A performance comparison of position-based routing approaches for mobile ad hoc networks

In this work we present a performance comparison study between SIFT (Simple Forwarding over Trajectory), an innovative and scalable trajectory-based approach, and DREAM (Distance Routing Effect Algorithm for Mobility), a stable, largely tested position-based scheme. In the literature, the latest studies indicate that control overhead is the most important drawback that routing protocols must face. Classical ad hoc routing schemes do not perform well in MANETS (Mobile Ad hoc Networks) because they were not designed to handle efficiently mobility handicaps. Position-based forwarding techniques perform better in highly dynamic scenarios, reducing control overhead consequences, but there may be some highly dynamic scenarios where they do not perform efficiently. Trajectory-based forwarding protocols solve the overhead problem and, thus, they perform efficiently in MANETS. Our study demonstrates that SIFT performs better than DREAM concerning delivery ratio, control overhead and route length in terms of number of hops. Its main handicap could be, a priori, the delivery delay. However, even if delay may be high in SIFT, control overhead may also causes even higher delivery delay in DREAM.