Measuring TFRC & SCTP Performance Over AODV In MANET

Measuring TFRC & SCTP Performance Over AODV In MANET

This study focuses on TCP-Friendly rate control (TFRC), which is defined by IETF in RFC 5348 as and Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), which is defined by IETF in RFC 4960 as a new transport protocol. TFRC feature as fairness has attracted real time application and SCTP features also as mu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Dakkak, Omar
Format: Thesis
Language:eng
eng
Published: 2012
Subjects:
TK5101-6720 Telecommunication
Online Access:https://etd.uum.edu.my/3331/1/OMAR_DAKKAK.pdf
https://etd.uum.edu.my/3331/4/OMAR_DAKKAK.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my-uum-etd.3331
record_format uketd_dc
institution Universiti Utara Malaysia
collection UUM ETD
language eng
eng
advisor Mohamad Tahir, Hatim
Abdullah, Mohd Syazwan
topic TK5101-6720 Telecommunication
spellingShingle TK5101-6720 Telecommunication
Dakkak, Omar
Measuring TFRC & SCTP Performance Over AODV In MANET
description This study focuses on TCP-Friendly rate control (TFRC), which is defined by IETF in RFC 5348 as and Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), which is defined by IETF in RFC 4960 as a new transport protocol. TFRC feature as fairness has attracted real time application and SCTP features also as multi-homing and multi-streaming, has attracted multimedia applications to use it as their transport protocol instead of TCP and UDP. However, the challenge faced by TFRC that is using additive increase to adjust the sending rate during periods with no congestion. This leads to short term congestion that can degrade the quality of voice applications. SCTP faced the challenge in a best-effort network. In this study, a comprehensive performance evaluation between TFRC and SCTP has been carried out. The objectives of this research are to measure the performance of both TFRC and SCTP in MANET in terms of throughput, delay and packet loss that has TFRC and SCTP with UDP traffic some times and some experiments without UDP and the nodes is in mobility positions. All experiments conducted in this research were obtained through network simulation tools using NS-2. It is expected that this study is useful for researchers in improving both TFRC and SCTP.
format Thesis
qualification_name masters
qualification_level Master's degree
author Dakkak, Omar
author_facet Dakkak, Omar
author_sort Dakkak, Omar
title Measuring TFRC & SCTP Performance Over AODV In MANET
title_short Measuring TFRC & SCTP Performance Over AODV In MANET
title_full Measuring TFRC & SCTP Performance Over AODV In MANET
title_fullStr Measuring TFRC & SCTP Performance Over AODV In MANET
title_full_unstemmed Measuring TFRC & SCTP Performance Over AODV In MANET
title_sort measuring tfrc & sctp performance over aodv in manet
granting_institution Universiti Utara Malaysia
granting_department College of Arts and Sciences (CAS)
publishDate 2012
url https://etd.uum.edu.my/3331/1/OMAR_DAKKAK.pdf
https://etd.uum.edu.my/3331/4/OMAR_DAKKAK.pdf
_version_ 1747827548608266240
spelling my-uum-etd.33312016-04-27T00:55:43Z Measuring TFRC & SCTP Performance Over AODV In MANET 2012 Dakkak, Omar Mohamad Tahir, Hatim Abdullah, Mohd Syazwan College of Arts and Sciences (CAS) College of Arts and Sciences TK5101-6720 Telecommunication This study focuses on TCP-Friendly rate control (TFRC), which is defined by IETF in RFC 5348 as and Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), which is defined by IETF in RFC 4960 as a new transport protocol. TFRC feature as fairness has attracted real time application and SCTP features also as multi-homing and multi-streaming, has attracted multimedia applications to use it as their transport protocol instead of TCP and UDP. However, the challenge faced by TFRC that is using additive increase to adjust the sending rate during periods with no congestion. This leads to short term congestion that can degrade the quality of voice applications. SCTP faced the challenge in a best-effort network. In this study, a comprehensive performance evaluation between TFRC and SCTP has been carried out. The objectives of this research are to measure the performance of both TFRC and SCTP in MANET in terms of throughput, delay and packet loss that has TFRC and SCTP with UDP traffic some times and some experiments without UDP and the nodes is in mobility positions. All experiments conducted in this research were obtained through network simulation tools using NS-2. It is expected that this study is useful for researchers in improving both TFRC and SCTP. 2012 Thesis https://etd.uum.edu.my/3331/ https://etd.uum.edu.my/3331/1/OMAR_DAKKAK.pdf text eng validuser https://etd.uum.edu.my/3331/4/OMAR_DAKKAK.pdf text eng public masters masters Universiti Utara Malaysia Amer,P., & Stewart,R. (2005). Why is SCTP needed given TCP and UDP are widely available? Virginia, USA: http://www.isoc.org/briefings/ 017/, copyright C Internet society. Beritelli,F., Ruggeri,G., & Schembra,G. (2002).Tcp-friendly transmission of voice over IP, in International Conference on Communication (ICC). Brutch,P., & Ko,C. (2003).Challenges in Intrusion Detection for Wireless Ad-hoc Networks. Applications and the Internet Workshops. Carson,S., & Maker,J. (1999,January). Mobile Ad-hoc Network-ing (MANET): Routing Protocol Performance Issues and Evaluation Considerations. Retrieved from The Internet Society. Chung,J., & Claypool,M. (2003). Ns by example. Retrieved from http://nile.wpi.edu/NS/. Demichelis,C., & Chimento,P. (2002). IP Packet Delay Variation Metric for IP Performance Metrics (IPPM). RFC 3393, 6-13. Floyd,S., & Kempf,J. (2002). Iab concerns regarding congestion control for voice traffic in the internet, RFC 3714. Greis,M. (2002). Tutorial for the Network Simulator NS2. Retrieved from http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/tutorial/. Handley,M., Floyd,S., Padhye,J., & Widmer,J. (2000). TEquation-based congestion control for unicast applications: the extended version, in Special Interest Group on Data Communications (SIGCOMM ’00), Stockholm,Sweden Handley,M., Floyd,S., Padhye,J., & Widmer,J. (2002). Tcp friendly rate congestion control (tfrc): protocol specification, RFC 3448. Hassan,M., & Jain,R. (2004)., Chapter 4 page:-by Pearson Education, Inc, Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ07458. In High Performance TCP/IP Networking (pp.76-79). USA: Alan R. Apt. Hunt,C. (1997). TCP/IP protocol architecure. In TCP/IP network adminstration (pp. 9-23), Sebastopol CA, USA: O'Reily Media. Issariyakul,T., & Hossain,E. (2009). Introduction to Network Simulator NS2, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009. doi : 10.1007/978-0-387-71760-91. Jansen,W., Mell,P., Karygiannis,T., & Marks,D. (1999). Applying Mobile Agents to Intrusion Detection and Response, National Institute of Standards and Technology Computer Security Division, NIST Interim Report (IR)-6416. Joe,I.,& YAN,S. (2009). SCTP throughput Improvement with Best Load Sharing based on Multihoming. Fifth International Joint Conference on INC, IMS and IDC (pp.1-5). Seoul, Korea: IEEE Computer Society. Kuhl,M., Kistner,J., Costantini,K., & Sudit,M. (2007). Cyber attack modeling and simulation for network security analysis, 39th conference on Winter simulation by ACM (pp.1-9), IEEE Computer Society. Kurose,J.F. & Ross,K.W. (2010). Computer Networking: A Top-Down Approach. New York: Addison-Wesley. P 30y Maldonado,M., Abdul Baset,S., & Schulzrinne,H. (2005). TCP-Friendly Rate Control with Token Bucket for VoIP Congestion Control, Department of Computer Science Columbia University Peacock,A. (2007). CONNECTING THE EDGE: Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks (MANETs) for Network Centric Warfare, Blue Horizons Paper Center for Strategy and Technology, Air War College. Phelan,T. (2004). TFRC with Self-Limiting Sources, Sonus Networks. Postel,J. (1980). User Datagram Protocol, RFC 768, August. Postel,J. (1981). Transmission Control Protocol, RFC 793. Rejap, M.R.A, Zaini,K.M., Azzali,F. Tahir,H. (2010). An Investigation of TFRC over AODV and DSR Routing Protocols, School of Communications and Computer Engineering, UUM College of Arts and Sciences. Santi,P. (2005). Topology Control in Wireless Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks. Italy: Ltd, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 4LP, UK. Applications. Schaar M. van der., & Sai Shankar N.D. (2005). Cross-layer wireless multimedia transmission: Challenges, principles and new paradigms, IEEE wireless Communications. Sjoberg,J., Westerlund,M., Lakaniemi,A., & Xie,Q. (2003). Real-time transport protocol (rtp) payload format and file storage format for the adaptive multi-rate (amr) and adaptive multi-rate wideband (amr-wb) audio codecs, RFC 3267. Stewart,R. (2007).Stream Control Transmission Protocol, RFC 4960. Stewart,R., T¨uxen,L., & Lei,K. (2007). Stream Control Transmission Protocol Dynamic Address Reconfiguration, RFC 5061. Tsaoussidis,V., & Badr,H. (2000). TCP-Probing: Towards an Error Control Schema with Energy and Throughput Performance Gains, 8th IEEE Conference on Network Protocols, Japan. USC (2001). USC supports Network Simulator software. Retrieved from http://nsnam.isi.edu/ nsnam/index.php/Contributed Code USC (2002). USC supports Network Simulator software. Retrieved from http://nsnam.isi.edu/ nsnam/index.php/ USC (2004). USC supports Network Simulator software. Retrieved from http://www.isi.edu/ nsnam/ns/ Widmer,J., Robert Denda,R., & Mauve,M. (2001). A survey on TCP-friendly congestion control. Special Issue of the IEEE Network Magazine ``Control of Best Effort Traffic, 15(3): 28-37. Zhang,C., & Tsaoussidis,V. (2001).TCP Real: Improving Real-time Capabilities of TCP over, Heterogeneous Networks, 11th IEEE/ACM NOSSDAV, NY.

Similar Items