## 2 Related Work
### GPS-Location-Based Geocast Routing without Link Quality  
Based on the geographical information of indented vehicles for packet dispersal, a hybrid flooding technique has been proposed [18]. In dynamic vehicular settings, with the exception of those with a higher node density, a hybrid technique that was created by combining the position-aware technique with the counter-based technique improves message dependability. Two forwarding algorithms are used in CTRC-based geographic routing: area sending for hop-to-multihop information transmission and line forwarding for hop-to-hop information transmission [19]. The transmission range is decreased with range forwarding. Because of this, the impact of dynamic mobility patterns and vehicle node speeds on the ratio of data delivery is considerably diminished. Additionally, the hop count is greatly increased. It has been proposed that border node most forward within a radius can decrease end-to-end delay in VANETs [20]. The ideal route with the highest chance of connecting to the network is selected using connectivity-aware routing (CAR) [21], which is derived by a probabilistic model employing information from statistical traffic statistics. However, connectivity may be impacted by the node density calculation's error. In [22], the accuracy of CAR was significantly enhanced. Using real-time node density data produced by an on-the-fly density collection approach, the best link connection for the route is identified in this study. These studies mentioned above overlook the analysis of connectivity while taking junction nodes into account. Cache is utilized in Cache-Agent-based Geocast (CAG) routing in [23] to solve the packet reject issue. A connectivity assertion mechanism was put forth in CAG to guarantee that the cached packet would not be deleted. It is woefully inadequate to only take into account node density when evaluating connectivity in geocast routing. Because, despite the high node density in urban VANETs, communication can be disrupted in some circumstances due to the presence of traffic signals. Junction-based Geographic Distance Routing (J-GEDIR) [14] and peripheral-node-based Geographic Distance Routing (P-GEDIR) [15] are the two most popular and recent geographic routing protocols. The next hop cars are chosen by J-GEDIR in junction nodes within the transmission range. P-GEDIR chooses all border nodes as next-hop vehicles from the half-circular section moving toward the destination after vertically dividing the circular coverage zone into two half-circular portions. By reducing the forwarding region's size, these protocols can choose fewer next-hop vehicles.  
All of the aforementioned geocast routing approaches considered either flooding techniques or vehicle density for routing purposes. The flooding in multi-hop routing contribute to an increase in network overheads. In addition, these routing approaches often experienced high path disconnection, and their efficiency began to degrade with increasing vehicle speed, making them unsuitable for high traffic environments. In highway, the quality of the link is severely affected by the obstacles of the surrounding, which can include buildings, trees, and other natural features. These protocols and its alternative neglected to take this factor into account.