This study presents an in-depth analysis of four prominent ad hoc routing protocols—AODV (Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector), GRP (Geographic Routing Protocol), OLSR (Optimized Link State Routing), and TORA (Temporally Ordered Routing Algorithm)—within a Wireless LAN (WLAN) framework. Emphasizing real-time application requirements, the research investigates critical Quality of Service (QoS) parameters including voice jitter, end-to-end delay, Mean Opinion Score (MOS), overall delay, packet retransmission, packet dropand WLAN delay. Through simulation-based evaluation, the behavior and responsiveness of each protocol was observed under dynamic network conditions. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of how these protocols handle the demands of real-time communication, offering insights into their operational characteristics within WLAN environments. The primary focus is on analyzing critical Quality of Service (QoS) parameters essential for real-time applications, including voice jitter, end-to-end delay, Mean Opinion Score (MOS), overall delay, packet retransmission, packet drop, and WLAN delay. Using simulation-based methods, each protocol was evaluated under identical network conditions to assess its ability to support consistent and high-quality communication. The results indicate that TORA outperforms the other protocols across most QoS metrics, demonstrating its effectiveness in handling dynamic network topologies while ensuring reliable and efficient data transmission. These findings suggest that TORA is a highly suitable protocol for enhancing real-time performance in WLAN-based ad hoc networks.

In this research, we conducted a detailed performance analysis of four well-known ad hoc routing protocols—AODV (Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector), GRP (Geographic Routing Protocol), OLSR (Optimized Link State Routing), and TORA (Temporally Ordered Routing Algorithm)—within a Wireless LAN (WLAN) environment. The primary objective was to evaluate the efficiency and suitability of each protocol for real-time applications by focusing on key Quality of Service (QoS) parameters: voice jitter, end-to-end delay, Mean Opinion Score (MOS), overall delay, packet retransmission, packet drop, and WLAN delay. Our simulation results clearly indicate that TORA outperformed the other protocols across most performance metrics. TORA achieved the lowest voice jitter and end-to-end delay, which are critical for voice transmission quality. It also recorded the highest MOS value, reflecting better user-perceived quality. Furthermore, TORA had the least number of packet retransmissions and data drops, indicating strong reliability and minimal congestion. In terms of WLAN delay, TORA again delivered the best results, maintaining low latency even under dynamic network conditions. OLSR showed moderate performance, benefiting from its proactive route maintenance, while AODV, despite being reactive, struggled with higher delays and packet losses due to its route discovery overhead. GRP consistently showed the weakest performance, particularly in jitter and MOS, suggesting that its location-based routing approach may be less effective in mobile and real-time WLAN scenarios. Overall, the results confirm that TORA is the most efficient and reliable routing protocol for time-sensitive and high-performance communication in Wireless LANs, especially for voice and multimedia applications.

1.Sajjad Ali, AsadAlim “Performance Analysis of AODV, DSR and OLSR in MANET”, Department of Electrical Engineering with emphasis on Telecommunication Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden 2009. 2.Anuj K Gupta, Harsh Sadawarti & Anil K Verma, 2010, ‘Performance analysis of AODV, DSR & TORA Routing Protocols’, International Journal of Engineering and Technology, vol.2, no.2. 3.Gurpinder Singh, Jaswinder Singh, “MANET: Issues and Behavior Analysis of Routing Protocols”, International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering, Volume 2, Issue 4, April 2012. 4.Harmanpreetkaur, Er. Jaswinder Singh “Performance comparison of OLSR, GRP and TORA using OPNET”, International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering, Volume 2, Issue 10, October 2012 5.PankajPalta and Sonia Goyal , “Comparison of OLSR and TORA routing protocols using OPNET Modeler” in International Journal of Engineering Research and technology Vol. 1 Issue 5, July – 2012 6.Sonia, Lokeshwar, Kuldeep Vats “Different QoS based OLSR Proactive Routing Protocol using 802.11b”, International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile Computing, Vol.3 Issue.6, June- 2014, pg. 898-906. 7.ManijehKashgari and VahideBabaiyan “Performance Evaluation of Reactive, Proactive and Hybrid Routing Protocols in MANET “ISSN: 0975-3397. Vol. 4 No. 02 February 2012.248. 8.KiranveerKaur, SurinderjitKaur, Vikramjit Singh, “Throughput Analysis of Proactive and Reactive MANET Routing Protocols”, International Journal of Emerging Research in Management &Technology, Volume-3, Issue-3, March 2014. 9.Pawani Popli1, Paru Raj 2016. Mitigation of Jamming Attack in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks”, International Journal of Innovative Research in Computer and Communication Engineering, Vol. 4, Issue 6. 10.Anupam Sharma, Deepinderjeet Kaur Dhaliwal “Simulation Based Analysis of Jamming Attack in OLSR, GRP, TORA and Improvement with PCF in TORA using OPNET tool” International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) Volume: 03 Issue: 03 | Mar-2016. 11.Anjana Tiwari, Inderjeet Kaur “Performance Evaluation of Energy Efficient forMANET Using AODV Routing Protocol” 3rd IEEE International Conference on “Computational Intelligence and Communication Technology” (IEEE-CICT 2017). Sakshi Yadav, Munesh Chandra Trivedi, Vikash Kumar Singh, Mohal L. Kolhe “Securing AODV Routing Protocol against Black hole Attack in MANET using Outlier Detection Scheme”, 2017 4th IEEE Uttar Pradesh Section International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Electronics (UPCON) GLA University, Mathura, Oct 26-28, 2017.

© 2025 International Journal of Engineering and Techniques (IJET).

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

IJET assigns a unique DOI to every accepted article via Zenodo for persistent linking and citation. Your article’s DOI: https://doi.org/{{doi}}

Open DOI About Zenodo DOI

Close