Figure 4 shows the network load of AODV
protocol and G-AODV
routing protocols changes with the static time increasing.
As per the end-to-end delay, AODV
, DYMO and LAR have higher jitter value and rest are having lower.
protocol outperforms DSR on performance metrics such as higher packet delivery ratio (PDR), lower end-to-end delay in high mobility situation.
In this paper three optimization schemes of the AODV
will be presented.
They enhanced the energy efficiency of AODV
by deploying SPAN, which acted as a middleware between the data link and the network layer.
Packet delivery Ratio (PDR) (figure 3) is almost kept constant with node density in the proposed protocol, whereas in AODV
the PDR drastically reduces with the increase in the node density.
In Random waypoint mobility model AODV
produces higher packet delivery ratio and DSDV, TORA, and DSR produces lower packet delivery ratio.
In this paper, we proposed a new framework for improving network lifetime by exploiting the RPAR protocol in combination with hexagonal deployment of nodes and also to validate its performance with the QoS parameters like Residual energy and SNR by supplying video signal as input which is compressed by MPEG-4 standard and found that the proposed work is superior to the models published previously and proved that the proposed framework outperforms than DSR and AODV
In , the authors compare the performance of the proactive Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) routing protocol  and the on-demand Dynamic Source Routing (DSR)  and the AODV
routing protocols with respect to the Random Waypoint and Random Trip mobility models.
In MANET, nodes use some routing protocols such as AODV
(Ad-hoc On-Demand Distance Vector), DSR (Dynamic Source Routing).
It is shown that GP effectively detects known attacks, flooding and route disruption attacks, against AODV
2012 Performance Evolution of AODV
and DSR Routing Protocols in MANET Using NS2, International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 3(5): 202-224.