且使用 The ONE 模擬器以及 OpenStreetMap 地圖的繪製軟體來進行模擬實驗，最後 將本論文提出的方向性路由機制 TPRP 和四種路由機制在模擬器上進行比較。
在第四章節路由機制比較項目有 Delivery Ratio (封包到達率)、Overhead (路 由開銷)、Latency (封包延遲時間)、Relayed (重傳)、HopCount (封包跳躍次數)，
而使用方向性判斷路由機制 SD_MPAR 的 Delivery Ratio 平均約 90%，本論文提出的 方向性判斷路由機制 TPRP 的 Delivery Ratio 平均更是約 95%，說明了使用方向性判 斷是有效的提升封包到達率。在 Overhead 以及 Relayed 的數據可以看出 TPRP 都是最 低，而 Relayed 的數據和 Overhead 的數據是有相關性的，TPRP 在第一階段有街道傳 輸條件以及方向性判斷條件，第二階段也有嚴格判斷條件，所以 TPRP 的 Relayed 的 數據才會較低，影響著 TPRP 的 Overhead 也是較低。
在 Latency 數據中可以看出，有使用方向性判斷的路由機制都是較低的，可以使 封包是有效率的往目地車移動，降低 Latency。在 HopCunt 的數據中，明顯看出 TPRP 是最低的，說明了 TPRP 的方向性判斷篩選車輛是有效率的，而 VR 以及 SD_MPAR 使用 方向性判斷在 HopCunt 也是較低的，其中 VR 比較高是因為 VR 向性判斷路由機制是將 封包傳到沒有走過的路、使得可以遇到更多車輛來傳輸封包，所以 HopCunt 才會是方 向性判斷路由機制中最高的。
本論文提出的方向性路由機制 TPRP 在第一階段時是在路口判斷車輛行徑方向，
如果方向是封包最短路徑方向則代表有較快的機率可以遇到目的車，所以會複製一份 封包給此方向車輛，而當封包離目的車很短的距離時，封包距離目的車≦門檻值，TPRP 第二階段就能在所有街道進行判斷傳輸封包，可以更快速有效的使封包到達目的車。
在模擬數據比較中使用方向性判斷的路由機制都能有較好的效果，而本論文提出的路 由機制 TPRP 也是使用方向性判斷，使得路由機制 TPRP 可以有較佳的效能。第二階段 判斷篩選中，門檻值設定並沒有理論推導的過程，而是單純實驗過程中較佳的數值，
以及我們實驗中 Buffer 的空間設置較大，這是為了看出差異性，但也就無法比較我 們實驗中使用的 Buffer 管理方法，而我們路由判斷主要是在路口，當街道的路口數 量很少的話，我們的方法效能也會較差，這三點是希望在未來中可以改善的。
參考文獻
[1] H. Hartenstein and K. P. Laberteaux, “A tutorial survey on vehicular ad hoc networks,”
IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 164-171, Jun. 2008.
[2] Y. Wang and F. Li, “Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks, in Guide to Wireless Ad Hoc Networks,” Computer Communications and Networks, Springer, London, pp.
503-525, 2009.
[3] K. Fall, “A Delay-Tolerant Network Architecture for Challenged Internets,” in Proc. Of ACM SIGCOMM Conf., pp. 27-34, Aug. 2003.
[4] ZebraNet, http://www.princeton.edu/~mrm/zebranet.html.
[5] IPNSIG, http://www.ipnsig.org/.
[6] Pentland A, Fletcher R, and Hasson A, “DakNet:Rethinking connectivity in developing nations,” Computer, 37(1), pp. 78−83, 2004.
[7] D. Mohney, “Soaring Condor Relieves Headaches,” Mobile Radio Technology , June 2004. Also at http://mrtmag.com/mag/radio_soaring_condor_relieves.
[8] Haggle, http://haggleproject.org/.
[9] S. K. Tseng, B. J. Kang, K. C. Lin, and T. H. Su, “An Introduction to IEEE 1609 for Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments,” ICL Technical Journal, vol. 130, pp.
130-135, 2009.
[10] J. Blum, A. Eskandarian, and L. Hoffmman, “Challenges of inter vehicle ad hoc networks,” IEEE Trans. Intelligent Transportations Systems, vol. 5, iss. 4, pp.
347-351, Dec. 2004.
[11] K. Fall, “A Delay-Tolerant Network Architecture for Challenged Internets,” in Proc. of ACM SIGCOMM Conf., pp. 27-34, Aug. 2003.
[12] S. Jain, K. Fall, and R. Patra, “Routing in a Delay Tolerant Network,” In Proc. of the
ACM SIGCOMM, pp. 145-158, 2004.
[13] E. Spaho, L. Barolli, G. Mino, F. Xhafa, and V. Kolici, “VANET Simulators: A Survey on Mobility and Routing Protocols,” in Proc. of the International Conference on Broadband, Wireless Computing, Communication and Applications, pp. 1-10, Dec.
2011.
[14] H. J. Lim, and T. M. Chung, “A survey on privacy problems and solutions for VANET based on network model,” in Proc. of the 11th international conference on Algorithms and architectures for parallel processing, vol. 2, pp. 74-88, 2011.
[15] S. C. Lo, M. H. Chiang, J. H. Liou, and J. S. Gao, “Routing and Buffering Strategies in Delay-Tolerant Networks: Survey and Evaluation,” in Proc. the International Conference on Parallel Processing Workshops, pp. 91-100, Sept. 2011.
[16] M. Liu, Y. Yang, and Z. Qin, "A survey of routing protocols and simulations in delay-tolerant networks," in Proc. of the 6th international conference on Wireless algorithms, systems, and applications, pp. 243-253, 2011.
[17] E. P. C. Jones, L. Li, and P. A. S. Ward, “Practical routing in delay-tolerant networks,”
in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Delay-tolerant networking, pp. 237-243, Aug. 2005.
[18] A. Vahdat, D. Becker, “Epidemic Routing for Partially-Connected Ad Hoc Networks,”
Duke University, Department of Computer Science, April 2000.
[19] T. Spyropoulos, K. Psounis, C. Raghavendra, “Spray and Wait: An Efficient Routing Scheme for Intermittently Connected Mobile Networks,” in Proc. of the ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Delay-tolerant networking, 2005.
[20] T. Spyropoulos, K. Psounis, C. Raghavendra, “Spray and Focus: Efficient Mobility-Assisted Routing for Heterogeneous and Correlated Mobility,” in Proc. of the IEEE Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops, March 2007.
[21] A. Lindgren, A. Doria, O. Schelen, “Probabilistic Routing in Intermittently Connected Networks,” ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 2003.
[22] J. Burgess, B. Gallagher, D. Jensen, B. N. Levine, “MaxProp: Routing for Vehicle-Based Disruption-Tolerant Networks,” in Proc. of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, pp. 1-11, April 2006.
[23] H. Y. Huang, P. E. Luo, M. Li, D. Li, X. Li, W. Shu, M. Y. Wu, Performance Evaluation of SUVnet With Real-Time Traffic Data,” IEEE Transactions On Vehicular Technology, pp.3381-3396, November 2007.
[24] H. Kang and D. Kim, “Vector routing for delay tolerant networks,” in Proc. IEEE VTC Conf., pp. 1-5, Sep. 2008.
[25] Hyunwoo Kang and Dongkyun Kim, “HVR: History-based Vector Routing for Delay Tolerant Networks,” IEEE ICCCN 2009.
[26] L.Yin, H.Lu, Y. Cao, “Similarity Degree-based Mobile Pattern Aware Routing in DTNs*,” Chinese Journal of Electronics, January 2010.
[27] R. Sulma, A. Qaisar, M. Soperi Mohd Zahid, A. A.Hanan, “E-DROP: An Effective Drop Buffer Management Policy for DTN Routing Protocols,” International Journal of Computer Applications, January 2011.
[28] A. Lindgren and K. S. Phanse, “Evaluation of queuing policies and forwarding strategies for routing in intermittently connected networks,” in Proc. of IEEE COMSWARE, January 2006.
[29 ] TheOpportunisticNetworkEnvironmentsimularot, http://www.netlab.tkk.fi/tutkimus/dt n/theone/
[30] OpenStreetMap, http://www.openstreetmap.org/
[31] OpenStreetMap to wkt conversion-osm2wkt, http://www.tm.kit.edu/~mayer/osm2wkt/
[32] OpenJUMP Geographic Information System, http://www.openjump.org/