|
|
Protocol and publication year |
Architecture |
Metric for link/path selection |
Multipath
support |
Service diff. |
Hole bypassing |
Security |
Location aware |
Data delivery model |
Cross-layer support |
Scalability |
Mobility |
Energy efficiency |
Load
balancing |
Reliability |
Congestion support |
Reduce packet drops |
Priority |
Adjust TX power |
Avoid interpath interference |
Simulator/software |
Compared with |
Strengths |
Weaknesses |
|
Akkaya and Younis
[37]
Springer 2005 | Hierarchical | () Distance
() Residual energy
() PLR
() Delay | | √ | — | — | — | Query | — | √ | — | √ | √ | — | — | — | √ | — | — | — | — | () Best-effort transmission
() High throughput
() Low delay | () Require complete knowledge of topology
() Not scalable
() No adaptive bandwidth sharing
() No comparison with previous schemes |
GEAMS [38]
IEEE 2009 | Flat | () Remaining energy
() Hop count from source till current node
() Distance with neighbors
() History of current stream | √ | — | √ | — | √ | Event | — | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | — | √ | — | — | — | OMNET++
[89] | GPSR [74] | () Low delay
() Less packet drops
() Scalable
() Improve N/w lifetime | () Performs poorly in less dense network
() No packet priority |
AGEM [39]
IEEE 2010 | Flat | () Remaining energy
() Hop count from source till current node
() Distance with neighbors
() History of current stream | √ | — | √ | — | √ | Event | — | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | — | √ | — | — | — | OMNET++
[89] | GPSR [74] | () Low delay
() Less packet drops
() Scalable
() Improve N/w lifetime | () Performing poorly in less dense network
() No packet priority |
S-AOMDV
[55]
IEEE 2010 | Flat | () Residual energy
() Hop count
() Free buffer size
() PLR | √ | — | — | — | √ | — | √ | — | — | — | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | — | — | NS-2 [87]
Evalvid
[95] | AOMDV
[104] | () Good PSNR
() Less frame loss | () Extra overhead
() More energy consumption |
REP [56]
IEEE 2010 | Flat | () Remaining energy of node
() Average remaining energy of all nodes
() Reaching probability
() Reliability requirement | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | √ | √ | √ | — | — | — | √ | — | — | Baseline REP
| () Reliable
() Energy prediction
() Adjusting transmit power based on remaining energy | () Intrapath interference at high power level
() No comparison with previous schemes
() No congestion control |
ARCH [57]
Hindawi 2010 | Hierarchical | () Remaining energy of node
() Average remaining energy of all nodes
() Reaching probability
() Reliability requirement | √
Only intercluster | — | — | — | — | — | — | √ | — | √ | √ | √ | — | — | — | √ | — | — | Baseline ARCH | () Reliable
() Energy prediction
() Adjusting transmit power | () Intrapath interference
() No congestion control
() No comparison with previous schemes |
IQAR [58]
IEEE 2011 | Flat | () Residual energy
() PDR
() Delay
() Reliability requirement | — | — | √ | — | √ | Event | — | — | — | √ | √ | √ | — | — | √ | — | — | J-SIM
[97] | MMSPEED
[30] | () Good PSNR
() Reliable
() Low delay when
a number of flows are more | () Prioritization limited to
only images
() Performance not good when a number of flows are less |
ACOWMSN
[59]
IEEE 2011 | Flat | () Bandwidth
() Delay
() PLR
() Remaining energy | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | √ | — | √ | √ | √ | — | √ | — | — | — | NS-2
[87] | M-IAR [100]
AODV [78] | () Low delay
() Improve N/w lifetime
() High PDR | () Generates extra heavy traffic
() Slow convergence |
EEQAR
[60]
IEEE 2011 | Hierarchical | () Remaining energy
() Trust value
() Data correlation coefficient
() Hop count | √ | — | √ | — | √ | — | — | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | — | — | — | √ | — | — | ARCH [57] | () Improve N/w lifetime
() Mobility support
() Data fusion support | () Path-interference at high power level
() No congestion support |
CR-WMSN [61]
IEEE 2012 | flat | () PST
() Channel utilization
() Hop count
() Remaining energy | √ | — | — | — | √ | Event | √ | — | — | — | — | √ | √ | — | — | — | — | NS-2
[87] | Min hop algorithm | () Low delay
() High throughput | () Restricted N/W lifetime
() Restricted load balancing
() No priority |
Dong et al.
[66]
IEEE 2012 | Flat | () Bandwidth
() Delay
() Jitter
() PLR | √ | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | √ | — | √ | — | — | — | Waxman Model
[99]
| — | () Multiobjective
optimization
() Increase in probability to find optimal solution | () Output depends on Pareto solution set
() More complexity |
Bae et al. [40]
IJMUE 2014 | Flat | () Distance
() Remaining energy
() LQI
() Traffic priority | √ | √ | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | — | — | Visual Studio [105] | — | () Reliable
() Low delay
() Service differentiation | () Extra overhead
() No comparison with previous schemes |
PWDGR [41]
IEEE 2015 | Flat | () Number of hops
() One-hop distance
() Path contract angle
() Included angle | √ | — | — | — | √ | Event | — | √ | — | — | √ | √ | — | — | — | √ | — | Opnet
[85] | DGR [106] | () Improve N/w lifetime
() More paths
() Energy sensitive | () High delay
() More hop counts
() Poor performance in small density networks |
|
