The Time to Live TTL , prevents the unnecessary forwarding of packets by a node hence reduces control overhead. Since, the performance depends on the bandwidth and end-end delay, so the route cache mechanism is not implemented in this protocol. This protocol is proposed to operate in a highly dynamic mobile wireless network environment. A directed acyclic graph DAG rooted at a destination is constructed by using a height as a metric.
ABR exploits route stability as the criteria in selecting a best route. The protocol is loop-free, no deadlock condition, no duplicate of packets.
Thus, the final path from source to destination consists of only strong link. If multiple paths are available, then the destination selects one route among them. The ant colony based routing algorithm ARA : Gunes et al. ARA is designed with a primary objective to reduce the overhead without any direct link among the participants the complex optimization and collaboration problem are solved by this type of algorithm. LDR utilizes distance labels to ensure loop free path in the network rather than using sequence number as other routing algorithms.
The special unique feature about DBR 2 P is, it does not require any routing table as other routing protocols. AQOR mechanism estimates the bandwidth and end-end delay requirements and exploits these metrics to determine accurate admission control and resource reservation decision. TTL, prevents the unnecessary forwarding of packets by a node hence reduces control overhead.
The goal of DAR is to reduce the computation complexity. Each node maintains a routing table. Forward ants are used to find new route. A node selects the next hop node based on weighted probabilities. The source node uses the network information collected during route discovery process to forward the packets even if the current route is failed.
The source node computes the optimal path based on the collected network information. Then, through the optimal path data packets are forwarded.
Hint based probabilistic protocol: Beraldi et al. This protocol has lower control overheads. Preemptive routing in ad hoc networks: Goffe et al. The algorithm initiate the route discovery process to discovery an alternative route before the probable current route failure. According, to authors view many on-demand protocols are built on top of AODV, by exploiting sequence number.
Table 2 illustrates the comparative analysis of reactive routing protocols. In proactive routing, each node has one or more tables that contain the latest information of the routes to any node in the network. Route is chosen by selecting a neighbor node that would minimize the path cost.
Using a source tree structure each node defines and store the preferred route to all possible destinations. ORA approach is preferred to obtain the optimal path with respect to metric i. Cluster head is elected by using LCC. LCC algorithm is considered to be stable algorithm for cluster head election. Clustering enables an effective way for channel allocation.
Table 3 describes the comparative analysis of proactive routing protocols. Hybrid routing protocols are designed with the route discovery mechanism and the table maintenance mechanism features of reactive and proactive respectively. Hybrid protocol is suitable for ad hoc network where large numbers of nodes are present. The protocols discussed in this section overcome the drawbacks of both proactive and reactive routing protocols such as latency and overhead problems in the network.
This protocol has features of both proactive and reactive mechanism. A subnet, set of nodes are grouped together as a single unit are likely to move as a group. RDMAR consists of two main algorithms: the route discovery algorithm and route maintenance algorithm. DST proposes two different routing strategies to determine a route between a source and a destination pair namely: 1 Hybrid tree flooding HFT and 2 Distributed spanning tree DST shuttling.
In DDR the trees do not require a root node. FSR maintains the accurate distance and path quality information about the immediate neighboring nodes.
FSR are more scalable to large networks. LRHR achieves the dynamic switching between table driven and on demand routing strategies due to the frequent topology changes in the network. Mobility aware protocol synthesis for efficient routing: Bamis et al. Based upon this metric the nodes can be classified into different mobility classes in turn determines the most suitable routing techniques for a particular source to destination pair.
Table 4 illustrates the comparative analysis of hybrid routing protocols. Hierarchical routing protocols apply clustering techniques to build a hierarchy of nodes. Nodes are organized into groups called zones or clusters. Each cluster consists of one or more clusters and gateways. Hierarchical routing protocols are developed with an ability to address scalability issues in ad hoc network environment and to minimize excessive overhead.
This on the other side increases the tediousness of the routing techniques used by these protocols. Hierarchical state routing HSR : HSR is a dynamic, distributed multilevel cluster based hierarchical protocol, proposed by Iwata et al. The primary objective of clustering is to have the efficient utilization of radio channel resource and the reduction of routing overhead, Thus the network performance can be enhanced.
Dynamic address approach: Eriksson et al. Under this scheme a geographical location based dynamic address is added to the nodes permanent identifier. Cluster head is referred as backbone node BN.
Table 5 illustrates the comparative analysis of hierarchical routing protocols. The multipath routing protocols are designed with primary objectives to provide reliable communication and to ensure load balancing as well as to improve quality of service QoS of ad hoc environment. Multipath routing protocols address issues such as multiple paths discovery and maintaining these paths. The main design goal is to minimize the packet drops that occur due to the frequent route breakages.
Secure multipath routing secMR : SecMR, secure an on-demand multipath routing protocol is designed by Mavropodi et al. Many security enhancement techniques are imposed in this protocol to present security attacks of collaborating malicious nodes. A centralized Certifying Authority CA issues a certificate to the secret keys. Energy and mobility aware geographical multipath routing protocols EM-GMR : Liang and Ren [ 68 ] developed energy and mobility aware geographical multipath routing protocol, a fuzzy logic mechanism based multipath routing protocol.
According to EM-GMR, while choosing the next hop, a mobile node should consider the following constraints namely: the remaining battery capacity, mobility and distance between that next hop to the destination. A fuzzy logic system is developed and applied to the next hop selection mechanism. Thus the authors developed 27 rules for the fuzzy logic set to select the next hop node.
Braided multipath routing BMR : Ganesan et al. In BMR protocol each node discovers alternate best paths from a source to a destination during the route discovery process.
The main objective of this protocol is to establish a multiple loop free and link-disjoint paths. The advertised hop count for a node is defined as the maximum acceptable hop count for any path recorded at the node.
Disjoint multipath routing using colored trees: Ramasubramanian et al. Thus, a pair of colored trees is constructed by this process. The major objective of this protocol is to minimize the routing overhead occurred during route break recovery and to increase the scalability.
Split multipath routing SMR : Lee et al. The overhead caused by route recovery process is minimized by establishing a multiple path from source to destination. Table 6 illustrates the comparative analysis of multipath routing protocols. In multicasting routing, the data are transmitted from one source to multiple destinations. Multicast protocols can be categorized into two types, namely tree-based multicast and mesh based multicast. The tree based multicast routing protocols utilize the network resource in efficient manner.
Mesh based protocols are robust due to formation of many redundant paths between the nodes and in high packet delivery ratio. Ad hoc multicast routing protocol AMRoute : Xie et al. In ad hoc network with highly dynamic mobile nodes, the control packets overhead are high due to maintenance of multi cast tree. This protocol does not support any non on-demand components. ADMR, uses a source based forwarding trees and monitors the traffic pattern and rate of the source.
ADMR navigates back to the normal mode, when the mobility of the node is reduced. DDM has two important characteristics features: 1. Source node, encodes the address within each data packets header on an in-band fashion.
Availability ensures the survivability of network services despite of various attacks. For example, on the physical and media access control layers, an adversary could employ jamming to interfere with communication on physical channel while on network layer it could disrupt the routing protocol and continuity of services of the network.
Again, in higher levels, an adversary could bring down high- level services such as key management service, authentication service [18]. Confidentiality Confidentiality ensures that certain information is only readable or accessible by the authorized party. Basically, it protects data from passive attacks. Transmission of sensitive information such as military information requires confidentiality.
Release of such information to enemies could have devastating consequences e. Routing and packet forwarding information must also remain confidential so that the enemies could never take the advantages of identifying and locating their targets in a battlefield. With respect to the release of message contents, several levels of protection can be identified. Integrity Integrity guarantees that the authorized parties are only allowed to modify the information or messages. It also ensures that a message being transmitted is never corrupted.
As with confidentiality, integrity can apply to a stream of messages, a single message or selected fields within a message. It is concerned with assuring that a communication is authentic.
In the case of a single message, such as a warning or alarm signal, the function is to assure the recipient that the message is from the source that it claims to be from. Without authentication, an adversary could masquerade as a node, thus gaining unauthorized access to resource and sensitive information and interfering with the operations of the other nodes [18]. Nonrepudiation Nonrepudiation prevents either sender or receiver from denying a transmitted message.
Thus, when a message is sent, the receiver can prove that the message was in fact sent by the alleged sender. On the other hand, after sending a message, the sender can prove that the message was received by the alleged receiver. Nonrepudiation is useful for detection and isolation of compromised nodes. When node A receives an erroneous message from node B, nonrepudiation allows A to accuse B using this message and to convince other nodes that B is compromised.
Scalability Scalability is not directly related to security but it is very important issue that has a great impact on security services. An ad hoc network may consist of hundreds or even thousands of nodes. Security mechanisms should be scalable to handle such a large network [18]. Otherwise, the newly added node in the network can be compromised by the attacker and used for gaining unauthorized access of the whole system. It is very easy to make an island-hopping attack through one rough point in a distributed network.
Johnson and Adrian Perrig, [3]. It was developed based on the distributed Bellman Ford algorithm where each node maintains a table that contains the shortest distance and the first node on the shortest path to every other node in the network. Liu, and M. Routing [19] C. Perkins and P. Highly dynamic destination- in clustered multihop mobile wireless networks with fading sequenced distance-vector routing DSDV for mobile com- channel.
Perlman and Z. Determining the optimal con- [4] M. Corson and A. A distributed routing figuration for the zone routing protocol. IEEE Journal on algorithm for mobile wireless networks. Das, C. Perkins, and E. Performance com- [21] R. Fault-tolerant broadcast of routing information. Networks, —, Conference on Computer Communications.
Artech House, Norwood, MA, Raju and J. Efficient on-demand [6] R. Dube et al. Signal stability based adaptive routing SSA routing using source-tracing. Royer and C. A review of current routing pro- [7] Z. Haas, M.
Gerla, D. Johnson, C. Perkins, M. Steenstrup, and C. Guest editorial: Communications, 6 2 —55, April Wireless ad hoc networks. Applications of Digital Wireless eas in Communications, 17 8 —, August Technologies to Global Wireless Communications.
Prentice [8] Z. Haas and M. Schult, M. Mirhakkak, D. LaRocca, and J. Proceedings of Conference [9] A. Iwata, C. Chiang, G. Pei, M.
Gerla, and T. Scalable routing strategies for ad hoc wireless net- Sivakumar, P. Sinha, and V. IEEE [10] M. Joa-Ng and I-Tai Lu. A peer-to-peer zone-based two- Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 17 8 — level link state routing for mobile ad hoc networks. IEEE , August Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 17 8 — [28] M. Steenstrup, editor. Routing in Communications Net- , August Routing in ad hoc networks of mobile [29] C. A novel distributed routing protocol to sup- hosts.
Phoenix Conf. Computers and Communications, pages [12] G. Packet-radio routing. In book: Routing in Com- —, Steenstrup , pages —, [30] C. Associativity based routing for ad hoc mobile Lin and J. Maltz, J. Broch, J. Jetcheva, and D. The effects of on-demand behavior in routing protocols for mul- tihop wireless ad hoc networks. McDonald and T.
0コメント