# Performance Evaluation of VANET Routing Protocols in Madinah City
## 2 Related Works  
There are various research areas in the VANET domain [28]. We focus on the communication aspects of VANETs. Tremendous work regarding the communication routing protocols for VANETs is studied. The authors in [29] discuss the details of the protocol stack, application, and challenges of VANET. In [30], the authors classify the routing protocols based on the type of architecture and mode of operation. They discuss the features of the current known routing protocols and how bio-inspired protocols can improve the performance of the routing process. Several factors might affect the performance of the routing protocols. Hence, the authors conclude that depending on the VANET application, the routing protocol needs to be designed or tailored. The authors in [31] evaluate the performance of AODV and Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) [32; 33] routing protocols in VANET with dense and sparse car traffic density. The simulation was carried out in the OPNET Network Simulator [34] using IEEE 802.11b standard [35] to study the impact on VANET. The Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR), throughput, and end-to-end delay were the performance metrics used for the study, and the authors concluded that AODV was better in dense traffic density. However, the authors only considered reactive routing protocols in their analysis. Another study [36] analyzed the performance of DSR, AODV, and DSDV routing protocols in terms of PDR, average throughput, delay, and total energy under high traffic density. The authors compared the performance of the routing protocols in a highly congested area of Kharutum to find out the most suitable routing protocol. Regardless, the authors did not consider different traffic scenarios or routes that might affect the performance. In [37], the authors studied the performance of AODV, DSR, and DSDV routing protocols in terms of PDR, throughput, and Normalized Routing Load (NRL) as performance metrics. The intended map of the city of Casablanca was generated using OSM, and the mobility model was created using SUMO. Simulations were run using the Network Simulator 2 (NS-2) [38] tool with a high traffic density. The authors concluded that the AODV protocol outperforms DSR and DSDV protocols under a heavy traffic load. However, the authors did not consider different traffic scenarios and the autonomy of vehicles in VANET systems. [PERSON] et al. [39] studied several routing protocols to identify the most suitable protocol for video streaming in VANET. They classified and examined the routing protocols and discussed the pros and cons of each routing protocol. The authors evaluated the performance of AODV and DSR routing protocols in terms of throughput and delay using OPNET as the network simulation tool. Road-side Units (RSUs) [40] were used to simulate a complex traffic scenario, and the authors concluded that AODV is the best routing protocol for  
Figure 1: Vehicles in a VANET communicating when an accident occurs at the traffic light intersection. VANET. However, the authors did not consider any proactive routing protocols in their study. The researchers in [41] analyzed AODV, Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (OLSR) [42], and DSDV routing protocols in terms of PDR, goodput, routing overhead, and end-to-end delay as performance metrics under different node densities and velocities. The mobility model was generated using the BonnMotion tool [43], and the simulation was carried out in NS-3 [44]. The authors concluded that the OLSR routing protocol performs best in their scenario. Nonetheless, the authors did not consider a more realistic scenario with traffic lights, etc. Additionally, they did not consider high node density in their study. The authors in [45] present a detailed classification of the routing protocols in VANET with their benefits and drawbacks. They simulate a VANET environment of Oujda city using OSM, SUMO, and NS-3 tools to compare the topology-based and position-based routing protocols.