Parameter in .NET

Create QR in .NET Parameter
TABLE 12.5. Parameter
.net Vs 2010 qrcode decoderon .net
Using Barcode Control SDK for .net vs 2010 Control to generate, create, read, scan barcode image in .net vs 2010 applications.
Parameter Values of RICA Value 5s 4s 6s No Yes 80 ms 3s
QR Code barcode library on .net
using barcode generator for vs .net control to generate, create quick response code image in vs .net applications.
Active route timeout CSI broadcast interval Time to keep a broadcast ID Broadcast hello message MAC link breakage detection Time to wait for receiving all RREQ/CSI checking packets Maximum time of unicast retry
recognizing qr bidimensional barcode for .net
Using Barcode decoder for visual .net Control to read, scan read, scan image in visual .net applications.
Successful Percentage of Packet Delivery. This is the ratio of packets reaching the destination to total packets generated in the sources. A packet may be dropped either if there is not enough data buffer due to the congestion or if it has stayed in the buffer for more than 30 s. Routing Control Overheads. This parameter re ects the ef ciency of the routing protocol and is measured in bits per second (bps). We count the
Bar Code barcode library for .net
using barcode implementation for visual .net control to generate, create bar code image in visual .net applications.
read bar code on .net
Using Barcode scanner for VS .NET Control to read, scan read, scan image in VS .NET applications.
Average end-to-end delay (ms)
Control qrcode data in
to deploy quick response code and qr barcode data, size, image with c# barcode sdk
500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 2
QR Code 2d Barcode barcode library in .net
generate, create qr barcode none with .net projects
AODV Average end-to-end delay (ms) RICA DSDV DSR
Control qr bidimensional barcode image for visual basic
generate, create qr-code none in visual projects
1200 1050 900 750 600 450 300 150 0
2D Barcode writer for .net
using barcode integrated for vs .net crystal control to generate, create 2d barcode image in vs .net crystal applications.
Bar Code barcode library with .net
generate, create barcode none for .net projects
Mobile speed (km/h)
.net Vs 2010 Crystal bar code implementwith .net
using barcode writer for .net vs 2010 crystal control to generate, create barcode image in .net vs 2010 crystal applications.
Mobile speed (km/h)
International Standard Serial Number barcode library on .net
use .net crystal issn generation toassign international standard serial number for .net
QR Code ISO/IEC18004 barcode library with visual c#
generate, create qr code none on .net c# projects
Average end-to-end delay (ms)
Control upc a image with word documents
using barcode generation for word documents control to generate, create gs1 - 12 image in word documents applications.
800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 2
Code 128 Barcode barcode library for visual
using barcode encoding for web service crystal control to generate, create code 128 image in web service crystal applications.
Barcode barcode library in .net
using barcode integration for windows forms control to generate, create bar code image in windows forms applications.
Average end-to-end delay (ms)
Control code39 data for word documents
code 39 data on office word
6 8 10 12 14 16
PDF-417 2d Barcode scanner in .net
Using Barcode scanner for VS .NET Control to read, scan read, scan image in VS .NET applications.
Build barcode with .net
use aspx barcode encoding toprint bar code on .net
2600 2400 2200 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600
integrating in vb
using aspx crystal tobuild gs1128 with web,windows application
Mobile speed (km/h)
Mobile speed (km/h)
Figure 12.5. Average end-to-end delays of all protocols: (a) 50 devices, 10 packets per second (pps); (b) 50 devices, 15 pps; (c) 100 devices, 5 pps; (d) 100 devices, 8 pps.
total number of routing control packets in each round of simulation. We then average the amount of routing control overheads (in bits) to the whole simulation time. 12.5.2 Average End-to-End Delay
The rst set of results is the average packet end-to-end delay against mobile speed with the traf c load varying from 10 to 15 packets per second. The mean mobile speed is varied from 0 to 14.4 km/h and thus, the maximum speed is varied from 0 to 28.8 km/h. This speed range can reasonably model a stationary user, a user moving with pedestrian speed, or a running user. As can be seen in Figure 12.5, taking the CSI into consideration can greatly shorten the end-to-end delay from the source to the destination in the RICA protocol, which outperforms the other three reactive and proactive protocols for the following reasons:
The source can update the route to the destination frequently and adaptively to the change of the CSI of the links in a route. Indeed, a chosen
route is temporarily the shortest one with a much better channel quality than those found by the AODV, DSR, and DSDV protocols. Thus, the transmission of the packet is greatly speeded up. The periodic update of the route is adaptive to the geographically sensitive changes of the CSI, which occurs frequently in an indoor environment (e.g., a shopping mall). Thus, packets for the same source destination pair (i.e., in the same session) can travel through different routes, and load balancing is therefore automatically achieved. Indeed, in the RICA protocol, a busy device will refrain from forwarding RREQ and CSI checking packets, thereby shifting the load to other devices that are having fewer burdens. Such a load balancing effect can help keep the packet queue short and hence reduce the transmission delay. Using the CSI checking mechanism, sometimes a full broadcast in search of a route can be avoided. The data queueing delay at the source will be reduced because the source device can swiftly choose a route to the destination. In addition, the CSI checking mechanism can also result in shorter routes, which re ect the current topology changes and thus, the delay incurred at the extra intermediate devices will be reduced.
In all four routing algorithms, when the traf c loads are relatively light, the end-to-end delay increases with the increase in speed of the mobile devices. The reason is that when the mobility is increased, there will be more link breakage. Therefore, the data packets have to be buffered in the source device and wait for the route recovery. This will obviously increase the packet endto-end delay. However, when we test all four protocols in the heavy load scenario (i.e., 8 packets per second with 20 source destination pairs) under a denser environment (100 devices in the eld), the end-to-end delay is the highest when the devices in the network are in low mobility. This can be explained by the following argument. For this rather high traf c load, more devices are competing for the wireless channel with only a very limited bandwidth; thus, a long queue in each device can very easily form because the route is longlived when the mobility is low. As the mobile speed increases, a long queue is less likely to form since link breakage occurs more often, and this leads to (1) most packets in the broken route being dropped and (2) traf c load spread to a larger number of devices and therefore fewer devices being unduly burdened. These two effects decrease the packet queueing delay at the source but at the same time increase the number of dropped packets as detailed below. The same phenomenon has also been observed in simulations reported by Johansson et al. [61] and Perkins et al. [111], respectively. 12.5.3 Successful Percentage of Packet Delivery
From the simulation results shown in Figure 12.6, we can see that taking CSI into consideration contributes to the reliability of packet delivery. Indeed, we can see that the RICA protocol outperforms the other three routing proto-