Performance Analysis of Redundancy Path Mitigation in Manet using Network Simulation 2 (NS2)

Routing techniques in Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANETs) rely on asymmetric connections, so data received for one connection is completely useless for another. As additional design scenarios and operational complexity are added to the redundancy network, it becomes difficult to choose which method should be used when the primary link is down and packet flows are switching between multiple paths. Two reactive protocols— Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) and Ad-Hoc on Demand Distance Vector Routing Protocol (AODV)—will be used in this study to compare and contrast which one offers the best redundancy mitigation. The results of this analysis show that the two reactive protocols, AODV and DSR, will produce better performance after being modified in terms of packet delivery ratio, which shows that the AODV protocol gets a better amount compared to DSR and even so, DSR has produced a shorter end-to-end time delay compared to AODV. So, in short, this project produces a result where both protocols have their own advantages, which are calculated based on the number of nodes, the width of the parameters and the time taken. Furthermore, this study produced the desired results for the project's objective. It shows that both AODV and DSR protocols have their own advantages after being modified to mitigate redundancy, such as for performance metrics such as packet delivery ratio and average throughput. For the AODV protocol, the original amount for the transmission of 50 nodes is 0.977036 to 0.995531 and 0.493585 to 1.744313, which dramatically increases the percentage of the number of nodes reaching the destination, while for the end-to-end delay, DSR produces a better speed compared to AODV, whose original amount is 0.551224 to 0.30009, which shows the amount of delay that is reduced throughout the process of sending nodes. From the result data produced, DSR and AODV have their own advantages in terms of performance metrics that were studied, even though AODV is better in Throughput and packet delivery ratio than DSR because AODV has a resource routing mechanism and high mobility scenarios better than DSR while DSR is better in end- to-end delay because DSR is always faster in the route cache to avoid longer delays. This study uses three different numbers of nodes, which are 50, 75 and 100, to get the corresponding results.