly achieved by
access and alternate path support and monitoring. The proactively maintaining routes to nearby nodes and
drawback of this technique, however, is the inefficiency of determining routes to far away nodes using a route discovery
bandwidth utilization and power usage due to the overhead strategy. Both the size of the routing tables and update packets
produced. are reduced by including part of the network (instead of the
As such, most proactive protocols will not perform well whole network) within them, thus reducing control overhead in
given a high mobility rate or a large number of network nodes. turn. The Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP) is an example of a
Protocols in this category differ in terms of the number of hybrid routing protocol [13].
tables they contain and how they update their information.
2 Reactive Routing Algorithm
B Network Structure
The reactive routing algorithm is the new version of the
Internet Link State Distance Vector algorithm. The reactive In this section, a classification of the routing algorithms
routing algorithm [6] is characterized by Route discovery according to the network structure is provided. The routing
mechanisms and Maintenance mechanisms. Route discovery algorithms that depend on the network structure consider two
consists of route request and route reply, which differ from one important elements which effect the routing operation: the
protocol to another. The Route discovery mechanism is nodes’ mobility and the network scalability. The structure of
initiated when a source needs to communicate with a Figure 2 blow is altered, as in Figure 1, but this is necessary in
destination that it does not know how to reach. When there is a order to preserve the integrity of the diagram. Figure 2
request from node A to transmit data to node D, a Route categorizes the routing algorithms in Ad hoc networks into
discovery process is begun by broadcasting to all nodes three broad categories: flat routing, Geographic Position
searching for node D. When D receives this message, it replies Information assisted routing, and hierarchical routing.
to the request to build the route to source A. 1 Flat Routing
The differences between the reactive routing protocols are Flat routing approaches [8] adopt a flat addressing scheme
in the implementation of the path discovery mechanism and its in that each participating node plays an equal role in routing.
optimization. Generally, reactive routing requires less overhead Therefore, the routing protocol is named as a uniform routing
than proactive routing, but incurs a path discovery delay protocol in which all its mobile nodes have the same role,
 Ad hoc Routing Algorithms

Geographic Position
Hierarchical routing Information Flat routing
Assisted routing (Uniform)

Zone Based
(Hybrid) Proactive Reactive
(Table Driven) (On Demand)
Cluster Based

Core Node Based

Figure 2. MANET routing algorithms classifications depending on network structure.

importance, and functionality. Flat routing schemes extend • Zone-based (Hybrid)

into two classes, proactive and reactive, according to their With zone-based hybrid routing algorithm technique each
design philosophy (more detail about these two classes is given node has a local scope and different routing strategies are used,
in Section A (1 and 2). In a large network, flat reactive inside and outside the scope, as communications pass across
protocols are better than flat proactive routing protocols the overlapping scopes. Given this flexibility, a more efficient
because of the reactive design philosophy; for example, if there overall routing performance can be achieved. Compared to
is no communication, this means that there are no routing maintaining routing information for all nodes in the whole
activities and no permanent routing information maintained at network, mobile nodes in the same zone know how to reach
the network nodes. The Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR) each other with a smaller cost. In some zone-based routing
protocol [10], Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) protocol [11] protocols, specific nodes act as gateway nodes and carry out
and Ad hoc On Demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing inter-zone communication. Therefore, the network will contain
protocol [12] are examples of uniform routing protocols. partitions or a number of zones. The Zone Routing Protocol
2 Hierarchical Routing (ZRP) [13] is a MANET zone-based hierarchical routing
Hierarchical routing has been implemented in wired protocol.
networks for a long time. In contrast to uniform flat routing, the
non-uniform hierarchical routing usually assigns different roles • Cluster-based
to network nodes; as explained in Section A (3). In contrast to A cluster-based routing protocol is the most popular
uniform flat routing, non-uniform routing approaches are hierarchical routing technique. It uses a specific clustering
related to hierarchical network structures to facilitate node algorithm for cluster head election in which mobile nodes are
organization and management. Normally, reactive algorithms grouped into clusters by geographic proximity. Cluster heads
are exploited to select the special nodes which carry out then take responsibility on behalf of the cluster for membership
reactive management and/or routing functions. management and routing functions. Cluster head Gateway
Generally, in wireless network, flat routing schemes Switch Routing (CGSR) [14] is an example of a cluster-based
become inefficient when the wireless network size increases MANET routing protocol. The Hierarchical State Routing
due to link and processing overhead. Therefore, hierarchical (HSR) protocol [15] also supports a multi-level cluster
routing has been presented as an efficient solution to solve the structure.
problem and produce a scalable network.
Non-uniform hierarchical routing protocols can be further • Core Node-based
sorted into three subcategories: zone-based, cluster-based, and In core node-based routing protocols, critical nodes are
core-based. These protocols are categorized according to the dynamically selected to compose a "backbone" for the
organization of the mobile nodes, their respective management, network. The “backbone” nodes carry out special functions,
and their routing functions [5]. such as the construction of routing paths and propagation of
control/data packets. Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR) for audio and video communications, are few examples of
[10] and Core Extraction Distributed Ad hoc Routing multicast routing services.
(CEDAR) [16] protocols are typical core node-based MANET The classification methods for unicast routing algorithms
routing protocols. are also appropriate for the existing multicast routing
3 Geographic Position Information Assisted Routing algorithms to be classified into reactive, proactive, and hybrid
Routing with assistance from geographic location multicast routing. The Ad hoc Multicast Routing (AMRoute)
information requires each node to be equipped with a Global [23] belongs to the proactive multicast routing category,
Positioning System (GPS). This satellite system [17] provides whereas On Demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP)
reliable positioning, navigation, and universal timing services [24] is a reactive multicast routing protocol and the Core-based
to worldwide users on a continuous basis, in all weather, day Tree (CBT) [25] is a hybrid multicast routing protocol.
and night, anywhere on Earth. This requirement is quite The existing MANET multicast routing approaches can be
realistic today since such GPS devices are advanced, updated, subclassified into tree-based, mesh-based, core-based, and
inexpensive, and can provide reasonable precision; GPS group forwarding-based multicast routing protocols [26]. This
provides location information with a precision within a few subclassification is based on how the distribution paths among
meters. Location information can be used for directional group members are constructed. Some of the multicast routing
routing in distributed Ad hoc systems. Research in this area has protocols could be included in more than one category, such as
shown that geographical location information can improve the Core-assisted Mesh Protocol (CAMP) [27] which can be
routing performance in Ad hoc networks [18]. characterized as both a core and mesh multicast routing
Additional care must be taken in a mobile environment protocol.
because locations may not be accurate by the time the • Tree-based
information is used. All protocols based on GPS assume that In tree-based multicast routing protocols, the source nodes
the nodes know their positions. The Location Aided Routing are the roots of multicast trees and in them the executing
(LAR) [19], the Distance Routing Effect Algorithm for algorithm for distribution tree contraction and maintenance.
Mobility (DREAM) [20], and geographical routing [21] are This requires that a source must know the topology information
examples of geographic position-assisted routing protocols. and address all of its receivers in the multicast group.
Therefore, when used for dynamic networks, source-rooted
tree-based multicast routing protocols often suffer from control
C Casting Packets
traffic overhead. The AMRoute [22] is an example of one such
In this section, the routing algorithms are classified source-rooted tree-based multicast routing.
depending on the packet casting type, either unicast or • Core-based
multicast routing protocols In a core-based multicast routing algorithm, cores are nodes
There are three categories to cast the control and/or the data with special functions such as multicast data distribution and
packets in network: membership management. Some core-based multicast routing
 Unicast: source will send messages to a single algorithms also utilize tree structures, but unlike source-rooted
destination. tree-based multicast routing, multicast trees are rooted at core
 Multicast: source will send same messages to specific nodes. For different core-based multicast routing protocols,
destinations. core nodes may perform various routing and management
 Broadcast: source will send same messages to all functions. For example, in a CBT multicast routing protocol
possible destinations. [25], cores are cross points for all traffic flows of multicast
1 Unicast Routing groups and may become bottlenecks along the network. On the
Most MANET routing algorithms previously categorized other hand, in protocols like CAMP [27], core nodes are not
could be classified as unicast routing algorithms such as necessarily utilized by all routing paths.
Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR) protocols [10], • Mesh-based
Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) protocols [11], and Ad hoc In a mesh-based multicast routing protocol, packets are
On Demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing protocols [12]. distributed along mesh structures that are a set of
2 Multicast Routing interconnected nodes. The mesh structure is more robust than
Many multicast routing schemes have been proposed for the tree structure for multicast routing in dynamic networks
wired networks, such as the Multicast Open Shortest Path First because a mesh provides alternate paths when link failure
(MOSPF) [22] which has been widely used in these networks. occurs. However, the cost for maintaining mesh structures is
Multicasting in MANET is defined as the transmission of normally higher than that of trees. The ODMRP [24] and
packets to a group of hosts identified by a single destination CAMP [27] are examples of mesh-based multicast routing
address. Multicast service is crucial in management protocols.
applications where one-to-many dissemination is necessary. • Group Forwarding-based
Applications that include close team collaboration in rescue In the group forwarding-based multicast routing, a set of
patrols, military battle, and among scientists with requirements mobile nodes is dynamically selected as forwarding nodes for a
multicast group. Forwarding nodes then assume the
responsibility for multicast packet distribution. Using this multiple routing paths available, the path selected will be the
scheme, it is possible to obtain multiple routing paths and send shortest routing paths with the minimum hop number in order
duplicate messages to receivers through the different paths to decrease traffic overhead and reduce packet collisions when
obtained. ODMRP [24] is a group forwarding-based multicast compared to longer routing paths. However, one disadvantage
routing protocol that uses adaptive forwarding groups to to the mobility in MANET is that it can cause route failure and
accomplish this. frequently leads to route discovery. Therefore, the link stability
3 Broadcasting Methods is an important metric that was considered in the route
The broadcasting mechanism is used by MANET nodes for construction. An example for that is the Associativity-based
periodic messages. A number of research groups have Routing (ABR) [30] that selects routes based only on nodes’
proposed efficient broadcast protocols based on distributed and link stability, where each node has an associative state that
hierarchical methodologies. The broadcasting methods could implies the period of stability. ABR is a simple bandwidth-
be subclassified according to their transmission methodology efficient distributed routing protocol that supports mobile
(or how nodes broadcast their packets). In addition to the computing in a conference-sized MANET environment. Unlike
simple flooding, the subclassification includes probability- the proactive or reactive routing algorithms, this protocol does
based methods, area-based methods, and neighbor knowledge not attempt to consistently maintain routing information in
methods. Most existing distributed network-wide broadcast every node. In this manner, the routes selected are likely to be
techniques have been summarized and categorized in long-lived; hence, there is no need to restart frequently,
Reference [28]. resulting in a higher attainable throughput. Route requests are
• Simple Flooding broadcast on a per need basis. The protocol is free from loops,
Most of the routing protocols use a generally inefficient deadlock, and packet duplicates and has scalable memory
form of broadcast called simple flooding. In simple flooding, requirements.
when a node receives a packet to be broadcast for the first time, This network metric taxonomy could include hop number,
it transmits the packet to all nodes within its transmission link stability (such as mobility), congestion [31], data rate [32],
range. In dense networks, the simple flood wastes bandwidth computing and power consumptions and many other network
and node resources. DSR [11] and AODV [12] routing metrics.
protocols use the simple flooding technique.
The following methods improve upon simple flooding and III. CONCLUSION
do not require that every node receive a packet to transmit it This paper presented a review of the routing process in
further. MANET, which is much more complex than in wired networks
• Probability-based Methods because of the host mobility, interference of wireless signals,
Using the probability-based protocols [29], the node and the broadcasting nature of wireless communication. The
decides whether to rebroadcast according to a specified complexities of this process and the associated issues have
probability or a simple conditional event which relates to the motivated researchers to develop several MANET routing
probability of reaching additional neighbors. protocols, with varying performance under different conditions.
• Area-based Methods Each routing protocol developed according to a specific
Area based methods [29] use knowledge of sender node criterion. In this paper, an overview of four different MANET
locations to estimate whether a transmission will reach a routing protocol categories was presented, including design
significant amount of additional coverage area. LAR [19] and philosophy, network structure, packets casting, and network
DREAM [20] include area-based methods in their routing routing metric. Each of these categories was used to compare,
protocols. classify, and group MANET routing protocols with similar
• Neighbor Knowledge Methods characteristics. These characteristics relate mainly to the
Neighbor knowledge methods [29] require the use of information utilized for routing that determined the nodes’
“Hello”-type packets so that nodes have explicit data regarding roles in the routing process. In this paper, a new type of
their neighborhood topology; the nodes then use this neighbor classification for MANET routing protocols was added based
data to decide whether to rebroadcast a packet. The OLSR on network routing metrics.
routing protocol [10] implements this method. The review in this paper indicates that the invention of new
protocols is not a solution due to the large number of protocols
D Network Routing Metrics already available. However, there should be an understanding
In this paper, a new classification for routing algorithms has of the network requirements and conditions for which each
been added which depends on the routing metric. The routing protocol is suited and will function best. For each of these
metric used in the identification of the routing path could also criteria, there is a wide list of protocols that will meet its needs;
be used as a criterion for MANET routing protocols therefore, this understanding of requirements and conditions is
classification. crucial to selection of the right protocol to enhance efficiency
In the previous sections, all abovementioned MANET and performance.
protocols have based on the hop number as a routing metric, As mentioned previously, focusing on a particular
such as in OLSR [10], DSR [11], and AODV [12]. If there are characteristic leads to the design of a particular routing
protocol. Therefore, a range of comparisons between the [23] J. Xie, R. Talpade, A. McAuley, and M. Liu, “AMRoute: Ad hoc
Multicast Routing protocol,” Mobile Networks and Applications, vol. 7,
routing protocols for each criterion should be made and then
no.6, pp. 429–439, 2002.
evaluated. [24] S. J. Lee, M. Gerla, and C.C. Chiang, “On Demand multicast routing
protocol,” Proceedings of IEEE WCNC’99, pp. 1298–1302, New
REFERENCES Orleans, LA, 1999.
[1] J. Andrews, S. Shakkottai, R. Heath, N. Jindal, M. Haenggi, R. Berry, D. [25] A. Ballardie, “Core Based Trees (CBT version 2) multicast routing
Guo, M. Neely, S. Weber, S. Jafar, and A. Yener, “Rethinking protocol specification,” Internet Request for Comment 2189, 1997.
information theory for mobile Ad hoc networks,” IEEE Communications [26] T. Omari, G. Franks, and M. Woodside, “On the effect of traffic model
Magazine, vol. 46, issue 12, pp. 94–101, 2008. to the performance evaluation of multicast protocols in MANET,”
[2] A. S. Tanenbaum, “Computer Networks”, 4th Edition, Prentice Hall Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, pp.
PTR, 2003. 404–407, 2005.
[3] J. Kakarla1, S. Siva Sathya1, B. Govinda Laxmi2, B. Ramesh Babu “A [27] J. J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves and E.L. Madruga, “The core-assisted mesh
Survey on Routing Protocols and its Issues in VANET,” International protocol,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 17,
Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887), vol. 28, no.4, Aug. issue. 8, pp. 1380–1394, 1999.
2011. [28] B. Williams and T. Camp, “Comparison of broadcasting techniques for
[4] S. Sesay, Z. Yang, and J. He, “A survey on mobile Ad hoc wireless mobile Ad hoc networks,” Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Mobile
network,” Information Technology Journal, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 168–175, ad Hoc networking and computing (MobiHoc), pp. 194–205, 2002.
2004. [29] B. Williams, D. P. Mehta, T. Camp, and W. Navidi, “Predictive models
[5] C. Liu and J. Kaiser, “A survey of mobile Ad hoc network routing to rebroadcast in mobile Ad hoc networks,” IEEE Transactions on
protocols,” University of Ulm Tech. Report Series, no. 2003-08, Oct. Mobile Computing, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 295–303, 2004.
2005. [30] C. K. Toh, “Associativity based routing for Ad hoc mobile networks,”
[6] M. Abolhasan, T. Wysocki, and E. Dutkiewicz, “A review of routing Wireless Personal Communications Journal, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 103–139,
protocols for mobile ad hoc networks,” Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 2, no. 1, 1997.
pp. 1–22, 2004. [31] R. Rashidi, M.A.J. Jamali, A. Salmasi, R. Tati “Trust routing protocol
[7] E. M. Royer and C. K. Toh, “A review of current routing protocols for based on congestion control in MANET,” International Conference on
Ad hoc mobile wireless Networks,” IEEE Personal Communications, Application of Information and Communication Technologies, AICT
vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 46–55, Apr. 1999. 2009. pp. 1-5, Dec. 2009.
[8] X. Hong, K. Xu, and M. Gerla, “Scalable routing protocols for mobile [32] S.Yongho, P. Jaewoo, C. Yanghee, “Multi-rate aware routing protocol
Ad hoc networks,” IEEE Network, vol. 16, issue 4, pp.11–21, 2002. for mobile ad hoc networks,” The 57th IEEE Semiannual Vehicular
[9] W. Kiess and M. Mauve, “A survey on real-world implementations of Technology Conference, VTC 2003-Spring, vol. 3, pp. 1749-1752, 2003.
mobile Ad hoc networks,” Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 5, pp. 324–339, 2007.
[10] T. Clausen and P. Jacquet, “Optimised Link State Routing Protocol
(OLSR)” Project Hipercom, INRIA, IFTF RFC 3626, 2003.
[11] D. B. Johnson, D. A. Maltz, and Y. Hu, “The Dynamic Source Routing
Protocol (DSR) for mobile Ad hoc networks for IPv4”, IETF RFC 4728,
2007.
[12] C. Perkins, E. Belding-Royer, and S. Das, “Ad hoc On Demand Distance
Vector (AODV) Routing,” IETF RFC 3561, 2003.
[13] Z. J. Haas, M. R. Pearlman, and P. Samar, “The Zone Routing Protocol
(ZRP) for Ad Hoc Networks”, IETF MANET Working Group, 2003.
[14] C. C. Chiang, T. C. Tsai, W. Liu, and M. Gerla, “Routing in clustered
multihop, mobile wireless networks with fading channel,” The Next
Millennium, Proceedings of IEEE Singapore International Conference
on Networks, SICON, pp. 197–221, 1997.
[15] G. Pei, M. Gerla, X. Hong, and C. C. Chiang, “A wireless hierarchical
routing protocol with group mobility,” IEEE Wireless Communications
and Networking Conference, WCNC ’99, vol.3, pp. 1538–1542, New
Orleans, LA, 1999.
[16] P. Sinha, R. Sivakumar, and V. Bharghaven, “CEDAR: a Core-
Extraction Distributed Ad hoc Routing algorithm,” IEEE Journal on
Selected Area in Communication, vol. 17, issue 8, pp. 1454–1465, 1999.
[17] A. Fard, “Global Positioning System (GPS),” [Online], available on:
http://www.network-tutorial.com/global-positioning-system-gps,
[accessed Feb. 6, 2012].
[18] X. Du, “QoS routing based on multi-class nodes for mobile ad hoc
networks,” Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 2, issue 3, pp. 241–254, 2004.
[19] Y. B. Ko and N. H. Vaidya, “Location Aid Routing (LAR) in mobile ad
hoc networks,” Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International
Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, MobilCom’98, pp.
85–97, 1998.
[20] S. Basagni, I. Chlamtac, V. Syrotiuk, and B. WoodWard, “A Distance
Routing Effect Algorithm for Mobility (DREAM),” Proceedings of the
4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and
Networking, MobilCom’98, pp. 76–84, 1998.
[21] R. Jain, A. Puri, and R. Sengupta, “Geographical routing using partial
information for wireless Ad hoc networks,” IEEE Personal
Communications, vo. 8, issue 1, pp. 48–57, 2001.
[22] J. Moy, “Multicast Open Shortest Path First (MOSPF),” RFC 1584,
1994.