1.1 (A) Aim and Objective
1.1 (A) Aim and Objective
INTRODUCTION
1.1(a)AIM AND OBJECTIVE
Present Scenario of real life is fully or partially based on science and technology. Today,
every activity in each area such as commerce, manufacturing, transportations and education
are frequently using computer networks to the ease of share the data over different places.
Data communication and networking are changing the way to do business, for safety purpose,
traffic experience and the way of living life. Since their emergence in the 1970s, wireless
networks have become increasingly popular in the computing industry. This is particularly
true within the past decade, which provides possibility of wireless networks being adapted to
enable mobility.
Wireless communication is one of the fastest-growing technologies. The demand for
connecting devices without the use of cables is increasing everywhere. Wireless LANs can be
found on college campuses, in the office buildings, on the roads and in many public areas.
The increasing demand of wireless communication and the needs of new wireless devices
have tend to research on self-organizing healing networks without the interference of
centralized or pre-established infrastructure/authority. The networks with the absence of any
centralized infrastructure are called Ad-hoc networks. Ad-hoc networks are collection of selfgoverning mobile nodes.
The aim of this research is to investigate what is the best way to support QOSin a MANET
containing malicious nodes. To make the investigation feasible within the given time-frame,
it is assumed in this thesis that malicious nodes only perform packet forwarding attacks on
data packets. The reason for this is that data packets are not typically transmitted during the
route discovery phase of routing protocol operation; and this thesis is concerned with the
QOS that the data packets, rather than protocol control packets, receive. Research on
supporting the delivery of routing protocol control packets in the presence of attacker nodes
is a substantial research area in and of itself. The above aim is supported by the following
have objectives.
1. To investigate and analyze MANET characteristics and security threats in this
environment, and understand their implications on the provision of QOS.
2. To analyze and specify design requirements for a QOS solution to support effective and
efficient QOS provisioning (including security related requirements) in a MANET containing
malicious nodes.
3. To analyze critically existing MANET QOS solutions against the specified requirements to
identify limitations, weaknesses, and missing features in their support for QOS provisioning.
4. To design a solution to support QOS in the presence of node mobility and malicious
attacks. The design will be guided by the requirements specified in (2) and based on the
existing state-of-the-art analyzed in (3), harvesting their strengths and overcoming their
limitations and weaknesses.
5. To perform a performance evaluation of the proposed solution, and to compare its
performance with related work.
1
1.1(b) HISTORY
We can characterized the life cycle of mobile ad hoc network into first, second and third
generation. Present ad-hoc network are considered the third generation [2][3]. The first
generation of ad hoc network can be traced back to 1970s. In 1970s, these are called Packet
Radio Network (PRNET) [4]. The Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA)
initiated research of using packet- switched radio communication to provide reliable
communication between computers and urbanized PRNET. Basically PRNET uses the
combination of Areal Location of Hazardous Atmospheres (ALOHA) and Carrier Sense
Multiple Access (CSMA) for multiple access and distance vector routing [5][2][3]. The
PRNET is then evolved into the Survivable Adaptive Radio Network (SURAN) in the early
1980s. SURAN provides some benefits by improving the radio performance (making them
smaller, cheaper and power thrifty). This SURAN also provides resilience to electronic
attacks. Around the same time, United State Department of Defense (DOD) continued
funding for programs such Globe Mobile Information System (GloMo) and Near Term
Digital Radio (NTDR). GloMo make use of CSMA/CA and TDMA molds, and provides selforganizing and self-healing network (i.e. ATM over wireless, Satellite Communication
Network). The NTDR make use of clustering and link state routing and organized an ad hoc
network. NTDR is worn by US Army. This is the only real ad hoc network in use. By the
growing interest in the ad hoc networks, a various other great developments takes place in
1990s.
The functioning group of MANET is born in Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) who
worked to standardized routing protocols for MANET and gives rise to the development of
various mobile devices like PDAs , palmtops, notebooks, etc . Meanwhile the Development
of Standard IEEE 802.11 (i.e. WLANs) benefited the ad hoc network. Some other standards
are also developed that provide benefits to the MANET like Bluetooth and HIPERLAN.
9.High client thickness and extensive level of client portability. Nodal integration is
discontinued.
because of the limited wireless transmission range, the broadcast nature of the wireless
medium (e.g. hidden terminal problem), mobility-induced packet losses, and data
transmission errors. Mobile wireless networks are generally more prone to physical security
threats than are fixed-cable nets. The increased possibility of eavesdropping, spoofing, and
denial-of-service attacks should be carefully considered.
Quality of Service (QOS): Providing different quality of service levels in a constantly
changing environment will be a challenge. The inherent stochastic feature of communications
quality in a MANET makes it difficult to offer fixed guarantees on the services offered to a
device. An adaptive QOS must be implemented over the traditional resource
reservation to support the multimedia services.
Inter-networking: In addition to the communication within an ad hoc network, internetworking between MANET and fixed networks (mainly IP based) is often expected in
many cases. The coexistence of routing protocols in such a mobile device is a challenge for
the harmonious mobility management.
Multicast: Multicast is desirable to support multiparty wireless communications. Since the
multicast tree is no longer static, the multicast routing protocol must be able to cope with
mobility including multicast membership dynamics (leave and join).
IP-Layer Mobile Routing-An improved mobile routing capability at the IP layer can provide
a benefit similar to the intention of the original Internet, viz. "an interoperable
internetworking capability over a heterogeneous networking infrastructure".
Diffusion hole problem: The nodes located on boundaries of holes may suffer from
excessive energy consumption since the geographic routing tends to delivers data packets
along the hole boundaries by perimeter routing if it needs to bypass the hole. This can enlarge
the hole because of excessive energy consumption of the node boundaries nodes
Node Mobility
The mobility of nodes, which are also routers, presents a challenge to smooth network
operation. MANET nodes are typically mobile. They roam in and out of one another's
wireless transmission range. This results in a dynamically changing network topology. This
means that a path established between a source node and a destination node may be shortlived. If the underlying network is not able to respond to such dynamic topological changes in
a timely manner it may result in significant periods of service disruption, e.g., delay and lost
packets. Supporting QOS in this dynamic environment is therefore a challenging issue.
Device Heterogeneity, Limited Node Capabilities, and Limited Channel Bandwidth
Devices (nodes) participating in a MANET are typically heterogeneous and their
specifications may vary considerably. A wireless node usually has lower resource capabilities
(CPU, memory, etc.) than a desktop or laptop computer. Table 2.1 shows a comparison of
processing and memory capabilities of a selection of mobile devices including a sensor [13],
a PDA (Personal Digital Assistant) [14], a smartphone [15] and a laptop [23]. The range of
capabilities is considerable. For example, the memory available on the laptop (3072MB) is
approximately 48 times greater than that on the sensor (64KB). The specification of a device
may limit the resources it is able to dedicate to the servicing of other nodes' packet flows.
In addition to potentially limited node resources, wireless networks have lower bandwidth
availability than their wired counterparts. Bandwidth availability may often actuate in a
5
MANET. This may be due to (1) MANET-specific factors such as node mobility and (2)
general factors such as a variable network load. A QOS solution for the wireless environment
should therefore use the limited bandwidth efficiently and effectively.
Device Processor
Sensor
PDA
Smartphone
Laptop
Desktop
Speed
12 MHz
624 MHz
1 GHz
2 GHz
2.93 GHz
Available Memory
64 KB
64MB
576 MB
3072 MB
4096 MB
in battlefield scenarios. A MANET can also extend the range of the Internet by serving as an
edge network. This can enable mobile users to share and access data and resources on the
Internet, where it would have not previously been possible. Tele-medicine is an application
scenario which may benefit from MANET and Internet integration and the provision of QOS
in this context. This section presents three application scenarios disaster relief, battlefield, and
telemedicine to illustrate that providing QOS in MANETs is necessary and that security
should be considered as an integral part of QOS provisioning.
1.Disaster Relief
Hurricane Katrina wreaked havoc across the USA and Gulf Coast in 2005. Parts of the
communications infrastructure were damaged or destroyed, and this hindered the federal
response [188]. Some of those affected by the disaster established a mesh network
comprising a number of static nodes distributed over a large geographic area. This enabled
communications between rescuers, officials, and civilians [13]. Mesh networks are related to
MANETs: both are types of wireless network which may have dynamic topologies, e.g., as a
sequence of lossy links, but MANET topologies are determined ad hoc and may also be
affected by node mobility [10, 58]. Another use of ad hoc networks in disaster relief is to
provide a communications platform for rescue robots. Autonomous and semi-autonomous
rescue robots can be sent into damaged buildings which may be hazardous to rescue workers.
Rescue workers operating the robotic platform in [92] use streaming video and static images
to control a robot and to assess a disaster scenario remotely. These data are communicated to
the robot's operator over an ad hoc network. The robot also uses an array of sensors for
location tracking and obstacle detection. Thus the real-time streaming video, images, sensor
data, robot control data, and routing protocol data must co-exist within the network.
2.Battle-Field
Another use of robots and ad hoc networks is by the military on the battlefield. Robots can be
controlled remotely over a MANET by soldiers. Using a MANET as the communications
platform allows the robots to be deployed quickly and conveniently in urban environments
[20]. For example, the work in [14] shows the integration of robots into a military mission. A
robot is tele-operated by a soldier. The soldier navigates the robot using a real-time video
feed. This feed is captured by the robot and streamed over a MANET to the soldier's control
unit. The video data must co-exist in the network with the robot control data and routing
protocol control data. There is therefore a requirement to support the requirements of
different data types simultaneously. Additionally, these data must be secured so that they
cannot be accessed by an enemy.
3. Tele-Medicine
Tele-medicine is the delivery of healthcare and medical expertise using communication
technologies [15]. These technologies enable medical information to be exchanged and
medical and healthcare services to be delivered between geographically distributed entities
(individuals and health service providers) [16]. For example, through the use of
communication networks healthcare and medical treatments can be provided to patients in
remote areas, or in areas where there is a lack of medical expertise or infrastructural support
(e.g., for disaster relief). Mobile wireless devices, when connected to the Internet, can allow
access to medical expertise or expert treatment anywhere and at any time. For example, prehospital treatment can be provided or enhanced in a mobile context; and expert treatment or
diagnoses are possible while a patient is en route to a hospital in an ambulance. The
monitoring of the patient's health data (vital signs such as heart rate, blood pressure, etc.) can
be undertaken in the ambulance and transmitted in real-time to the hospital [13, 20, 22].
7
Other real-time and non-real-time medical data, such as high-quality video, still images (Xrays), and electronic patient records [19], can also be transmitted, so that experts, regardless
of their locations, can make a visual inspection of these data and provide a diagnosis prior to
the patient's arrival at the hospital. From the above it can be seen that communication
technologies can play an important role in supporting healthcare. This applies in both mobile
and static contexts as well as in locations with and without infrastructure. There exists a need
to support a wide-range of applications and provide resilient communications between
different health professionals, regardless of their locations, from first contact with a patient to
his or her arrival at and departure from a hospital.
Hybrid protocols
These types of protocols combine proactive and reactive protocols to exploit their strengths.
One approach is to divide the network into zones, and use one protocol within the zones, and
another between them.
There are several reasons why mobile traffic has grown so quickly. Firstly, mobile video,
which requires high bit rates, is considered to lead to the increase of mobile traffic. It is
reported that mobile video reached as high as 49.8% of total mobile traffic in 2010 and will
account for two thirds of mobile traffic by 2015 [19]. Moreover, Internet gaming, which
consumes, on average, 63 PB per month in 2009, also results in a growth in mobile traffic and
it is expected to achieve an annual growth of 37% in the coming five years [4]. Last but not
the least, Voice over IP (VoIP) which includes phone-based VoIP services direct from or
transported by a third party to a service provider, and software-based internet VoIP such as
Skype, leads to the expansion of mobile traffic. Many of those applications described above
are real-time applications which demand certain guarantees for performance metrics for
acceptable operation.
Those metrics specify the Quality of Service.
1.3.3 Quality of Service in Mobile Ad hoc Networks
A mobile ad hoc network can be seen as an autonomous system or a multi-hop wireless
extension to the Internet. As an autonomous system, MANET should provide its own routing
protocols and network management mechanisms. As a multi-hop wireless extension, it should
provide a flexible and seamless communication among the users or access to the Internet.
Recently, due to increasing popularity of multimedia applications and pending commercial
deployment of MANETs, the quality of service(QOS) support in MANETs has become an
important requirement. However, the QOS support in a MANET is unlike that of the wire line
network or the cellular network because wireless bandwidth is shared among neighboring
nodes and the network topology continuously changes with node mobility. This condition
requires extensive collaboration between the nodes, both to establish the route and to secure
the resources necessary to provide the QOS.
According to RFC2386 [2], QOS is defined as a set of service requirements to be met by the
network while transporting a packet stream from source to destination. Intrinsic to the notion
of QOS is an agreement or a guarantee by the network to provide a set of measurable prespecified service attributes to the user in terms of delay, jitter, available bandwidth, packet
loss, and so on. As in the Internet, mobile ad hoc network share designed to support the besteffort service with no guarantees of associated QOS.
Therefore, when a packet is lost in a mobile ad hoc network, the sender simply retransmits
the lost packet. This is an efficient method for applications requiring no QOS, but simple endto-end retransmission is inadequate for real-time applications that are sensitive to packet loss,
delay, bandwidth availability, etc. Although a lot of work has been done in supporting QOS in
the Internet, they are not readily applicable to MANET due to their resource constraints and
frequent topology changes. For example, current QOS routing algorithms for the Internet
require accurate link state and topology information, but the time-varying capacity of
wireless links and mobility make it almost impossible to provide accurate global information
in MANETs. Knowing these limitations, researchers are attempting to provide new QOS
components tailored to MANETs. This research effort includes QOS routing, QOS signaling
schemes (e.g., resource reservation), QOS-based MACs, and soon.
The QOS routing is different from the resource reservation (i.e., QOS signaling)and they
have two distinct responsibilities that can be either coupled or decoupled in QOS
architectures. The QOS routing protocol is used to find a path that meets the QOS needs, but
it is the QOS signaling that reserves, maintains, and releases resources in the network. The
QOS signaling will work better if it coordinates with QOS routing but most QOS routing
algorithms are too complicated or too expensive (i.e., substantial overhead) to be
implemented in MANET. The QOS signaling still works even without support of a QOS
10
routing but the resource reservation may fail because the selected path may not have enough
resources.
As of now, the Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) [3] and Session Initiation Protocol
(SIP) are the widely accepted standard signaling protocols for the Internet. However, they are
not directly applicable to MANETs because the signaling overhead is too high when network
topology changes. These signaling control messages will contend with data packets for the
channel and cost a large amount of bandwidth. In addition, RSVP and SIP are not adaptive
enough for MANETs because they have no mechanism to rapidly respond to the topology
change. In particular, when the network topology changes, the signaling entity that has to
manage resource reservations in the network often fails to de-allocated resources on the old
path due to lack of connectivity to the targeted nodes .
The QOS MAC protocol is an essential component in QOS support in MANETs. All upperlayer QOS components (i.e., QOS routing and QOS signaling) are dependent on the QOS
MAC and the ability to provide QOS is dependent on how well there sources are managed at
the MAC layer. Although many MAC protocols (e.g., MACA [4], MACAW [5], FAMA [6],
MACA-BI [7]) have been proposed for wireless networks, they are primarily designed to
solve medium contention, hidden/exposed terminal problems but do not incorporate the
notion of QOS. Recently, the Group Allocation Multiple Access with Packet-Sensing
(GAMA-PS) protocol [8] and the Black-Burst contention mechanism [9] have been proposed
to support QOS guarantees to real-time traffic in a distributed wireless environment.
However, their QOS support[7]is valid only in a wireless LAN environment where every host
can sense each other's transmission without any hidden terminals. In fact, all aforementioned
MAC protocols show some level of inadequacy for QOS support or multi-hop wireless
networking.
Consequently, the IEEE 802.11 is the de facto standard MAC for MANETs. Various research
studies have proven that the IEEE 802.11 is capable of supporting multi-hop wireless
networking, effectively eliminates the hidden terminals, and provides the collision avoidance
feature through its distributed control function (DCF).However, the IEEE 802.11 DCF only
supports best effort service. To incorporate the notion of QOS, several researchers have
proposed some modifications to the IEEE 802.11 DCF to support differentiated service. Note
that the signaling protocol is the control center that coordinates the behaviors of routing,
MAC, and other components (e.g., admission control, scheduling). Hence, better QOS can be
provided if the signaling component coordinates with other QOS modules. However, since
realization of QOS components such as QOS routing and QOS MAC are often prohibitively
complex and impractical in MANET environment, we need to consider implementing generic
QOS measures that are not reliant on a QOS routing or a specific MAC.
1.3.4 Congestion in Mobile Ad hoc Networks
Traditionally, congestion occurs when the total volume of traffic offered to the network or
part of the network exceeds the resource availability. Congestion typically manifests itself in
excessive end-to-end delay and packet drops due to buffer overflow. There are a variety of
conditions that can contribute to congestion and they include but are not limited to traffic
volume, the underlying network architecture, and the specification of devices in the network
(e.g., buffer space, transmission rate, processing power, etc).As in the Internet, a mobile ad
hoc network is also afflicted by diverse degrees of congestion. However, the cause and
characteristics of congestion conditions in MANET are somewhat different from that of the
Internet. This was discovered while evaluating the performance of the QOS signaling
protocol discussed in this dissertation. This observation led us to study the simulation results
and test bed experiments for the identification and the solution for the congestion conditions
11
in MANET. It was observed that the many congestion conditions in MANET are not
necessarily due to the presence of excessive workloads in the network. In fact, we can
observe congestions under all loading conditions, even in the lightly loaded networking
condition. After a careful study of this intriguing phenomenon, it was found that the route
selection convention widely implemented in MANET routing protocols is one of the key
reasons for these peculiar congestion conditions. Being a mobile network, the network
topology of a MANET may change and cause a flow to reroute multiple times during the
lifetime of an on-going session. The route discovery or rerouting procedure of many ondemand MANET routing protocols allows intermediate nodes to reply to route requests
leading to a small number of routes becoming overused throughout the network. The
mechanism to reduce the impact of flooding caused by route request packets inadvertently
fosters a small number of routes to be overused, creating a unique congestion condition in
MANET. In fact, we observe patches of heavily congested areas in MANETs that entail
packet loss, delay spikes, and unbalanced resource consumption. While some researchers
have broadly discussed congestion issues [10] in mobile ad-hoc networks, there is no
comprehensive approach to this problem. This led us to investigate a generic solution that can
be applied to all existing MANET protocols.
QOS is usually defined as a set of services that should be supported during packet
transmission. A QOS enabled protocol is expected to support several parameters in
terms of end-to-end throughput, delay, and jitter as well packet delivery ratio.
End-to-End Throughput
End-to-End throughput, , is defined as the ratio of the payload of effectively delivered
data packets, Ped, over the elapsed time, telapsed.
=Ped/telapsed
Chapter (Next) Section 1Equation Chapter (Next) Section 1
the basic unit of is b/s or B/s. Effectively delivered data packets refers to data packets that
are successfully delivered, excluding any duplicated packets.
Since the available bandwidth in a network is fairly well known, it is helpful to obtain the
actual throughput achieved which reveals the bandwidth usage efficiency. The higher the
average throughput is, the better the bandwidth is utilized.
Delay (or Latency)
Delay, , sometimes refers to as end-to-end delay, is the time between the originating node
sending a packet and that packet reaching the destination. It may vary dramatically because
of long queue time or a congested network environment.
= R t St
where Rt and St denote time at the source and destination for a given packet respectively,
assuming suitably synchronized clocks in the transmitter and receiver. In some cases,
excessive delay can render some time sensitive applications such as VoIP or online gaming
unusable.
Jitter
Jitter was originally used in signal processing where it measures the deviation of some pulses
in a digital signal and can be expressed in terms of phase, amplitude or width of the signal
pulse. In the context of mobile ad hoc networks, the term jitter is defined as the average of
difference between instantaneous delay and average delay.
Where n denotes number of effective received data packets, i is symbolizes delays for
different data unit and n represents the average delay. It is reported that jitter can degrade live
video quality nearly as much as packet loss rate.
Packet delivery ratio
The effective delivery ratio of data packets, , is defined as:
= ENDP/TNTP
where ENDP and TNTP denote number of effectively received and total data packets
respectively. Retransmission degrades the packet delivery ratio because it increases the
denominator. A high packet delivery ratio is desirable, especially in MANETs, since the
bandwidth available is limited for wireless links.
network on average but also implies no node is depleted of energy. In this study, we analyse
the performance of a path-hopping routing based on reverse AODV (R-AODV). In contrast to
the standard AODV routing, R-AODV uses a reverse request rather than AODVs unicast
route reply. R-AODV therefore builds multi-path map to the destination and then adaptively
hops available paths for communications. Hopping paths can also protect data from the
intrusion by malicious nodes. We implement the simulation model of proposed path-hopping
routing using NS-2. Simulation results show benefits of the path hopping routing on
distribution of power consumption and increased security. Increasing of control packet
overhead and slightly decreasing of data delivery rate are disadvantages of path hopping.
separating the control channel and the data channel for supporting QOS, which is borrowed
from the cellular system.
We study the protocol design issues, the performance and the trade-off to support QOS at the
MAC layer.
1.6RELATED WORK
This section describes the AODV routing protocol. Some details on the route request
mechanism and link sensing are provided, along with an example.
Introduction to AODV
AODV is an on-demand routing algorithm that determines a route only when a node wants to
send a packet to a destination. It is a relative of the Bellman-Ford distant vector algorithm,
but is adapted to work in a mobile environment. Routes are maintained as long as they are
needed by the source. AODV is capable of both unicast and multicast routing.
In AODV every node maintains a table containing information about which direction to send
the packets in order to reach the destination.
Sequence numbers, which are one of the key features of AODV, ensures the freshness of
routes.
Control Messages
Three message types are defined by AODV:
RREQ When a route is not available for the desired destination, a route request packet is
flooded throughout the network. Figure 3.3 shows the format of such a packet.
RREP It a node either is, or has, a valid route to the destination, it unicasts a route reply
message back to the source.
RERR When a path breaks, the nodes on both sides of the link issues a route error to
inform their end nodes of the link break.
Sequence numbers
AODV differs from other on-demand routing protocols in that it uses sequence numbers to
determine an up-to-date path to a destination. Every entry in the routing table is associated
with a sequence number. The sequence numbers act as a route timestamp, ensuring the route
remains up-to-date. Upon receiving a RREQ packet, an intermediate node compares its
sequence number with the sequence number in the RREQ packet. If the sequence number
already registered is greater than that in the packet, the existing route is the most up-to-date.
Counting to infinity
The use of sequence numbers for every route also helps AODV avoid the count to infinity
problem. This problem arises in situations where nodes update each other in a loop. The core
of the problem, as Tanenbaum put it, is that when X tells Y that it has a path somewhere, Y
has no way of knowing whether it itself is on the path. So if Y detects that the link to, say, Z
is down, but X says it has a valid path, Y assumes X in fact does have a path, thus registering
X as the next neighbor toward Z. If the path X assumed is valid runs through Y, X and Y will
start updating each other in a loop.
Route discovery
15
Route discovery is initiated by issuing a RREQ message. The route is established when a
RREP message is received. However, multiple RREP messages may be received, each
suggesting different routes to the destination. The source only updates its path information if
the RREP holds information about a more up-to-date route than already registered. Thus,
every incoming RREP packet is examined to determine the most current route. When a
intermediate node receives either a RREQ or a RREP packet, information about the previous
node from which the packet was received is stored. This way, next time a packet following
that route is received, the node knows which node is the next hop toward the source or
destination, depending on which end node originated the packet.
Example of a Route Discovery
In this example, node A wants to send a packet to node F. Suppose A has no table entry for F.
A then needs to discover a route to F. In our example, we assume that neither of the nodes
knows where F is.
The discovery algorithm works like this:
Node A broadcasts a special ROUTE REQUEST packet on the network. The format of
the ROUTE REQUEST (RREQ) packet is shown in figure 3.3 on the preceding page. Upon
receiving the RREQ packet, B, C and E check to see if this RREQ packet is a duplicate, and
discards it if it is. If not, they proceed to check their tables for a valid route to F. If a valid
route is found, a ROUTE REPLY (RREP) packet is sent back to the source. In the case of the
destination sequence number in the table being less than the destination sequence number in
the RREQ, the route is not considered up-to-date, and thus no RREP packet is sent. Since
they dont know where F is, they increment the RREQ packets hop count, and rebroadcast it.
In order to construct a route back to the source in case of a reply, they also make an entry in
their reverse route tables containing As address. Now, D and G receive the RREQ. These go
through the same process as B, C and E. Finally, the RREQ reaches F, which builds an RREP
packet and unicasts it back to A.
The Expanding Ring search
Since RREQ packets are flooded throughout the network, this algorithm does not scale well
to large networks. If the destination node is located relatively near the source, issuing a
RREQ packet that potentially passes through every node in the network is wasteful. The
optimization AODV uses is the expanding ring search algorithm. The source node searches
successively larger areas until the destination node is found. This is done by incrementing the
time to live(TTL) value carried in every RREQ packet for every RREQ retransmission until a
route is found thus expanding the search ring in which the source is centered.
Link Breakage
When a link breaks, a RERR message is propagated to both the end nodes. This implies that
AODV does not repair broken links locally, but rather makes the end nodes discover alternate
routes to the source. Moreover, link breakage caused by the movement of end nodes also
results in initialization of a route discovery process. When an RERR packet is received by
intermediate nodes, their cached route entries are removed.
16
CHAPTER
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
17
18
destination for which a route is supplied. The destination sequence number field indicates the
destination sequence number associated with the route. The lifetime field indicates the time
for which nodes receiving the reply consider the route to be valid. Otherwise, the
intermediate node will rebroadcast the RREQ to its neighbors and increase the hop count. The
intermediate nodes keep track of the source address and the broadcast ID and discards
redundant RREQ broadcasts. If an intermediate node cannot accommodate the RREQ, it
maintains the following information: destination IP address, source IP address, broadcast
ID, expiration time for reverse path route entry and the source node's sequence number. This
information will be necessary to implement the reverse and forward path setup that
accompanies the RREP[8].
20
FIGURE 2.9 Portion of NS2 Pseudo code for the Reverse Path Setup
own routing information concerning the destination node. The intermediate node can reply to
the RREQ when it contains a route with a destination sequence number that is greater than or
equal to the destination sequence number in the RREQ. Otherwise, the intermediate node
rebroadcasts the RREQ. The intermediate node can unicast a route reply (RREP) packet to
the neighbor from which it received the RREQ under two conditions, both of which must be
satisfied. If the intermediate node contains a current route to the destination node and the
RREQ has not been processed previously, then the RREP can be sent. Figure 2.10 is a portion
of the C++ pseudo code used for forward path setup resident within the Network Simulator 2
(NS2). The pseudo code describes the process of creating the forward path setup to ensure
that a valid route exists. The RREP contains five key pieces of information: source address,
destination address, destination sequence number, hop count and lifetime.
FIGURE 2.10 Portion of NS2 Pseudo code for the Forward Path Setup
As the RREP traverses the network back to the source, two processes occur. The intermediate
nodes along the path use the reverse path setup to forward the RREP, and forward links
(forward path setup) are established when the RREP travels along the reverse path. As the
RREP traverses intermediate nodes, each node updates its route request expiration timer
information and records the most recent destination sequence number for the destination
node. The route request expiration timer information is used to remove reverse path route
entries for intermediate nodes that are not on the path from the source to the destination node.
This parameter depends on the actual size of the MANET.
Figure 2.11 depicts the forward path setup from the source node S to the destination node D.
Intermediate nodes that are not on the path, as determined by the RREP, will automatically
timeout and delete the reverse pointers. If an intermediate node receives a RREP with a better
metric, it updates its route entry and propagates this RREP towards the source node. If an
intermediate node receives a RREP without a better metric, it suppresses the RREP and
deletes it with no further propagation. The source node can begin transmitting data once it
22
receives the first RREP. Additionally, the source node can update its routing information if it
learns of a better route at any time.
23
2.5PATH MAINTENANCE
Due to the movement of nodes throughout the network, path maintenance is used to ensure
that routes from the source to the specified destination are still valid. Prior to performing path
maintenance, AODV follows a specified criteria. The movement of a node, or nodes, not
along the active path, does not trigger path maintenance since these nodes do not affect the
routing to the specified destination. The movement of the source node does not trigger path
maintenance since the source node can reinitiate route discovery to establish a new route to
the specified destination. The movement of the specified destination or an intermediate node
does trigger path maintenance. When any of these nodes move, nodes upstream of the break
propagate unsolicited RREPs to all active upstream neighbors. The information provided
within the unsolicited RREP includes a fresh sequence number, one different from the
previously known sequence number, and a hop count of infinity. The nodes propagate the
unsolicited RREP until all the active sources receive the unsolicited RREP. The unsolicited
RREP terminates because AODV maintains only loop-free routes and the hop count of
infinity violates the number of nodes in the MANET.
new location J'. Node F, upstream of node J, notices the loss of the link and sends an
unsolicited RREP to node E. Node E forwards this unsolicited RREP to the source node S.
The source node S reinitiates route discovery and finds a new route through node K to the
destination node D. Figure 2.14 is a portion of the C++ pseudo code used for path
maintenance (unsolicited RREP) resident within NS2. The pseudo code describes the process
of broadcasting an unsolicited RREP to the upstream neighbors. In this case, the pseudo code
must also include purging the network interface queues that may have packets destined for
this broken neighbor. Once the upstream neighbors are notified, the source node is informed
of the break. If a node is the source of the packet, it will queue this packet and send a RREQ.
Otherwise, the node will drop the packet: nothing is salvaged by an intermediate node.
FIGURE 2.15 Portion of NS2 Pseudo code for Path Maintenance (unsolicited RREP)
25
26
SUMMARY
Chapter II has presented the AODV protocol and the procedures through which it establishes
a route, maintains a route, adjusts to the movement of nodes into and out of the network, and
manages the routing table and the local connectivity. AODV is a hybrid of DSR and DSDV.
From DSR, AODV incorporates a broadcast discovery mechanism, and from DSDV it
incorporates the most recent routing information between nodes.
AODV minimizes the network load for control and data traffic, is responsive to topology
changes, is capable of adjusting to changes in topology, and ensures loop-free routing even
while repairing broken links.
27
CHAPTER
FIGURE 3.1 Source node initiate Route Discovery and send RREQ packet
28
29
Lets see the same case of AODV, we have mentioned above, in figure 3.3. In RAODV,
destination does not unicast reply along pre-decided shortest reverse path D->3->2->1->S.
Rather, it floods R-RREQ to find source node S. And forwarding path to destination is built
through this R-RREQ. Following paths might be built:
S->4->5->6->D, S->11->10->9->8->7->D, and etc. Node S can choose best one of these
paths and start forwarding data packet. So RREP delivery fail problem on AODV does not
occur in this case, even though node 1 moves from transmission range.
R-RREQ message (Figure 3.4) contains following information: reply source id, reply
destination id, reply broadcast id, hop count, destination sequence number, reply time
(timestamp).
When broadcasted R-RREQ message arrives to intermediate node, it will check for
redundancy. If it already received the same message, the message is dropped, otherwise
forwards to next nodes.
30
consumption of nodes on the active path. Further-more, using a single path lets malicious
nodes to intrude secret information, violating network confidentiality. Hopping paths may
help to balance the energy consumption and distribute traffic load across network. Also,
distribution of traffic loads helps to decrease transmission delay.
In this study we propose path-hopping routing based on reverse AODV. In R-AODV, which is
an easy multipath searching method, the destination node uses re-verse RREQ to find the
source node rather than a unicast reply. It reduces path fail correction messages and also
source node builds partial or complete non-disjoint multipath from source to destination.
Hopping paths means source node sends each data packet through different paths each time,
therefore traffic is well distributed among paths and intrusion of malicious node effect to
network become weaker.
32
3.2.2Overview of PHR-AODV
Analyzing previous protocols, we can say that most of on-demand routing protocols based on
unicast route reply along a reverse path to establish a routing path and use complex methods
to build multipath. Our proposed method distinguishes due to its simplicity of building
multipath.
Purpose of our study is to distribute energy and traffic load among multi-paths, and
strengthen security of routing while decreasing possible intrusions of malicious nodes. The
proposed PHR protocol discovers routes using a reverse route discovery procedure of R-AOV
[3]. After receiving RREQ message, the destination node floods reverse request (R-RREQ) to
find the source node. When source node receives R-RREQ messages, the number of
messages becomes the path numbers.
33
The source node broadcasts the RREQ to all nodes within its transmission range. These
neighboring nodes will then pass on the RREQ to other nodes in the same manner as AODV
does [4].
The RREQ packet format is same as R-AODV RREQ packet. RREQ packet traversal is also
same as R-AODV.
When the destination node receives first route request message, it generates so called reverse
request (R-RREQ) message and broadcasts towards the source. R-RREQ message contains
following information: reply source id, reply destination id, reply broadcast id, hop count,
destination sequence number, reply time (timestamp).
35
During the communication failed paths are eliminated from the path list, and continue the
transmission with available route to destination. When no path remains in a routing table the
source node re-initiates RREQ for establishing new multipath.
Where E is average consumed energy for sending an amount of data, Dis total packets,
Txand Rx is amount of energy required to transmit and to receive a packet, Pn is number of
paths (multi-paths).
Lets assume node 1 is a malicious node. How can this influence on two protocols. Node
intrusion for AODV case will be 100% due to single path. On AODV intrusion of malicious
nodes may cause serious impairment to the security. Node intrusion for PHR will be 33%.
Therefore, we can conclude that more paths reduce malicious node intrusion to network.
Lets assume some parameters: Np is he number of nodes in routing paths, Nall is the number
of all nodes in network, M is the number of malicious nodes, S is the number of paths from a
source to a destination, Pm is probability of active malicious nodes.
(2)
Therefore, we can calculate Pi, malicious node intrusion rate, as follows
(3)
10% Pm
0.4
20% Pm
40% Pm
0.2
0.1
0
20
30
40
50
Number of Nodes
37
CHAPTER
SIMULATION
The Simulation software used in this thesis was NS2, Version 2.1b6 on a Linux platform.
Perkins and Royer's AODV NS2 implementation, originally developed in a Parallel
Simulation Environment for Complex Systems (PARSEC) environment and later converted
to work in UNIX, LINUX and Windows environments, was one of four MANET protocols
available at the time of this work. The other three MANET protocols available are DSR,
DSDV and the Temporally Ordered Routing Algorithm (TORA). The NS2 package was
chosen for this MANET protocol research due to its availability as freeware on the Internet
from the University of California (UCB) at Berkeley and because of the numerous MANET
routing protocols available for evaluation. Other popular simulation software packages used
for MANET protocol simulation include Optimum Network Performance (OPNET),
PARSEC, and the C++ programming language.
38
39
PHR-AODV
OTCL
PHR-AODV_AGENT
HdrPHR-AODV
PHR-AODV
RTable
Request
Buffer
C++
PHR-AODV
Constant
40
Nscbrgen.tcl -type cbr -nn 50 -seed 1.0 -mc 20 -rate 4.0 > cbr-50-rate4-ty
calculation for each statistic, packet fraction delay, throughput, etc., is parsed from the output
file using a perl script then dumped into NS2 to organize and produce results for analysis.
Appendix B contains an output trace file generated in the simulation.
SUMMARY
This chapter has provided an introduction of the implementation of NS2 version 2.34 and has
presented the AODV model. NS2 maintains resident features of the AODV model in C++,
and the user is able to generate a specific node movement, traffic pattern and routing protocol
in the OTCL/TCL script. The mobile nodes are modeled to work in a MANET environment
and are executed through a mobile node mechanism as depicted in Figure 4.3. The user has
the ability to change numerous parameters for the mobile node movement and the traffic
pattern. Statistics were collected on each simulation through parsing of the output file then
analyzed in NS2.
42
CHAPTER
RESULTS ANALYSIS
This section explained the simulation model and their performance metrics. This also
describes the results which are analyzed from the simulation.
100 Sec
Routing protocols
AODV, R-AODV,PHR-AODV
Area of Terrain
1500*1500
Number of nodes
20,30,40,50,60
Type of Traffic
TCP,UDP
Size of Packet
512 byte
MAC Type
IEEE 802.11
Transmission Range
250 meter
Transmission rate
4Packet/Sec
Antenna Type
Omni Antenna
Propagation Type
Queue Type
Queue Length
50
Mobility Model
43
PDR=
In our thesis we use AODV, R-AODV and PHR-AODV routing protocol and analysis the
performance of protocol and compare the result in terms of throughput, end to end delay and
packet delivery ratio. Performance analysis computes for 20,30,40,50and 60 nodes. In NS2
we perform computation using trace files and awk programs.
44
TCP- AODV
TCP-R-AODV
TCP-PHR-AODV
60
40
20
0
20 30 40 50 60
Number of Nodes
45
60
Packet Delivery Ratio(%)
40
20
0
20 30 40 50 60
Number of Nodes
TCP-AODV
TCP-R-AODV
TCP-PHR-AODV
Number of Nodes
FIGURE 5.3 End to End Delay Vs Number of Nodes (with TCP Connection)
46
UDP-AODV
UDP-R-AODV
UDP-PHR-AODV
400
End to End Delay (ms) 300
200
100
0
20 30 40 50 60
Number of Nodes
FIGURE 5.4 End to End Delay Vs Number of Nodes (with UDP Connection)
TCP-AODV
TCP-R-AODV
TCP-PHR-AODV
10000
0
2030405060
Number of Nodes
47
30000
Control Overhead packets
20000
10000
0
20 30 40 50 60
Number of Nodes
50
40
30
20
10
0
AODV
R-AODV
PHR-AODV
48
TCP
UDP
300
200
100
0
AODV
R-AODV
PHR-AODV
15000
10000
5000
0
AODV
R-AODV
PHR-AODV
49
In terms of PDR(Packet Delivery Ratio), R-AODV with TCP connection perform better than
AODV and PHR-AODV.
In terms of End to End Delay, R-AODV with TCP connection have less delay than AODV
and PHR-AODV.
In terms of Control Overhead, AODV with UDP connection have less overhead than RAODV and PHR-AODV with TCP and UDP connection.
PERFORMNCE
AODV
R-AODV
PHR-AODV
PDR
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
DELAY
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
CONTROL
LOW
HIGH
MEDIUM
METRICES
OVERHEAD
TABLE 5.2 Comparison of Routing Protocol
CHAPTER
50
REFERENCES
51
[1] C. Perkins, E. Belding-Royer Ad hoc on-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing, RFC
3561, July 2003.
[2]Chonggun Kim, ElmurodTalipov, and ByoungchulAhn, A Reverse AODV Routing
Protocol in Ad Hoc Mobile Networks , LNCS 4097, pp. 522 531, 2006.
[3] C. K.-L. Lee, X.-H.Lin, and Y.-K. Kwok, A Multipath Ad Hoc Routing Approach to
Combat Wireless Link Insecurity, Proc. ICC 2003, vol. 1, pp. 448452, May 2003.
[4] S.-J. Lee and M. Gerla, Split Multipath Routing with Maximally Disjoint Paths in Ad
HocNetworks, Proc. ICC 2001, vol. 10, pp. 32013205, June 2001.
[5] M. K. Marina and S. R. Das On-Demand Multi Path Distance Vector Routing in Ad Hoc
Networks, Proc. ICNP 2001, pp. 14 23, Nov. 2001.
[6] NS, The UCB/LBNL/VINT Network Simulator (NS), http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/,
2004.
[7]Zhi Li and Yu-Kwong Kwok, A New Multipath Routing Approach to Enhancing TCP
Security in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks in Proc. ICPPW 2005. [1] Elizabeth M. Royer and
Chai-KeongToh, "A Review of Current Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc Mobile Wireless
Networks," IEEE Personal Communications, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 46-55, April 1999.
[8] C.E. Perkins and E. M. Royer, Ad hoc on-demand distance vector routing in Proc.
WMCSA New Orleans, LA, pp. 90100, Feb. 1999.
[9] M. K. Marina and S. R. Das On-Demand Multi Path Distance Vector Routing in Ad Hoc
Networks in Proc. ICNP 2001, pp. 14 23, Nov. 2001.
[10] A. Nasipuri and S. R. Das, On-Demand Multipath Routing for Mobile Ad Hoc
Networks Proc. ICCN 1999, pp. 6470, Oct. 1999.
[11]Tarique, M., Tepe, E., SasanAdibi, and ShervinErfani, Survey of multipath routing
protocols for Mobile Ad-hoc networks, Journal of Network and Computer Applications,
32:1125-1143, 2009.
[12]Chonggun Kim, ElmurodTalipov and ByoungchulAhn, "A Reverse AODV Routing
Protocol in Ad Hoc Mobile Networks," LNCS 4097, pp. 522-531, 2006.International Journal
of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6, No. 5, October 2014.
[13]Pravanjan Das and Upena D Dalal, A Comparative Analysis of AODV and R- AODV
Routing Protocols in MANETS, International Journal of Computer Applications 72(21):1-5,
June 2013.
[14]KhafaeiTaleb and KhafaieBehzad, The Effect of Number of Hops per Path on Remind
Energy in MANETs Routing Protocols, International Journal of Computer Applications vol.
43, no. 24, pp. 23-28, April 2012.
[15]HumairaNishat, Vamsi Krishna K, D.SrinivasaRao and Shakeel Ahmed, Performance
Evaluation of On-Demand Routing Protocols AODV and Modified AODV (R-AODV) in
52
MANETS, International Journal of Distributed and Parallel Systems, vol. 2, no. 1, January
2011.
[16]Talipov, Elmurod, Donxue Jin, Jaeyoun Jung, Ilkhyu Ha, YoungJun Choi, and Chonggun
Kim. "Path hopping based on reverse AODV for security." Management of Convergence
Networks and Services, pp. 574-577. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2006.
[17] The Network Simulator NS-2, available at http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns, 2004.
[18] Anumeha and BhawnaMallick. Enhancing the Performance ofAODV Protocol,
International Journal of Advanced Technologyin Engineering and Science, vol. 3, pp. 110117, Aug. 2015.
[19] Ashraf Abu-Ein and Jihad Nader.An Enhanced AODV routing Protocol for MANETs,
International Journal of Computer Science, vol. 11, pp. 54-58, Jan. 2014.
[20]Loganathan and Ramamoorthy. Performance Analysis is Enhanced AODV Protocol for
Efficient Routing In Wireless Ad Hoc Networks, International Journal of Engineering and
Science, vol. 2, pp. 01-08, April 2013.
[21]Sreedhar, MadhusudhanaVerma and Kasiviswanath.Performance Analysis of Secure
Routing Protocols in Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks, International Journal of Computer Science
and Technology, vol. 3, pp. 693-697, March 2012.
[22]Elizabeth M. Royer and Chai-KeongToh, "A Review of Current Routing
Protocols for Ad Hoc Mobile Wireless Networks," IEEE Personal
Communications, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 46-55, April 1999.
[23] C.E. Perkins and E. M. Royer, Ad hoc on-demand distance vector
routing in Proc. WMCSA, New Orleans, LA, pp. 90100, Feb. 1999.
[24] M. K. Marina and S. R. Das On-Demand Multi Path Distance Vector
Routing in Ad Hoc Networks in Proc. ICNP 2001, pp. 14 23, Nov. 2001.
[25] A. Nasipuri and S. R. Das, On-Demand Multipath Routing for Mobile
Ad Hoc Networks Proc. ICCN 1999, pp. 6470, Oct. 1999.
[26] Tarique, M., Tepe, E., SasanAdibi, and ShervinErfani, Survey of
multipath routing protocols for Mobile Ad-hoc networks, Journal of
Network and Computer Applications, 32:1125-1143, 2009.
[27]Chonggun Kim, ElmurodTalipov and ByoungchulAhn, "A Reverse AODV
Routing Protocol in Ad Hoc Mobile Networks," LNCS 4097, pp. 522-531,
2006.International Journal of Wireless & Mobile Networks (IJWMN) Vol. 6,
No. 5, October 2014 174
[28]Pravanjan Das and Upena D Dalal, A Comparative Analysis of AODV
and R- AODV Routing Protocols in MANETS, International Journal of
Computer Applications 72(21):1-5, June 2013.
53