International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856

A Comprehensive Review of Mobile Adhoc Networks (MANETS)

Manjot Kaur1, Anand Nayyar2
1 M.Tech (CSE) Research Scholar Punjab Institute of Technology (PIT), Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar

Assistant Professor Department of Computer Applications & IT KCL Institute of Management and Technology, Jalandhar

ABSTRACT: A Mobile Adhoc Network (MANET) is a

complex self configurable wireless network consisting of mobile devices. This network allows devices to work without any fixed infrastructure, nodes in this act as router as well as host. This concept has given introduction to various new technologies have become a boon for the people since this provides tremendous support in day to day work. MANETS are providing a huge area of research which is concluded in this paper. This paper also insight the various security challenges, attacks that various protocol designers or developer face while deploying any MANET, various protocols through which MANET is deployed is also concluded in this paper. This paper also reviews the various characteristics, applications of MANETS. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of Simulation for MANETS using various commercial and open source simulation tools like NS2, OPNET, and QUALNET etc. The pros and cons of various simulation tools are also presented in this paper.

MANETs are infrastructure less, self-organizing, selfforming, self- administrating and self-healing. MANETs provide the ability for data packets to hop from one user to another effectively extends the network coverage area. It ensures that with due to frequent change in topology the communication routes are updated within fraction of seconds and accurately. In MANETS the nodes can dynamically set up the path among themselves to transmit the data packets temporarily. Nodes which lie in each others range can communicate directly while the nodes outside each others range communicate with the help of other nodes termed as rely nodes. The relay nodes are just like other nodes that forward / relay the messages from the source node to the destination node. The below figure illustrates the working of Mobile Ad Hoc Network

Keywords
MANETS, Routing Protocols, MANET Simulation, Adhoc Security, Wireless Communications.

1. INTRODUCTION
The era of new technology has led to development of various networks. The tremendous growth in technology and day to day needs for communication has experienced an unprecedented growth during the past decades. 2G cellular networks are followed by 3G (third generation, currently 3G is getting replaced by 4G) provides the users with bulk storage and high speed data rate transfers, telemedicine, location based services, global positioning system (GPS). Broadband Internet is walked behind by Wireless LAN. The increasing number of portable devices such as laptops, Pocket PCs, Tablet PCs etc are becoming heartthrob for an individuals, since these are becoming cheaper, user friendly, easily available. This rise is leading to new way out for mobile communication Mobile Ad hoc networks. Ad-hoc is a Latin word, which means "for this or for this only." Mobile ad hoc network is an autonomous system of mobile nodes connected by wireless links; each node operates as an end system and a router for all other nodes in the network. Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANETs) is a peer to peer system in which each node act as router or host. Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013 Fig 1: Pictorial Representation of MANETS Figure 1 depicts a simple ad-hoc network with 3 nodes. Node 1 and node 3 are not within range of each other however the node 2 can be used to forward packets between node 1andnode 2. The node 2 will act as a router and these three nodes together form an ad-hoc network This paper represents evolution of MANETS (section2), Routing Protocols (Section 3), Security Goals (Section 4) and Simulation of MANETS (Section 5).

2. EVOLUTION OF MANETS
Networks and the technologies are bound to connect and communicate and they continue to drive computer hardware, software, and peripherals industries. This expansion is mirrored by growth in the numbers and types of users of networks from researchers and businesses to families and individuals in everyday use. The earliest MANETs were called packet radio networks, and were sponsored by DARPA in the early 1970s which was mainly inspired by the efficiency of the packet switching technology, such as bandwidth sharing Page 196

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
and store and-forward routing, and its possible application in mobile wireless environment. In 1970s DARPA Packet Radio Network (PRNet) features distributed architecture consisting of network of broadcast radios with minimal central control a combination of Aloha and CSMA channel access protocols are used to support the dynamic sharing of the broadcast radio channel. In addition, by using multi-hop store-andforward routing techniques, the radio coverage limitation is removed, which effectively enables multi-user communication within a very large geographic area. [1] In 1980 Survivable Adaptive Radio Networks (SURAN) were developed by DARPA in 1983 to address main issues in PRNet, in the areas of network scalability, security, processing capability and energy management. The main objectives were to develop network algorithms to support a network that can scale to tens of thousands of nodes and withstand security attacks, as well as use small, low-cost, low-power radios that could support sophisticated packet radio protocols [1] This effort results in the design of Low-cost Packet Radio (LPR) technology in 1987 [2] which features a digitally controlled DS spread-spectrum radio with an integrated Intel 8086 microprocessor-based packet switch. During 1980 emergence of internet Emerging Task Force (IETF), termed the mobile adhoc networking group. To leverage the global information infrastructure into the mobile wireless environment, DoD initiated DARPA Global Mobile (GloMo) Information Systems program in 1994, which aimed to support Ethernet-type multimedia connectivity any time, anywhere among wireless devices. In the middle of 1990, with the definition of standards (e.g., IEEE 802.11[31]), commercial radio technologies have begun to appear on the market, and the wireless research community became aware of the great commercial potential and advantages of mobile ad hoc networking outside the military domain. Most of the existing ad hoc networks outside the military arena have been developed in the academic environment, but recently In 1994 Bluetooth was developed by Ericson. 2.1 CLASSIFICATION OF MANETS The MANETS can be categorized into two fields 2.1.1 Open MANET Each node in the network has its own operational goals. The nodes are free to join and leave the network. Virtual classroom session is an example of open MANET [3]. 2.1.2 Closed MANET All the nodes in the network co-operate with each other towards a common desired goal. A new node can join only after having permission from the authorized nodes already in the network. Military application is an example of closed MANET. [3]

Fig 3: CLOSED MANET TABLE 1: CHARACTERISTICS OF MANETS [4] Distributed operation: There is no background network for the central control of the network operations; the control of the network is distributed among the nodes. The nodes involved in a MANET should cooperate with each other and communicate among themselves and each node acts as a relay as needed, to implement specific functions such as routing and security Multi hop routing When a node tries to send information to other nodes which is out of its communication range, the packet should be forwarded via one or more intermediate nodes. Light-weight terminals In maximum cases, the nodes at MANET are mobile with less CPU capability, low power storage and small memory size Dynamic topology: Nodes are free to move arbitrarily with different speeds; thus, the network topology may change randomly and at unpredictable time. The nodes in the MANET dynamically establish routing among themselves as they travel around, establishing their own network

Fig 2: OPEN MANETS Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013 Page 197

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
Autonomous terminal: In MANET, each mobile node is an independent node, which could function as both a host and a router. The wireless communication medium is accessible to any entity with the appropriate equipment and adequate resources. Accordingly, access to the channel cannot be restricted Sensor networks Home applications: smart sensors and actuators embedded in consumer electronics Body area networks (BAN) Data tracking of environmental conditions, animal movements, chemical/biological detection Personal area networks (PAN), Personal networks (PN) Networks at construction sites Conferences, meeting rooms Wireless P2P networking Outdoor Internet access Robotic pets Theme parks

Shared Physical Medium

Home and enterprise

TABLE 2: APPLICATIONS OF MANETS [5] Application Possible scenarios/services Entertainment Tactical networks Military communication and operations Automated battlefields Search and rescue operations Disaster recovery Replacement of fixed infrastructure in case of environmental disasters Policing and fire fighting Supporting doctors and nurses in hospitals E-commerce: electronic payments anytime and anywhere environments Business: dynamic database access, mobile offices Vehicular services: road or accident guidance, transmission of road and weather conditions, taxi cab network, inter-vehicle networks Sports stadiums, trade fairs, shopping malls Networks of visitors at airports Follow-on services: callforwarding, mobile workspace Information services: location specific services, time dependent services Infotainment:touristic information Extending cellular network access Linking up with the Internet, intranets, etc

Emergency services

Commercial and civilian

Context aware services

Coverage extension

2.1.3 MANETs Challenges Limited bandwidth: Wireless link continue to have significantly lower capacity than infrastructured networks. In addition, the realized throughput of wireless communication after accounting for the effect of multiple access, fading, noise, and interference conditions, etc., is often much less than a radios maximum transmission rate. [6] [7] Dynamic topology: Dynamic topology membership may disturb the trust relationship among nodes. The trust may also be disturbed if some nodes are detected as compromised. Routing Overhead: In wireless adhoc networks, nodes often change their location within network. So, some stale routes are generated in the routing table which leads to unnecessary routing overhead. Hidden terminal problem: The hidden terminal problem refers to the collision of packets at a receiving node due to the simultaneous transmission of those nodes that are not within the direct transmission range of the sender, but are within the transmission range of the receiver. Packet losses due to transmission errors: Ad hoc wireless networks experiences a much higher packet loss due to factors such as increased collisions due to the presence of hidden terminals, presence of interference, uni-directional links, and frequent path breaks due to mobility of nodes. Mobility-induced route changes: The network topology in an ad hoc wireless network is highly dynamic due to the movement of nodes; hence an on-going session suffers frequent path breaks. This situation often leads to frequent route changes. Battery constraints: Devices used in these networks have restrictions on the power source in order to maintain portability, size and weight of the device. Page 198

Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
Security threats: The wireless mobile ad hoc nature of MANETs brings new security challenges to the network design. As the wireless medium is vulnerable to eavesdropping and ad hoc network functionality is established through node cooperation, mobile ad hoc networks are intrinsically exposed to numerous security attacks. Diffusion hole problem-Nodes which lie near to holes tend o consume more energy due to geographic routing as it delivers the packets along the boundaries of hole by perimeter routing when it needs to bye-pass the hole. Inter-networking: In order to have with network communications between MANETS and fixed networks is a challenge in the mobility management. Quality of Service (QoS): This is a major challenge in MANETS due to its mobility environment. An adaptive measure should be taken in concern with regard to QoS of traditional reservation of resource in order to support multi media services. Device discovery: The continuous movement of nodes in the network must be identified to have optimal route selection. destination node. The packets are forwarded to a neighbor in the receiver direction; for this reason, these routing protocols are also referred to as position-based or geographic approaches. Generally, a location service is used to solve the queries about the current position of the networks node. [12] Location-aware routing does not require routes establishment and maintenance. No routing information is stored. The use of geo-location information avoids network-wide searches, as both control and data packets are sent towards the known geographical coordinates of the destination node. Three main strategies can be identified in location-aware routing protocols [13]: greedy forwarding, directed flooding and hierarchical routing. Greedy forwarding and directed flooding algorithms forward the packet to one or more neighbors, respectively. Hierarchical routing algorithms are a combination of position based and non-position-based routing algorithms. Unicast Routing A primary goal of unicast routing protocols is the correct and efficient route establishment and maintenance between a pair of nodes, so that messages may be delivered reliably and in a timely manner.

3. ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MANETS

To cope with the self-organizing, dynamic, volatile, peerto-peer communication environment in a MANET, most of the main functionalities of the Networking protocols (i.e., network and transport protocols in the Internet architecture) need to be re-designed. [8] Adhoc routing and forwarding A preliminary classification of the routing protocols can be done via the type of cast property, i.e., whether they use a Unicast, Geocast, Multicast or Broadcast forwarding

Fig 5: Types of Routing Protocol Pro-active (Table Driven) Protocols These protocols update routing information prior to the network requirement. Hence, the route can be selected immediately but resulting in higher bandwidth and slow reaction. DSDV, OLSR, WRP, FSR are some of the proactive protocols. DSDV- Destination-Sequenced distance vector is a hopby-hop distance vector routing protocol which requires each node to periodically broadcast routing updates. Every mobile node maintains a routing table for all the possible destinations within the network and the number of hops to each and every destination. Every entry is marked by a particular sequence number as assigned by the destination node which enables the nodes to differentiate between the stale routes and fresh routes. Hence, it helps in preventing the formation of routing loops. The routing table updates are periodically Page 199

Fig 4: Routing Casting Classification Geocast forwarding is a special case of multicast that is used to deliver data packets to a group of nodes situated inside a specified geographical area. Nodes may join or leave a multicast group as desired, on the other hand, nodes can join or leave a geocast group only by entering or leaving the corresponding geographical region.[9] Location Aware Geocasting Location-aware routing protocols use, during the forwarding operations, the nodes position (i.e., geographical coordinates) provided by GPS [10], or other mechanisms. Specifically, a node selects the next hop for packets forwarding by using the physical position of its one-hop neighbors, and the physical position of the Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
transmitted throughout the network for maintaining consistency in it [14]. WRP- Wireless routing protocol uses an improved version of Bellman Ford distance vector routing algorithm. Each node in the network maintains four tables- distance table, routing table, link cost table and message retransmission list. Each entry in the routing table comprises of the distance to the destination node, predecessor and successor along the paths to the destination and a tag for state identification. Storing the information related to predecessor and successor in the routing table helps in the detection of the routing loops, hence avoiding the counting-to-infinity problem [15]. OLSR- Optimal Link State Routing protocol exchanges topology information with other nodes regularly. Each node in the network selects a set of its neighbors as the multipoint relay nodes (MPR) [14] which are responsible for forwarding of the control traffic by reducing the number of transmissions required. Nodes selected as MPR play an important role in declaring link state information periodically. FSR- Fisheye State Routing is an implicit hierarchical routing protocol which makes use of fisheye technique to reduce the size of the information required to represent graphical data. It maintains a topology map at each node [14]. A link state table is maintained at each node which keeps up-to-date information received from neighbouring nodes and periodically exchanges it with local neighbours only. Hence, there is no flooding of the link state packets. Table 3 shows the comparison of Different Routing Protocols. Reactive (On-demand) Protocols These protocols eliminate the need of any prior updating in the routing table. The route is discovered when demanded by flooding route request. Hence, resulting in less consumption of bandwidth but higher time for route discovery leading to congestion. AODV, DSR, ABR, LAR, TORA are some of the on-demand routing protocols. AODV- Ad-hoc On-demand Distance Vector routing protocol does not involve nodes that are not on active path for maintaining routes to the destination node. Different route messages like RREQ, RREP and RERR are used to discover and maintain links. It makes use of the Dest_Seq_No (destination sequence number) for creation of each new route to the destination node. A route with maximum sequence number is selected. To find a new route the source node sends RREQ message to the network till destination is reached or a node with fresh route is found. Then RREP is sent back to the source node. The nodes on active route communicate with Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013 each other by passing hello messages periodically to its immediate neighbor. If a node does not receive a reply then it deletes the node from its list and sends RERR to all the members in the active members in the route [16].

Fig 6: Working of AODV DSR- Dynamic Source Routing protocol is based on source routing in which a sender determines the exact sequence of nodes through which to propagate a packet. The header of the packet contains the list of intermediate nodes for routing. Every mobile maintains a route cache. When a node wants to send a packet to another node in the network, it checks its route cache first for a source route to the destination. When a route is found, the sender uses this route to propagate the packet else the source node will initiate the route discovery process [16].

Fig 7: Working of DSR LAR- Location aided routing protocol aims to reduce the routing overhead by the use of location information. Position information will be used by LAR for restricting the flooding to a certain area. Every node needs to know its physical location which is achieved by the Global Positioning System (GPS). Since the position information always includes a certain amount of small error, GPS is currently not capable of determining a nodes exact Page 200

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
position. Therefore, differential GPS5 is preferred to offer accuracies but it works within only a few meters [15]. SLURP- (Scalable Location Update-based Routing Protocol) SLURP, is based on a combination of (1) approximate geographical routing and (2) a simple static mapping procedure to maintain approximate location information for nodes.

TORA- temporally ordered routing algorithm is basically used for routing IP datagrams within an autonomous system. It belongs to the family of link-reversal algorithms. It is structured as a temporally ordered sequence of diffusing computations and each computation comprises of a sequence of directed link reversals. TORAs reaction to link failures involves a localized single pass of the distributed algorithm which is achieved by the use of physical or logical clock for establishing temporal order of the topological change events [14]. Table 4 highlights the comparisons of different Proactive Routing Protocols. Hybrid Protocols These protocols include the good characteristics of both the pro-active and reactive protocols. It aggregates the set of nodes into zones in the network topology. As the network is divided into zones, the proactive approach is used within each zone for maintenance of routing information. Reactive approach is used for routing packets between different zones. ZRP, ZHLS, SLURP, DST, DDR are some of the hybrid routing based protocols.

DST- routing dynamic source tracing, that considerably reduces control overhead and thereby increases the available bandwidth while conserving power at the mobile stations. DST routing also provides high user throughput and can operate efficiently in a variety of traffic situations. DST employs a source-tracing algorithm that provides loop checking of complete paths prior to an entry being made into the routing table. In addition, DST makes use of information about the length and second-to-last hop (predecessor) of the shortest path to all known destinations, thus eliminating the counting to infinity problem, such as exhibited by the distributed Bellman-Ford protocol.

ZRP- Zone Routing Protocol divides the entire network into overlapping zones of variable size. It uses the combination of the features of both pro-active and reactive protocols. The proactive protocol helps in finding zone neighbors by instantly sending HELLO messages. The reactive protocol is used for routing purpose between different zones, i.e. a route is only established if needed. Each node defines its own zone size, i.e. number of hops to zone perimeter. ZRP even helps in providing a framework for other protocols [16] ZHLS-GF- (Zone-Based Hierarchical Link State Routing Protocol with Gateway Flooding) is a hybrid routing protocol based on ZHLS. In ZHLS, all network nodes construct two routing tables, an intra-zone routing table and an inter-zone routing table, by flooding NodeLSPs within the zone and ZoneLSPs throughout the network. However, this incurs a large communication overhead in the network. In ZHLS-GF, the flooding scheme floods ZoneLSPs only to the gateway nodes of zones thus reduces the communication overhead significantly. Furthermore in ZHLS-GF, only the gateway nodes store ZoneLSPs and construct inter-zone routing tables therefore the total storage capacity required in the network is less than ZHLS. Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013

DDR- Dial on Demand Routing is a routing technique where a network connection to a remote site is established only when needed. In other words, if the router tries to send out data and the connection is off, then the router will automatically establish a connection, send the information, and close the connection when no more data needs to be sent. DDR is advantageous for companies that must pay per minute for a WAN setup, where a connection is always established. Table 5 demonstrates the comparison of different Hybrid Protocols. Multicasting Protocols Multicasting is an efficient communication service for supporting multi-point applications (e.g., software distributions, audio/video conferencing) in the Internet. In MANET, the role of multicast services is potentially even more important due the bandwidth and energy savings that can be achieved through multicast packets delivery [19]. The topology of a wireless mobile network can be very dynamic, and hence the maintenance of connected multicast routing tree may cause large overheads. To avoid this, a different approach based on meshes has been proposed. Meshes are more suitable for dynamic environments because they support more connectivity than trees, thus avoiding drawbacks of multicast trees, e.g., intermittent connectivity, traffic concentration, or frequent tree reconfiguration. Although multicast meshes perform better than multicast trees in dynamic networks, mesh mechanism is more inclined to form routing loops; in addition, approaches to mesh building based on flooding incurs excessive overhead in large networks [20]. Page 201

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
Representative mesh-based multicast routing protocols include: Core-Assisted Mesh Protocol (CAMP) [20], and the On-demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP) [21]. These protocols build routing meshes to disseminate multicast packets within groups. The difference is that ODMRP uses flooding to build the mesh, while CAMP uses one or more core nodes to assist in building the mesh, instead of flooding.
Dropping Attacks: Compromised nodes or selfish nodes can drop all packets that are not destined for them. Dropping attacks can prevent end-to-end communications between nodes. Modification Attacks: These attacks modify packets and disrupt the overall communication between network nodes. Sinkhole attacks are the example of modification attacks. Fabrication Attacks: In fabrication attack, the attacker send fake message to the neighboring nodes without receiving any related message. The following are the types of active attacks:Neighbor Attack Upon receiving a packet, an intermediate node records its ID in the packet before forwarding the packet to the next node. An attacker, however, simply forwards the packet without recording its ID in the packet to make two nodes that are not within the communication range of each other believe that they are neighbors (i.e., one-hop away from each other), resulting in a disrupted route. Rushing Attack On demand routing protocols that use route discovery process are vulnerable to this type of attack. An attacker node which receives a route request packet from the source node floods the packet quickly through out the network before other nodes which also receive the same route request packet can react. Nodes that receive the legitimate route request packet assume those packets to be the duplicates of the packet already received through the attacker node and hence discard those packets i.e. When the compromised node receives the RREQ from the source node, it floods packet to all the nodes in the network at faster rate than any other node.

4. SECURITY GOALS
In MANET, all networking functions such as routing and packet forwarding, are performed by nodes themselves in a selforganizing manner. For these reasons, securing a mobile ad -hoc network is very challenging. The goals to evaluate if mobile adhoc network is secure or not are as follows: Availability: Availability means the assets are accessible to authorized parties at appropriate times. Availability applies both to data and to services. It ensures the survivability of network service despite denial of service attack. Confidentiality: Confidentiality ensures that computer-related assets are accessed only by authorized parties. It means protection of information which is exchanging through MANET. It should be protected against any disclosure attack like eavesdropping- unauthorized reading of message. Integrity: Integrity means that assets can be modified only by authorized parties or only in authorized way. Integrity assures that a message being transferred is never corrupted. Authentication: Authentication is essentially assurance that participants in communication are authenticated and not impersonators. The recourses of network should be accessed by the authenticated nodes. Authorization: This property assigns different access rights to different types of users. For example a network management can be performed by network administrator only. Resilience to attacks: It is required to sustain the network functionalities when a portion of nodes is compromised or destroyed. Freshness: It ensures that malicious node does not resend previously captured packets

4.1 Security Threats in MANETS

MANETS are vulnerable to two types of attack: Passive attacks: A passive attack does not alter the data transmitted within the network. But it includes the unauthorized listening to the network traffic or accumulates data from it. Passive attacker does not disrupt the operation of a routing protocol but attempts to discover the important information from routed traffic. Active attacks: Active attacks are very severe attacks on the network that prevent message flow between the nodes. However active attacks can be internal or external. Active external attacks can be carried out by outside sources that do not belong to the network. Internal attacks are from malicious nodes which are part of the network, internal attacks are more severe and hard to detect than external attacks. These attacks generate unauthorized access to network that helps the attacker to make changes such as modification of packets, DoS, congestion etc. Active attack is attack when misbehaving node has to bear some energy costs in order to perform the threat Active attacks are classified into three groups :

Fig 8: Rushing Attack Blackhole Attack A blackhole attacker first needs to invade into the multicast forwarding group (e.g., by implementing rushing attack) in order to intercept data packets of the multicast session. It then drops some or all data packets it receives instead of forwarding them to the next node on the routing path. This type of attack often results in very low packet delivery ratio .For example, in Fig. 2, source node S wants to send data packets to destination node D and initiates the route discovery process. We assume that node 2 is a malicious node and it claims that it has route to the destination whenever it receives route request packets, and immediately sends the response to node S. If the response from the node 2 reaches first to node S then node S thinks that the route discovery is complete, Page 202

Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
ignores all other reply messages and begins to send data packets to node 2. As a result, all packets through the malicious node is consumed or lost. In the misrouting attack, a non-legitimate node redirects the routing message and sends data packet to the wrong destination. This type of attack is carried out by modifying the final destination address of the data packet or by forwarding a data packet to the wrong next hop in the route to the destination. Resource consumption Attack In this attack, a malicious node deliberately tries to consume the resources (e.g. battery power, bandwidth, etc.) of other nodes in the network. The attacks could be in the form of unnecessary route request control messages, very frequent generation of beacon packets, or forwarding of stale information to nodes. [11]

Fig 9: Blackhole Attack Byzantine Attack Here a compromised intermediate node or a set of compromised intermediate nodes collectively carries out attacks such as creating routing loops, forwarding packets through non-optimal paths, or selectively dropping packets, which results in disruption or degradation of the routing services within the network. It is also called as impersonation attack because the malicious node might imitate another normal node. It also sends false routing information for creating an anomaly update in the routing table. In addition to this, attacker may get unauthorized admission to resources and sensitive information.

Fig 11: Resource Consumption Attack In the above figure, where M is the malicious node, it keeps on forwarding excessive requests to the victim nodes C, D and E. This results in the decrease in battery power of the nodes. [8]. Routing table or Route cache poisoning In this attack, a malicious node sends false routing updates to other uncompromised nodes. Such an attack may result in suboptimal routing, network congestion or even make some part of the network inaccessible. Here a compromised intermediate node or a set of compromised intermediate nodes collectively carries out attacks such as creating routing loops, forwarding packets through nonoptimal paths, or selectively dropping packets, which results in disruption or degradation of the routing services within the network. It is also called as impersonation attack because the malicious node might imitate another normal node. It also sends false routing information for creating an anomaly update in the routing table. In addition to his, attacker may get unauthorized admission to resources and sensitive information. Link Withholding and Link Spoofing Attack: Link withholding attack is commonly found in OLSR protocol [11] in which a malicious node does not broadcast any information about the links to the specific nodes, resulting in the loss of link to those nodes. In link spoofing attack, a malicious node advertises false links to the non- neighbouring nodes (target nodes two hop neighbour) [11]. This results in disruption of the normal operation of the network by manipulating the data or routing traffic.

Fig 10: Byzantine attack In the above figure, the malicious node M receives route request from source node A. But, M selectively drops certain data packets or it just forwards the data packets to a non optimal route. This is how the byzantine attack is formed in MANETs. [11] Blackmail Attack This attack is applicable against routing protocols which use mechanisms for the recognition of malicious nodes and broadcast the messages which try to blacklist the offender. By adding other legitimate nodes to their blacklists, an attacker might blackmail a legitimate node. Thu the nodes can be avoided in those routes. Sybil Attack In the Sybil attack, an attacker pretends to have multiple identities. A malicious node can behave as if it were a larger number of nodes either by impersonating other nodes or simply by claiming false identities. Sybil attacks are classified into three categories: direct/indirect communication, fabricated/stolen identity, and simultaneity. Misrouting Attack Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013

Page 203

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
A jellyfish attacker first needs to intrude into the multicast forwarding group. It then delays data packets unnecessarily for some amount of time before forwarding them. This results in significantly high end-to-end delay and thus degrades the performance of real-time applications. Fig 12: Link Withholding and Link Spoofing Attack In figure 12, A is the attacker node and T is the target node. Before the attack, node A and B are selected as multipoint relay nodes for node T. In the link spoofing attack, node A advertises to have a false link to node D (two hop neighbor of node T). Hence, T will select the malicious node A as its multipoint relay node because A is in the minimum set to reach Ts two hop neighbor. Node T will start sending data through node A which will drop or withhold the routing traffic generated by node T [11]. Sinkhole Attack In sinkhole Attack, a compromised node or malicious node advertises wrong routing information to produce itself as a specific node and receives whole network traffic. After receiving whole network traffic it modifies the secret information, such as changes made to data packet or drops them to make the network complicated. A malicious node tries to attract the secure data from all neighboring nodes. In this type of attack, the malicious node advertises wrong routing information to produce itself as a specific node and receives the whole network traffic [11]. It modifies the data packets by changing the sequence number or drops them. Hence, the path through malicious node M appears to be the best available path.

5. SIMULATING MOBILE ADHOC NETWORKS

The performance analysis of MANETs the techniques that can be used are Analytical Modeling, Testbeds and Simulation/Emulation [23] Analytical methods require certain simplification to model and predict the performance. Therefore, they are inappropriate due to inherent complexity and diverse nature of MANETs. Oversimplified models may lead to inaccurate results that are not desirable. Testbed- It can be implemented and deployed on actual hardware. While testbeds might yield the most accurate results, there are several drawbacks, such as: the need to obtain hardware and the severely limited monitoring and debugging possibilities, as well as, high effort needed to create an artificial environment resembling the real application scenario. Hence, testbed implementations will generally be an option only for smaller numbers of nodes and during the later stages of the implementation phase. Emulation is hybrid approach that combines hardware and software where some components are implemented on real hardware and some are simulated. Simulation is economical because it can carry out experiments without the actual hardware. It is flexible because it can, for example, simulate a link with any bandwidth and propagation delay or a router with any queue size and queue management policy. [8] 5.1 Simulation Tools
Different types of network simulators can be categorized and explained based on some criteria such as if they are commercial or free, or if they are simple ones or complex ones. Commercial and open source simulators Some of the network simulators are commercial which means that they would not provide the source code of its software or the affiliated packages to the general users for free. All the user s have to pay to get the license to use their software or pay to order specific packages for their own specific usage requirements. The advantage is that it generally has complete and up-to-date documentations and they can be consistently maintained by some specialized staff in that company. However, the open source network simulator is disadvantageous in this aspect, and generally there are not enough specialized people working on the documentation. This problem can be serious when the different versions come with many new things and it will become difficult to trace or understand the previous codes without appropriate documentations. On the contrary, the open source network simulator has the advantage that everything is very open and everyone or organization can contribute to it and find bugs in it. The interface is also open for future improvement. It can also be very flexible and reflect the most new recent developments of

Fig 12: Sinkhole Attack Denial of Service (DoS) The prevention of authorized access to resources or the delaying of time-critical operations. A denial of service (DoS) attack is characterized by an attempt by an attacker to prevent legitimate users of a service from using the desired resources and attempts to flood a network, thereby preventing legitimate network traffic. Jelly fish (JF) attack Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013

Page 204

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
new technologies in a faster way than commercial network simulators [24].

Network simulators name

NS-2 has advantages of large number of available models, realistic mobility models, powerful and flexible scripting and simulation setup, large user community, and ongoing development. NS-2 includes an energy model and it allows user to easily generate traffic and movement patterns. It provides a set of randomized mobility model and there are several projects to bring advanced mobility models to the simulators. Disadvantages: NS-2 needs to be recompilation every time if there is a change in the user code. Simulation running will be very slow especially when the network simulated contains many nodes. 5.1.2 OMNeT++ OMNeT++ [27] [28] (Objective Modular Network Testbed in C++) is a open source, discrete event simulator tool written in C++. OMNET++ is a general-purpose simulator capable of simulating any system composed of devices interacting with each other. OMNeT++ supports wireless and mobile simulations within OMNeT++. This support is said to be fairly incomplete. OMNeT++ is for academic and educational use. OMNeT++ [28] provides a component-based, hierarchical, modular and extensible architecture. Components, or modules, are programmed in C++ and new ones are developed using the C++ class library which consists of the simulation kernel and utility classes for random number generation, statistics collection, topology discovery etc. New modules may be derived from basic object classes like module, gate or connection. A high-level language called Network Description (NED) is used to assemble individual components into larger components and models. Alongside the simulation kernel library, the simulation environment contains a Graphical Network Editor (GNED), a NED compiler, graphical (Tkenv) and command line (Cmdenv) interfaces for simulation execution, graphical tools for simulation result analysis (Plove, Scalars), a model documentation tool, utilities (random number seed generation tool, etc.), documentation and sample simulations. the simulator includes modules for Application Layer and Network Layer of OSI model as well as a Network Interface Card module which encapsulates MAC and PHY layers. OMNeT++ has extensive GUI support. Features OMNeT++ is a feature-rich and powerful simulation tool. OMNeT++ has external extensions which enable it to provide support for simulation of wireless networks. Two most known and used extensions are INET Framework and Mobility Framework for mobile ad-hoc networks. Page 205

Commercial

OPNET, QualNet

Open Source

NS2,OMNeT++, SSFNet, J-Sim, NS3

Table 6: Different types of Network Simulators

5.1.1 NS2 NS-2 [25] is a discrete event simulator which provides support for simulation of TCP, routing, and multicast protocols over wired and wireless (local and satellite) networks. It is the most popular network simulator used by researchers. The Network Simulator began as a variant of the REAL [17] network simulator in 1989 and has evolved over the past years. NS-2 is written in C++ and is based on two languages: C++ which is used to extend the simulator (i.e. to define protocol behaviors), and OTcl [26], an object-oriented extension of Tcl developed by David Wetherall as part of the VUsystem project at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which is used for scenario configuration, manipulation of existing C++ objects, periodic or triggered actions, etc. Features NS-2 supports deterministic or probabilistic packet loss in queues attached to network nodes as well as it supports deterministic and stochastic modeling of traffic distribution. NS-2 provides emulation facility; NS-2 can be connected to a real network and capture live packets just like a common node. It can also inject packets into the live network. The simulator can generate personalized trace files by allowing users to select parameters to be traced, therefore saves CPU resource. NS-2 offers a comprehensive documentation and a regularly updated manual as well as an API for C++ and OTcl classes. Other features of the simulator include models for different network architectures including Wireless LAN, MANET and satellite, built-in traffic models with support for development of new ones, plugging of new pseudorandom number generators, and net- work state estimation. Advantages and disadvantages Advantages: Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
Some features of the simulator are failure modeling at specified times at runtime for nodes and links, built-in traffic scenarios with support for custom development, creation of any form of hierarchical topology using NED language and multiple open source pseudorandom number generators some of which are quite feasible for large scale simulations. A future development is that simulation executables created by the simulator are actually standalone programs that can be run on other machines without the simulators. Advantages and Disadvantages Advantages: OMNeT++ provides a powerful GUI. This strong GUI makes the tracing and debugging much easier than using other simulator. OMNeT++ accurately models most hardware and includes the modeling of physical phenomena. Disadvantages: It does not offer a great variety of protocols, and very few have been implemented, leaving users with significant background work if they want to test their own protocol in different environments. Poor documentation and poor analysis of typical performance measures [25]. The mobility extension of the simulator fairly incomplete. [26] 5.1.3 OPNET OPNET is the registered commercial trademark and the name of product presented by OPNET Technologies incorporation. It is one of the most famous and popular commercial network simulators by the end of 2008. Because of it has been used for a long time in the industry, it become mature and has occupied a big market share. [32] OPNET software environment is specialized for network research and development. It can be flexibly used to study communication networks, devices, protocols, and applications. Because of the fact of being a commercial software provider, OPNET offers relatively much powerful visual or graphical support for the users. The graphical editor interface can be used to build network topology and entities from the application layer to the physical layer Features Fast discrete event simulation engine Lot of component library with source code Object-oriented modeling Hierarchical modeling environment Scalable wireless simulations support 32-bit and 64-bit graphical user interface Customizable wireless modeling Discrete Event, Hybrid, and Analytical simulation 32-bit and 64-bit parallel simulation kernel Grid computing support Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013 Integrated, GUI-based debugging and analysis Open interface for integrating external component libraries

Advantages and Disadvantages Advantages: Implement 3 protocols for ad hoc network ( DSR, AODV and ZRP ) Include large library of network protocols models for LAN and equipment models Stable and good technical support Disadvantages: Lack a good wireless mobility/topology model Limited protocols support Lack energy models 5.1.4 GloMoSim GloMoSim [29] is a scalable simulation environment for wireless network systems. It is being designed using the parallel discrete-event simulation capability provided by PARSEC [30]. Most network systems are currently built using a layered approach that is similar to the OSI seven layer network architecture. The plan is to build GloMoSim using a similar layered approach. Standard APIs will be used between the different simulation layers Features GlomoSim allows the simulation Scalability to simulate networks with a hundred and thousands of nodes. GloMosim Supports protocol for the wireless networks. GloMoSim provides the Random Waypoint mobility model, which may not be suitable for all types of simulations. The BonnMotion software provides a generator for other kinds of mobility models. GloMoSim is designed to be extensible, with all protocols implemented as modules in the GloMoSim library. Advantages and disadvantages Advantages: Achievement of large scalability, good mobility models (random drunken model and random distribution model), specify for wireless simulation, many ad hoc networking protocols support and analysis and visualization tools are basic but sufficient for general studies. The ability to use GloMoSim in a parallel environment distinguishes it from most other wireless network simulators.

Disadvantages: Page 206

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
Documentation is quite poor. No specific routing protocols for sensor network, No energy consumption models Still has transport layer and IP address support. Hard for user is to simulate large sensor network since no hardware environment. The main disadvantage of GloMoSim is update of this simulator is not regular. 5.1.5 EXATA/CYBER (QUALNET) SCALABLE was founded in 1999 by Dr. Rajiv Bagrodia. Various versions: QualNet, EXATA (2008) EXATA/Cyber (2010). EXATA/Cyber is a comprehensive suite of tools for simulating and emulating large wired and wireless networks. It uses a software virtual network (SVN) to digitally represent the entire network, the various protocol layers, antennas, and devices. It develops, test and evaluate, and train users on cyber warfare and network security technologies. It connects real networks, applications, and devices with EXATA/Cyber emulated network. Analyze and manage EXATA/Cyber virtual networks with popular, industrystandard, tools. Advantages Easy-to-use and clear UI Wide range of possible applications (even WiMAX MAC layer is supported) Support for multiprocessor systems and distributed computing Sophisticated animation capabilities Extensive possibilities for analyzing scenario Shipped with a lot helpful documentation and tons of example scenarios Disadvantages Difficult installation in Linux Slow java based UI Very expensive. 5.2 COMAPRISON OF SIMULATION TOOLS FOR MANETS Network simulators exhibit different features and models. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages and each is appropriate in different situations. All four simulators common feature is Discrete-Event Simulators and General Purpose Simulators. [31] Table 7 shows the comparison of different network simulators. Table 7: COMPARISON OF SIMULATION TOOLS FOR MANETS
Basis of Comparis on Emulation Support License NS-2 OMNET+ + Limited Support Open NCTUns GloMoSi m No Open User Support Scalabilit y Extendabl e Technique of Simulatio n GUI Interface Modules Availabili ty Source No C++, OTcl Wired, Wireles s, Adhoc Networ ks & WSN Excelle nt Small Yes Discret e Event Simulat ion Source Yes C++, NED Wired, Wireless & Adhoc Networks Source Yes C Wired, Wireless & Adhoc Networks Source Limited C Wired, Wireless & Adhoc Network s

Medium Large Yes Discrete Event Simulatio n

Good Medium Yes Discrete Event Simulatio n

Poor Large Yes Discrete Event Simulati on

6. CONCLUSION
MANETS are bound to flourish in the upcoming years due its infrastructure less nature. The MANETS importance and opportunity is now well recognized in both research and industrial field. The survey of various routing protocol is done as these routing protocol used in MANETS are used for achieving security and privacy. This paper also compares the routing overhead with other protocols. The Network simulators are also described in this paper and various comparison features between network simulators is also represented.

REFERENCES
[1] James A. Freebersyser, Barry Leiner, A DoD perspectiveon mobile ad hoc networks, in: Charles E. Perkins (Ed.),Ad Hoc Networking, Addison Wesley, Reading, MA,2001, pp. 2951. [2] W. Fifer, F. Bruno, The low-cost packet radio, Proceedings of the IEEE 75 (1) (1987) 3342. [3] http://eecatalog.com/military/2012/07/30/a-mobilestarbucks-hotspot-in-spots-that-arent-so-hot-andtheres[4] Martin Schutte, Detecting selfish and malicious nodes in MANETs, 2006. [5] Web site of the IEEE 802.11 WLAN: http://grouperieee.org/grups/802/11/main.html. [6] W. Stallings, Local & Metropolitan Area Networks Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1996. [7] ETSI Technical Report 101 683, V1.1.1, BroadbandLocal Area Network (HiperLAN) Type 2; System Overview Radio Access Networks (BRAN): HIgh Performance. Stallings, Local & Metropolitan Area Networks [8] Y. Bing Lin, I. Chlamtac, Wireless and Mobile Network Architectures, Wiley, New York, 2000.

Limited Support Open

Yes Open

Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013

Page 207

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
[9] Martin Mauve Jorg Widmer, Hannes Hartenstein, A networks, IEEE Network 15 (6) (2001) 3039 [10] S. Basagni, I. Chlamtac, V. Syrotiuk, B. Woodward, A distance routing effect algorithm for mobility (DREAM) in: Proceedings of The Fourth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MOBICOM _98), Dallas, TX, USA, October 2530, 1998. [11] Dhiman Deepika, Nayyar Anand, Complete Scenario of Routing Protocols, Security Leaks and Attacks in MANETs In Proceedings of the IJARCSEE Volume 3, Issue 10, October 2013 [12] E.D. Kaplan (Ed.), Understanding GPS: Principles and Applications, Artech House, Boston, MA, 1996. [13] Jorg Widmer, Martin Mauve, Hannes Hartenstein, Holl HolgerFusler, Position-based routing in ad-hoc wireless networks, in: Mohammad Ilyas (Ed.), The Handbook of Ad Hoc Wireless Networks, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2003. [14] C. M. Cordeiro and D. P. Agrawal, Mobile Ad hoc Networking, University of Cincinnati, USA. [15] S. K. Sarkar, T.G. Basavaraju, and C. Puttamadappa," Ad hoc mobile wireless networksPrinciples, Protocols and Applications," Auberach publications, London [16] D.O Jorg, Performance Comparison of MANET Routing Protocols In Different Network Sizes, Computer Networks and Distributed Systems, University of Berne, Switzerland, 2003. [17] M. Abolhasan, T. Wysocki, and E. Dutkiewicz, A review of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks, ELSEVIER Ad Hoc Networks, 2004 [18] I. Panda, A survey on routing protocol of MANET by using QoS metrics, International Journal in Computer Science and Software Engineering, vol. 2, no. 10, October 2012 [19] I. Chlamtac, O. Weinstein, The wave expansion approach to broadcasting in multi-hop radio networks, in: Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, San Francisco, CA, April1987. [20] E.L. Madruga, J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, Scalable multicasting: the core assisted mesh protocol,ACM/Kluwer Mobile Networks and Applications Journal 6 (2001) 151165. [21] Sung-Ju Lee, William Su, Mario Gerla, Wireless ad hocmulticast routing with mobility prediction, ACM/Kluwer Mobile Networks and Applications 6 (4) (2001) 351360. [22] Klaus Hermann, MESHMdla middleware for selforganization in ad hoc networks, in: Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Mobile and Distributed Computing (MDC 2003) in conjunction with ICDCS 2003, May 19,2003. [23] Abolhasan, M., Wysocki, T., and Dutkiewicz, E., A review of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks, Ad Hoc Networks 2, pp. 1-22 (2004). [24] Jianli Pan A Survey of Network Simulation Tools: Current Status and Future Development [25] TheNetworkSimulator-ns-2. http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/.. [26] OTcl.http://otcl-tclcl.sourceforge.net/otcl/. [27] OMNeT++ Community Site. http://www.omnetpp.org/. [28] Murat Miran Koksa A Survey of Network Simulators Supporting Wireless Networks [29] L. Bajaj, M. Takai, R. Ahuja, K. Tang, R. Bagrodia, and M. Gerla. "GloMoSim: A Scalable Network Simulation Environment", UCLA Computer Science Department Technical Report 990027, May 1999. [30] R. Bagrodia, R. Meyer et al., PARSEC: A Parallel Simulation Environment for Complex Systems, IEEE Computer, October 98 [31] Nayyar Anand Review and Comparison of various Simulators for Mobile Adhoc Networks (MANETS) [32] http://www.opnet.com/

S. No 1 2 3

Table 3: COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT ROUTING PROTOCOLS Parameters DSDV CGSR WRP FSR Route Selection Beacon No. of Tables Link State Yes 2 Shortest Path No 2 Shortest Path Yes 4 Shortest Path Yes 4

GSR Shortest Path Yes 4

4 5

Type of routes Topology structure

Single Flat

Single or multiple Hierarchical

Single Flat

Single or multiple Hierarchical

Single or multiple Flat

Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013

Page 208

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
6 7 8 9 Update information Frequency of update Method of Broadcasting Route Computation Route Error Mixed Full Distributed Nodes Periodic Local Distributed Route Error Mixed Limited Distributed Route Error Periodic Local Distributed Route Error Periodic Local Distributed

S. No 1

Table 4: COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT PROACTIVE PROTOCOLS Parameters AODV DSR TORA ABR Route Selection Beacon Link State Shortest Path No Shortest Path Shortest Path

SSR Shortest Path Yes

Yes

NO

Yes

Frequency of updates Type of routes Topology structure Update information Frequency of update Route Configuration

Event Driven Multiple

Event Driven Multiple

Event Driven

Event Driven

Event Driven Single

Multiple

Single

Flat

Flat

Flat

Flat

Flat

Distance Vector Mixed

Nodes Distance Periodic

Distance Vector

Distance Vector

Distance Vector Periodic

Mixed

Periodic

Method of Transmission

Erase, route, notify source Unicasting

Erase, route, notify source Unicasting

Link, Reversal, route repair

Localized Broadcast

Broadcast/unicas t

Broadcast/unicas t

Erase, route, notify source Broadcast

S. No 1

Table 5: COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT HYBIRD PROTOCOLS Parameters ZRP ZHLSDSR SLURP DST Route Selection Beacon Link State Shortest Path No Shortest Path Shortest Path

DDR Shortest Path Yes

Yes

No

No

No. of routes

Single

Multiple

Multiple

Multiple

Multiple

Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013

Page 209

International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science (IJETTCS)

Web Site: www.ijettcs.org Email: editor@ijettcs.org, editorijettcs@gmail.com Volume 2, Issue 6, November December 2013 ISSN 2278-6856
4 Route Metric Method Shortest path Shortest path MFR for interzone forwarding, DSR for intra zone routing Link, Reversal, route repair Forwarding using tree neighbors and bridges using shuttling Localized Broadcast Stable Routing

Route Maintenance

Route Configuration Strategy

Erase, route, notify source Source notification , Route repair at the point of failure

Erase, route, notify source Location Request

Source notification. location discovery

Holding time or shuttling

Erase, route, notify source Source notification and then the source initiates a new path discovery

Volume 2, Issue 6 November December 2013

Page 210