车载自组网中基于位置的路由研究资源-CSDN文库

需积分: 5 143 浏览量 2021-04-11 06:33:47 上传评论收藏 1.09MB PDF 举报

车载自组网(VANET)是一种移动自组织网络，它由车载单元(TUs)或车载设备(OBEs)组成，这些设备通过无线通信接口互相连接，形成一个临时的网络。VANETs在智能交通系统(ITS)中扮演着重要的角色，能够提高道路安全、缓解交通拥堵，并提供各种车载服务。基于位置的路由是VANET中一种非常有前景的路由策略，因为车载节点可以从车载全球定位系统接收器获得位置信息，并且能从车载数字地图获得全球道路布局信息。在这篇研究论文中，作者刘建奇、万佳福、王沁若、邓潘、周科良、乔宇鹏提出，由于VANET的网络拓扑结构高度动态且迅速变化，基于位置的路由协议，尤其是以贪婪转发为主，非常适合VANETs。在文章中，作者详细讨论了各种基于位置的路由协议的优缺点，并进行了详细的比较。此外，还探讨了开放问题、挑战以及未来的研究方向，并观察到混合路由协议是城市和高速公路环境下VANETs的最佳选择。论文的主要内容涵盖了如下几个重要知识点： 1. VANET的背景和发展：随着车辆数量的显著增加，交通相关问题，如事故和拥堵，也随之增加。车载自组网技术作为智能交通系统的关键组成部分，对于处理这些问题至关重要。 2. 基于位置的路由策略：VANET节点可以从车载GPS接收器获取位置信息，这为基于位置的路由提供了条件。这类路由策略能够根据节点的位置信息来进行数据包的转发。 3. 路由协议的分类与选择：根据节点间如何进行信息的传递，基于位置的路由协议可以分为多种类型，其中包括基于贪婪转发的路由协议。这类协议通常会选择距离目标节点最近的节点来转发数据包。 4. 混合路由协议的优势：混合路由协议结合了多种路由策略的优点，它能够适应城市和高速公路等不同环境下的网络需求。这类协议的性能通常比单一策略更好，且更加灵活。 5. 研究中的挑战：在VANET中部署基于位置的路由协议面临诸多挑战，包括如何确保路由协议在高速移动的车辆间能够高效运行，如何处理频繁变化的网络拓扑，以及如何保证数据传输的安全性和可靠性。 6. 未来研究方向：随着技术的发展，未来的研究需要关注路由算法的优化、网络协议的设计、以及协议在实际交通环境中的应用。同时，还需要考虑如何融入新的技术趋势，比如车联网（IoV）、5G通信等。车载自组网中的基于位置的路由研究是一个多方面、多层次的复杂问题，它不仅涉及传统网络路由协议的基本原理和技术，还需要解决实际应用中遇到的特殊问题和挑战。这要求研究人员不仅要有深厚的理论基础，还要具备解决实际问题的能力和创新思维。

资源推荐

资源详情

资源评论

Telecommun Syst

DOI 10.1007/s11235-015-9979-7

A survey on position-based routing for vehicular ad hoc networks

Jianqi Liu · Jiafu Wan · Qinruo Wang · Pan Deng ·

Keliang Zhou · Yupeng Qiao

Abstract Position-based routing is considered to be a very

promising routing strategy for communication within vehic-

ular ad hoc networks (VANETs), due to the fact that vehicular

nodes can obtain position information from onboard global

positioning system receivers and acquire global road lay-

out information from an onboard digital map. Position-based

routing protocols, which are based mostly on greedy forward-

ing, are well-suited to the highly dynamic and rapid-changing

network topology of VANETs. In this paper, we outline t he

background and the latest development in VANETs and sur-

vey the state-of-the-art routing protocols previously used in

J. Liu

School of Information Engineering, Guangdong Mechanical and

Electrical College, Guangzhou, China

e-mail: liujianqi@ieee.org

J. Wan (

)

School of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering, South China

University of Technology, Guangzhou, China

e-mail: jiafuwan_76@163.com

Q. Wang

Faculty of Automation, Guangdong University of Technology,

Guangzhou, China

e-mail: wangqr2006@gdut.edu.cn

P. Deng

Parallel Computing Laboratory, Institute of Software of Chinese

Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

e-mail: dengpan@iscas.ac.cn

K. Zhou

College of Electrical Engineering and Automation, Jiangxi

University of Science and Technology, Ganzhou, China

e-mail: nyzkl@sina.com

Y. Q i ao

College of Automation Science and Engineering, South China

University of Technology, Guangzhou, China

e-mail: ypqiao@scut.edu.cn

VANETs. We present the pros and cons for each routing

protocol, and make a detailed comparison. We also discuss

open issues, challenges and future research directions. It is

observed t hat a hybrid routing protocol is the best choice for

VANETs in both urban and highway environments.

Keywords VANET · Position-based routing · Forwarding

strategy · Intelligent transportation systems · Internet of

vehicle

1 Introduction

The number of vehicles on the roads has been rising signiﬁ-

cantly, leading to dramatic increases in trafﬁc-related issues

such as accidents and congestion. Six million car accidents

and a combined cost of accidents and congestion totaling

$232 billion are reported annually in the United States. In

China, more than 100 thousand people have died in traf-

ﬁc accidents every year and this number is increasing each

year. More than 57 % of accidents can be directly or indi-

rectly attributed to human errors such as inattention, lack of

cooperation, and poor decisions. Accident alarm information

can be used effectively to prevent collisions if there exists a

reliable and quick method to transmit this type of message

between vehicles or between vehicles and infrastructure [1].

Therefore, connecting vehicles wirelessly before the onset of

collisions and congestion is critical.

Vehicle ad hoc networks (VANETs) are types of mobile

ad hoc networks which are used to provide communica-

tions vehicle to vehicle (V2V) or vehicle to infrastructure

(V2I). VANETs support a myriad of applications related to

vehicles, vehicle trafﬁc, drivers, passengers and pedestrians

ranging from trafﬁc safety to infotainment. VANETs are a

core element of next generation intelligent transportation

123

J. Liu et al.

systems (ITS) and comprise of radio-enabled vehicles act-

ing as mobile nodes and infrastructure acting as ﬁxed nodes.

While there are similarities to other ad hoc networks, such

as short radio transmission range, self-organization, self-

management, and low bandwidth [2], VANETs can be distin-

guished from other types of ad hoc networks by the following

features [3]:

• Dynamic and rapidly-changing network topology:The

network topology of VANETs varies as the vehicles

move. According to the 801.11p speciﬁcation, the max-

imum wireless transmission range of each vehicle is

1,000 m (the effective range is 400 m). A communica-

tion link can be established between two vehicles inside

this range, and will be disconnected outside this range.

If the two vehicles are moving in opposite directions,

the connectivity of the network may change rapidly.

In VANETs, vehicles acting as communication nodes

move in and out of the network more frequently, which

leads to a highly dynamic topology of the vehicular

network [4].

• Inhomogeneous density of vehicles: VANETs are usu-

ally used in two typical scenarios, highway and urban.

On the highway, the environment is relatively simple

and straightforward, as the vehicles are moving in two

directions along the road. In some congested urban areas

there are more complex factors which must be consid-

ered. Vehicle density may be high during the day, espe-

cially at rush hour, and much lower at night.

• Instability of wireless channel and limited bandwidth:

In VANETs environments, factors such as tall buildings,

green belts, live trafﬁc, vehicle type and vehicle speed

can rapidly cause wireless channel fading and a severe

Doppler Effect, which affects the stability of the wireless

channel. In urban environments, there may be many vehi-

cles competing for the wireless channel, which results in

an actual bandwidth that is much lower than the theoret-

ical value. In order to satisfy the requirements of com-

munication, trafﬁc management, and infotainment, the

network quality of service (QoS) should be enhanced to

overcome the inﬂuence of instability of the wireless com-

munication channel.

• Predictability of vehicular pathway: Most vehicles have

been equipped with a global navigation satellite sys-

tem (GNSS) device, such as a global positioning sys-

tem (GPS) receiver. Current position information can be

retrieved from the GPS receiver in all but some special

circumstances, such as within a tunnel. Vehicular nodes

are also usually constrained by pre-built highways, roads

and streets, so if the speed, position and the street map

are known, then the vehicle pathway can be predicted

according to the mobility model.

• Sufﬁcient energy and resources: For mobile ad hoc net-

works (MANET), key constraints that must be consid-

ered in the protocol design are limited energy and com-

puting power. In contrast for VANETs, there is unlim-

ited energy and rich resources available [5–7]. The vehi-

cle engine offers continuous power for communication

devices, GPS or other devices. The vehicle can also be

installed with a digital map or inertial sensor, which can

be used by the vehicle to obtain location, velocity and

direction. The vehicle can also be equipped with a high-

performance integrated chip to offer strong computing

power and storage capability.

• Hard delay constraints: Active safety applications need

strict delay constraints and high reliability in vehicu-

lar communications. Although a dedicated short-range

communications (DSRC) protocol has been developed

in IEEE 802.11p, it does not consider the inﬂuence of

trafﬁc dynamics on data rate and channel access. In addi-

tion, the protocol is designed for one-hop applications,

while a reliable multi-hop scheme is required to minimize

communication delay in a dynamic trafﬁc environment.

For example, once braking happens on a highway, a mes-

sage should be transmitted and received quickly to avoid

a crash. In this type of application, the maximum con-

straint delay is a more important consideration than the

average delay.

Due to the aforementioned characteristics of VANETs, many

traditional routing protocols cannot accommodate VANETs,

as a network with rapidly moving nodes obviously has very

dynamic topologies. The dedicated short range communi-

cation (DSRC) protocol allows for ad-hoc setup of wireless

networks which consists of vehicles participating in the trans-

mission and routing of relevant information such as road con-

dition data to other vehicles. Routing protocols for these ad-

hoc vehicular applications need to be designed with particular

consideration to the dynamic changes in the network’s shape

and size. One of the speciﬁc issues with such networks is

the relatively short amount of time that a participating node

may reside in the network. The information that is trans-

mitted within these mesh networks needs to be routed in

a multi-hop fashion towards a particular direction or des-

tination while the network conﬁguration i s changing. The

ability to take advantage of the potentially short presence

of a vehicle within the network to route the message is a

critical aspect in the design of routing algorithms for these

applications. Therefore, the critical factor is to be able to

place an upper limit on the time between the next hop deci-

sion and the data transmission. In addition, a dynamic topol-

ogy renders scheduling schemes with deterministic access

times as impractical due to the overhead required in dis-

covering a node’s neighbors and determining the schedule

123

A survey on position-based routing for vehicular ad hoc networks

[8]. There have been many routing protocols proposed for

VANETs in the past ten years [3,9–26]. Routing protocols

dedicated to VANETs are roughly divided into ﬁve cate-

gories: topology-based routing, position-based (geography-

based) routing, trafﬁc-aware routing, cluster-based routing,

and broadcast-based (multicast, geocast) routing.

Topology-based routing forwards packets using exist-

ing communication links. The classical routing protocols

are DSDV [27], WRP, AODV [28], DSR [29] and TORA.

In addition, Namboodiri V presented the PRAODV and

PRAODV-M routing protocols in 2004, which depend on

the accuracy of the predicted algorithm [30]. Naumov V

proposed the ADOV + PGB r outing protocol in 2006 [31]

and Celimuge Wu et al. presented a ﬂexible, portable and

practical routing protocol called PFQ-AODV, which is based

on AODV in 2013. The protocol uses fuzzy logic to eval-

uate whether a wireless link is acceptable by considering

multiple metrics. Based on an evaluation of each wireless

link, the protocol uses a Q-learning algorithm to learn and

ﬁnd the best route [24]. Position-based (geography-based)

routing protocols or position-based hybrid routing protocols

have been proposed by several papers [13,22,23,25,32,33],

since vehicle position, speed and road information (geog-

raphy, road condition) can be readily obtained or predicted.

Trafﬁc-aware protocols take the trafﬁc information (real-time

or non-real time) into account in their forwarding strategy.

Spatial and trafﬁc aware routing (STAR) [34] is a hybrid

routing protocol, which considers trafﬁc data based on the

position of vehicle, exploiting both street layout information

achieved from geographic information systems and informa-

tion about the spatial distribution of vehicles along the street

and vehicular trafﬁc. Improved greedy trafﬁc aware rout-

ing (GyTAR)[35] considers the direction of vehicle travel,

vehicular density, road conditions and trafﬁc environment

changes. It is a road-based geographic routing protocol

which can ﬁnd a robust optimal path in an urban environ-

ment. Clustering for Open IVC networks (COIN) [36] and

cluster-based location routing (CBLR) [37] are two typical

cluster-based routing protocols. The urban multi-hop broad-

cast protocol (UMB) [38], multi-hop vehicular broadcast

protocol (MHVB) [39,40], to last one protocol (TLO)[41]

and context-adaptive information diffusion protocol (CAID)

[42] are broadcast-based routing protocols that use ﬂood-

ing to broadcast packets. Some improved ﬂooding mecha-

nisms are addressed, such as probabilistic-based ﬂooding,

counting-based ﬂooding, distance-based ﬂooding, location-

based ﬂooding, neighbor-based ﬂooding and clustering-

based ﬂooding.

After analyzing relevant literature carefully, we ﬁnd that,

except for some traditional topology-based routing protocols,

the best routing protocols are related to position (digital map

or road layout). We can further sub-classify these routing

protocols into position-based simple routing, position-based

hybrid routing (such as those which incorporate trafﬁc ﬂow

information) and non-position-based routing.

Our main contribution in this paper is to present a study

of strengths and limitations of some well-known position-

based routing protocols. Our goal is to survey the state of

the art of position-based simple and hybrid routing protocols

from the perspectives of scenario, characteristics and prereq-

uisites. We discuss pros and cons for routing protocols from

each perspective, and also make a qualitative comparison of

protocols. To the best of our knowledge, this is the ﬁrst sur-

vey to assess the state of the art of routing protocols from

three perspectives. In addition, we also have discussed some

positioning algorithms, since vehicular position is a basic

element for position-based routing protocols.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 will

introduce the architecture of Internet of Vehicle and protocol

stacks of VANETs. Since accurate position information is an

important consideration in vehicular applications, we outline

some positioning schemes to help GNSS to acquire vehicle

location. Then we will explain the position-based routing

protocols for V2V and V2I in Sect. 3. In Sect. 4, we will

discuss and compare routing protocols for vehicular com-

munication. Section 5 reviews open issues and challenges in

vehicular communication. Finally, we conclude the paper in

Sect. 6.

2 Backgrounds and motivations

With the advent of big data technology, large volumes of data

generated from vehicular information, trafﬁc data and road

status can now be utilized more effectively. Google’s prod-

ucts, including basic ﬁle systems (Google ﬁle system [GFS]

or Colossus), management databases (BigTable), and pro-

gramming models (MapReduce), can assist with managing

applications based on large amounts of data, such as trafﬁc

ﬂow forecasting. Meanwhile, the development of LTE com-

munication technologies brings faster network access than

before. The data storage mode has changed in some indus-

tries, such as wireless body area network (WBAN) [43] and

mobile cloud computing [44,45]. Similarly, the architecture

of Internet of Vehicle has changed with the introduction of

big data and the LTE technique in recent years [46,47]. Enter-

tainment and information services can now be delivered more

effectively using LTE cellular networks. In this section, we

outline the background and the latest developments in ITS,

including system architecture and protocol stacks. Position-

based routing applies in more and more applications, as vehi-

cles can obtain their location from onboard GPS receivers or

a global digital map. Accurate position information plays

an important role in location based services. However, GPS

will fail in tunnels, underground, or anywhere else where the

satellite signal is blocked. The accuracy of positioning may

123

剩余15页未读，继续阅读

评论收藏

内容反馈

weixin_38748875

粉丝: 10
资源: 951

车载自组网中基于位置的路由研究

车载自组网的路由协议研究

城市场景下车载自组网中GPSR路由协议的研究.nh

论文研究-基于链路稳定性加权的车载自组网按需路由协议.pdf

基于分簇的车载自组网可信路由协议研究 (2013年)

安全技术-网络信息-车载网络中基于拓扑地理以及网络编码感知的自组网路由协议研究.pdf

5G蜂窝网辅助的车载自组网数据传输机制与路由算法.docx

论文研究-车载自组网路由稳定性分析.pdf

无线自组网ADHOC研究路由

基于车载以太网的协议研究

基于城市公交的车载自组网隐私保护协议

车载自组网

车载自组网技术综述.doc

车载自组网中一种自适应粒子群算法的研究.pdf

车载网仿真

基于位置和定向泛洪的车联网区域路由协议.pdf

车载自组网MAC层的安全问题研究* (2009年)

车载自组网中基于车辆密度的多跳广播协议

IEEE 802.11p车载自组网协议研究

基于车载自组网的AODV协议的改进

基于位置信息的车联网路由恢复方法.pdf

论文研究-一种基于移动向量的副本受限的路由协议.pdf

最新资源