How do you compare NS-3 and OMNeT++ for wireless ad hoc network simulations?

1 NS-3 overview

NS-3 is an open-source, discrete-event network simulator that supports a wide range of wireless technologies, such as Wi-Fi, WiMAX, LTE, 5G, and Bluetooth. It also provides modules for routing, mobility, energy, and security. NS-3 is written in C++ and Python, and allows you to create and run simulations using either language or a combination of both. NS-3 has a large and active community of developers and users, and offers extensive documentation and tutorials.

2 OMNeT++ overview

OMNeT++ is also an open-source, discrete-event network simulator, but it is more general and modular than NS-3. It provides a framework for building and composing network models from reusable components, such as modules, messages, channels, and gates. OMNeT++ is written in C++, but it uses a graphical user interface (GUI) and a network description language (NED) to simplify the creation and visualization of simulations. OMNeT++ has a smaller but growing community of developers and users, and supports several extensions and libraries for wireless networks, such as INET, Veins, and MiXiM.

3 Comparison criteria

When comparing NS-3 and OMNeT++ for wireless ad hoc network simulations, you should consider criteria such as the availability and quality of wireless models and protocols, the ease of use and learning curve, the performance and scalability, the flexibility and extensibility, and the compatibility and interoperability with other tools and platforms.

4 Wireless models and protocols

Both NS-3 and OMNeT++ offer a variety of wireless models and protocols, but NS-3 has an edge in terms of the diversity and maturity of its wireless modules. NS-3 supports more wireless standards and technologies, such as LTE, 5G, Bluetooth, and ZigBee, and has more advanced models for channel propagation, interference, fading, and spectrum. OMNeT++ relies on external libraries and extensions for wireless models and protocols, which may not be as well maintained or updated as NS-3 modules. However, OMNeT++ has some advantages in terms of the realism and accuracy of its wireless models, such as the use of ray tracing for channel modeling and the integration of realistic maps and traffic data for vehicular networks.

5 Ease of use and learning curve

Both NS-3 and OMNeT++ have a steep learning curve, as they require a good knowledge of C++, network theory, and wireless concepts. However, OMNeT++ may be easier to use and learn for beginners, as it provides a GUI and a NED language that can help you create and visualize simulations without writing much code. NS-3 does not have a GUI, and requires you to write code in C++ or Python to define and run simulations. However, NS-3 may be easier to use and learn for experienced programmers, as it offers more control and flexibility over the simulation logic and parameters.

6 Performance and scalability

Both NS-3 and OMNeT++ can handle large-scale and complex wireless ad hoc network simulations, but their performance and scalability may depend on the type and size of the network, the level of detail of the models, and the hardware and software resources available. NS-3 may have better performance and scalability than OMNeT++ for some scenarios, such as high-density or heterogeneous networks, as it can leverage parallel and distributed computing techniques, such as MPI and DCE. OMNeT++ may have better performance and scalability than NS-3 for other scenarios, such as low-density or homogeneous networks, as it can optimize the simulation execution using techniques such as event aggregation and checkpointing.

7 Flexibility and extensibility

Both NS-3 and OMNeT++ are flexible and extensible simulators, as they allow you to modify existing models and protocols, or create new ones from scratch. However, OMNeT++ may have more flexibility and extensibility than NS-3, as it uses a modular and component-based architecture that makes it easier to reuse and customize network models. OMNeT++ also supports multiple inheritance and polymorphism for network components, which can enhance the code reusability and maintainability. NS-3 may have less flexibility and extensibility than OMNeT++, as it uses a hierarchical and object-oriented architecture that makes it harder to modify or extend network models. NS-3 also does not support multiple inheritance or polymorphism for network components, which can limit the code reusability and maintainability.

8 Compatibility and interoperability

Both NS-3 and OMNeT++ are compatible and interoperable with other tools and platforms, such as emulation, visualization, analysis, and testing tools. However, NS-3 may have more compatibility and interoperability than OMNeT++, as it supports more interfaces and standards for connecting with external tools and platforms, such as TCP/IP sockets, NetAnim, Wireshark, PyViz, Gnuplot, Matlab, and ns-2. OMNeT++ may have less compatibility and interoperability than NS-3, as it supports fewer interfaces and standards for connecting with external tools and platforms, such as TCP/IP sockets, Pcap, Qtenv, Scavetool, OmnetppIDE, and Castalia.

9 Here’s what else to consider

This is a space to share examples, stories, or insights that don’t fit into any of the previous sections. What else would you like to add?