Bug 1609

Summary:	Route Request Table is needed
Product:	ns-3	Reporter:	Daniel L. <nikkipui>
Component:	dsr	Assignee:	Yufei Cheng <michaelcheng1943>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED
Severity:	normal	CC:	nimit.agrwal, tomh
Priority:	P5
Version:	ns-3-dev
Hardware:	All
OS:	All
Bug Depends on:
Bug Blocks:	1608
Attachments:	Example scenarios current patch for bugs 1608 and 1609

Description Daniel L. 2013-03-23 14:57:12 UTC

The current implementation does not have Route Request Table. When a node receives a Route Request, it simply checks if its address is already included in the sequence of addresses in the DSR header or not. If its address is not present, then the node forwards the Route Request (after appending its address to the list).

The RFC states that the node must not forward the route request packet if the (source, destination, request ID) was recently forwarded.

Comment 1 Daniel L. 2013-03-23 14:59:51 UTC

Created attachment 1539 [details]
Example scenarios

Topology

  1
 / \
0   3--4
 \ /
  2

[node 0] sends to [node 4]

Comment 2 Daniel L. 2013-03-23 15:09:25 UTC

RngRun=1 Timeline:

[node 0] broadcasts RREQ

[node 1] and [node 2] receive RREQ, schedules RREQ forward

[node 1] broadcasts RREQ (List 0->1)

[node 0] and [node 3] receive RREQ, [node 0] discards, [node 3] schedules RREQ forward

[node 3] broadcasts RREQ (List 0->1->3)

[node 1], [node 2] and [node 4] receive RREQ, [node 1] discards, [node 2] *schedules RREQ forward*, [node 4] schedules RREP

[node 2] broadcasts RREQ (List 0->2)
...
[node 2] broadcasts RREQ (List 0->1->3->2)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

RngRun=4 Timeline:

[node 0] broadcasts RREQ

[node 1] and [node 2] receives RREQ, schedules RREQ forward

[node 2] broadcasts RREQ (List 0->2)

[node 0] and [node 3] receive RREQ, [node 0] discards, [node 3] schedules RREQ forward

[node 2] broadcasts RREQ (List 0->1)

[node 0] and [node 3] receive RREQ, [node 0] discards, [node 3] *schedules RREQ forward*

[node 3] broadcasts RREQ (List 0->2->3)
...
[node 3] broadcasts RREQ (List 0->1->3)

Comment 3 Nimit Agarwal 2013-04-05 03:01:14 UTC

.(In reply to comment #0)
> The current implementation does not have Route Request Table. When a node
> receives a Route Request, it simply checks if its address is already included
> in the sequence of addresses in the DSR header or not. If its address is not
> present, then the node forwards the Route Request (after appending its address
> to the list).
> 
> The RFC states that the node must not forward the route request packet if the
> (source, destination, request ID) was recently forwarded.

I read the RFC and I think you are making a valid point here. 
I want to take this bug . But I am new to ns-3 community and thus need your help

Comment 4 Tom Henderson 2013-04-08 00:50:07 UTC

reassigning to Yufei

Comment 5 Tom Henderson 2013-04-08 00:50:49 UTC

Created attachment 1556 [details]
current patch for bugs 1608 and 1609

under testing; will commit to ns-3-dev when ready

Comment 6 Tom Henderson 2013-04-08 00:53:02 UTC

(In reply to comment #3)
> .(In reply to comment #0)
> > The current implementation does not have Route Request Table. When a node
> > receives a Route Request, it simply checks if its address is already included
> > in the sequence of addresses in the DSR header or not. If its address is not
> > present, then the node forwards the Route Request (after appending its address
> > to the list).
> > 
> > The RFC states that the node must not forward the route request packet if the
> > (source, destination, request ID) was recently forwarded.
> 
> I read the RFC and I think you are making a valid point here. 
> I want to take this bug . But I am new to ns-3 community and thus need your
> help

Nimit, thanks for volunteering, but the DSR maintainer (Yufei) has worked out a patch (attached) so we are probably going to close this bug if the patch tests OK.

Comment 7 Tom Henderson 2013-04-08 10:28:32 UTC

fix in this changeset:  854e085e1a01