FANET特种通信路由协议的综合调研(续)

在过去的十年中,无人机或称无人驾驶飞机,当它们组织成Ad Hoc连接群时,显示了对完成复杂任务的有效性,从而形成了飞行自组织网(FANET)。虽然类似于移动自组织网(MANET)和车载自组织网(VANET),但是,FANET还是具有自己的特性。主要区别之一是无人机,特别是当组成FANET时,一般而言是基于任务的,它们的移动模型是由任务目的及它们计划完成任务的性质所决定。因此,FANET特种通信路由协议应考虑到部署无人机应用和服务的性质及移动模型的因素。然而,鉴于FANET的高动态拓扑和它们受到的飞行约束,设计FANET特种通信的路由协议并不是一个简单的任务。与基于拓扑的路由相比,已证明了基于位置的路由,对处理节点的高移动性具有高效和弹性。为此,本文提供了针对FANET不同类别,基于位置的路由协议的综合调查,可以总结如下:对FANET最有用的应用进行分类;陈述了支持路由协议所使用主要的移动模型;描述了FANET最流行路由协议所使用的不同路由技术;提出了对现存FANET路由协议新分类法;通过对所有引用的路由协议的综合比较研究,描述了一些流行的基于位置的路由协议,并概括了所有的处理要点;对每一个讨论的路由协议的所有缺陷进行了总结。揭示了使用策略和每个协议限制间的各种重要关系。

The last decade,UAVs or drones as referred to,have shown to be efficient in completing complex tasks when organized as Ad Hoc connected groups,thus forming a Flying Ad Hoc Network(FANET).Although similar to Mobile Ad Hoc Network(MANET) and Vehicular Ad Hoc Network(VANET),but,FANETs have their own characteristics.One of the main differences is the fact that UAVs in general,but particularly when organized are FANETs,are mission-based,and their mobility models are often dictated by the purpose of their mission and the nature of the task they plan to accomplish.Therefore,routing protocols for FANETs Particular Communication should take into consideration the nature of the applications and services that the UAVs are deployed for,and factor in the mobility models.However,designing routing protocols for FANETs Particular Communication is not an easy task given the highly dynamic topology of FANETs and the flying constraints they are subjected to.Compared to topology-based routing,position-based routing has demonstrated high efficiency and resilience to handle the high mobility of FANET nodes.To this end,in this paper,we propose a comprehensive survey of position-based routing protocols for FANETs with their various categories,it can be summarized as follows:classification of the most useful applications in FANETs;presentation of the main mobility models used by the proposed FANET routing protocols;description of the different routing techniques employed by the most popular routing protocols in FANETs;proposition of a new taxonomy of existing FANET routing protocols;depiction of some popular position-based routing protocols and recapitulation of all handled points using a comprehensive comparative study of all referenced routing protocols;summarization of all weak points distinguished in each discussed routing protocol.It reveals the various important relationships between the used strategies and limitations about each protocol.