3.9 Review

Unicast routing protocols for urban vehicular networks: review, taxonomy, and open research issues

Publisher

ZHEJIANG UNIV
DOI: 10.1631/jzus.C1300332

Keywords

Unicast protocols; Taxonomy; Protocol review; Vehicular ad hoc networks; Geographic routing

Funding

  1. High Impact Research, University of Malaya
  2. Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia [UM.C/HIR/MOHE/FCSIT/09]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Over the past few years, numerous traffic safety applications have been developed using vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs). These applications represent public interest and require network-wide dissemination techniques. On the other hand, certain non-safety applications do not require network-wide dissemination techniques. Such applications can be characterized by their individual interest between two vehicles that are geographically apart. In the existing literature, several proposals of unicast protocols exist that can be used for these non-safety applications. Among the proposals, unicast protocols for city scenarios are considered to be most challenging. This implies that in city scenarios unicast protocols show minimal persistence towards highly dynamic vehicular characteristics, including mobility, road structure, and physical environment. Unlike other studies, this review is motivated by the diversity of vehicular characteristics and difficulty of unicast protocol adaption in city scenarios. The review starts with the categorization of unicast protocols for city scenarios according to their requirement for a predefined unicast path. Then, properties of typical city roads are discussed, which helps to explore limitations in efficient unicast communication. Through an exhaustive literature review, we propose a thematic taxonomy based on different aspects of unicast protocol operation. It is followed by a review of selected unicast protocols for city scenarios that reveal their fundamental characteristics. Several significant parameters from the taxonomy are used to qualitatively compare the reviewed protocols. Qualitative comparison also includes critical investigation of distinct approaches taken by researchers in experimental protocol evaluation. As an outcome of this review, we point out open research issues in unicast routing.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available