Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks: A Review of Recent Issues and Challenges

Table 6

Comparison of the underwater routing protocols.

Routing Protocol	Publication Year	Bounded latency	Multi-path	Load balancing	Based		Energy Consumption	Geographic information		Communication overhead	Time complexity
					Receiver	Sender		Location	Depth
E-PULRP[39]	2010	✕	✕	✕	✓	✕	Medium	✕	✕	Low	O(n)
QELAR [40]	2011	✕	✕	✕	✓	✕	Low	✕	✕	Low	O(m1)
H2-DAB [41]	2009	✕	✕	✕	✓	✕	Low	✕	✓	Low	O(n2)
DBR [42]	2008	✕	✓	✕	✓	✕	High	✕	✓	Low	O(m1)
DSDBR [43]	2014	✓	✓	✕	✓	✕	Medium	✕	✓	Low	O(m1)
LAFR [44]	2013	✕	✓	✕	✓	✕	High	✕	✕	Low	O(n×m1)
ARP [45]	2008	✓	✓	✕	✕	✓	High	✓	✕	High	O(m1)
MRP [46]	2013	✕	✓	✕	✕	✓	Low	✕	✕	Low	O(m2)
RDBF [47]	2014	✕	✓	✓	✕	✓	High	✓	✕	High	O(n×m1)
RMTG [48]	2011	✕	✓	✕	✕	✓	High	✓	✕	High	O(n2)
DVRP [35]	2014	✕	✕	✕	✕	✓	High	✓	✕	Median	O(m1)
VAPR [49]	2013	✕	✓	✕	✕	✓	High	✕	✓	Median	O(m1)
PER [34]	2011	✕	✓	✕	✕	✓	Medium	✕	✕	High	O(n2)
CARP [50]	2015	✕	✕	✕	✕	✓	High	✕	✕	High	O(m1)
EEDBR [51]	2012	✕	✓	✕	✕	✓	Medium	✕	✕	High	O(m1)