|
| Scheme | Pros | Cons |
|
| Counter | Easy implementation
High % of informed vehicles | Originally proposed for MANETs
High number of messages used |
|
| Distance | Easy implementation
Low number of messages | Low performance in urban environments |
|
| eSBR | Good performance in different environments
Improving distance results in terms of % of informed vehicles | GPS required |
|
| eMDR | Improving eSBR
Reducing the number of messages used | High precision GPS required
Specially designed for urban environments |
|
| NJL | High efficiency in urban scenarios
Reduced number of messages used
Aggressive broadcast storm reduction | High precision GPS required
Useless in highway scenarios |
|
| RTAD | Adaptive dissemination scheme
High efficiency in different scenarios | Complex implementation
GPS required |
|
| FDPD | Recommended for highway scenarios
Direction of vehicles is considered | GPS required
Low performance in urban scenarios |
|
| UV-CAST | Adaptive dissemination scheme
Connecting disconnected subnetworks
Reduced number of messages used | Low performance in urban scenarios |
|
| DV-CAST | Adaptive dissemination scheme
Good performance in terms of informed vehicles | GPS required
Low reduction of messages |
|
| JSF | Higher % of informed vehicles
Specially indicated for simple maps | High number of messages used
GPS required
Overhead in high density conditions |
|
| NSF | Highest % of informed vehicles
Specially indicated for low density scenarios | High number of messages used
Overhead in high density conditions |
|
