Abstract
Analysis and simulation of beaconless geo-routing protocols have been traditionally conducted assuming equal communication ranges for the data and control packets. In reality, this is not true since the communication range is actually function of the packet length. Control packets are typically much shorter than data packets. As a consequence, a substantial discrepancy exists in practice between their respective communication ranges. In this paper, we devise a practical link model for computing the effective communication range. We further introduce two simple strategies for bridging the gap between the control and data packet communication ranges. Our primary objective in this paper is to construct a realistic analytical frame work describing the end-to end performance of beaconless geo-routing protocols. Two flagship protocols are selected in this paper for further investigation under the developed framework. For a better perspective, the two protocols are actually compared to a hypothetical limit case; one which offers optimal energy and latency performance. Finally, we present four different application scenarios. For each scenario, we highlight the geo-routing protocol which performs the best and discuss the reasons behind it.