Randomized delivery paths for secure data transmission in ad hoc network NS2 ( MANET)

1

By

Arvind Pande M.E Electronics ,MCTS

http://arvindpandeblog.blogspot.in

http://www.facebook.com/digitalpadm

Randomized Delivery Paths for Secure data Transmission in Ad-hoc Network

http://arvindpandeblog.blogspot.in/


INDEX

2 What is MANET ?

Routing protocols ?

Need of security

Randomize delivery path algorithm ?

Algorithm Comparison Technique?

Network simulator?

Implementation details & Demo ?

Experimental Results

conclusion

References

3

Infrastructure Network: A network with fixed and wired gateways. When a mobile unit goes out of range of one base station, it connects with new base station.

Infrastructure-less (ad hoc) Networks: All nodes of these networks behave as routers and take part in discovery and maintenance of routes to other nodes.

Types of Network

Infrastructure less network

The network’s wireless topology may dynamically change in an unpredictable manner since nodes are free to move.

Information is transmitted in a store-and forward manner using multi hop routing.

4

• A collection of wireless mobile hosts forming a temporary network without the aid of any established infrastructure or centralized administration.

What is MANET ?

5

M3

M2

M4

M1

M5

M6

M7

MANET: Mobile Ad hoc Network

M8

What is MANET ?

Security in mobile ad hoc networks is very important because of

6

the vulnerability of wireless links

lack of a centralized monitoring or management point.

the dynamically changing topology

NEED OF SECURITY

NEED OF SECURITY

The core functionalities of routing is packet forwarding

Received packets from node to node until they reach their final

destination, the routes selected and maintained by the routing

protocol.

can be exploited by malicious nodes to eavesdropping packets in

transit, and then analyze them to obtain confidential and sensitive

information.

7

Routing Protocol

The Routing protocols can be classified as,

Proactive:

when a packet needs to be forwarded, the route is already known.

Table Driven protocols

Reactive:

Determine a route only when there is data to send.

Source Initiated (on demand) protocols

8

Routing Protocol

9

Routing Protocol for MANET

Table-Driven/

Proactive

On-Demand-

driven/Reactive

Distance-

Vector

DSDV

RDSDV

AODV

Routing Protocol

10

Example of DSDV in operation

DESTINATION

NEXT HOP

COST

MH4 MH4 0

MH1 MH2 2

MH2 MH2 1

MH3 MH2 2

MH5 MH6 2

MH6 MH6 1

MH7 MH6 2

MH8 MH6 3

MH3

MH6 MH2

MH1 MH7

MH4

MH8

MH5

Routing Table at

M4

NEED OF SECURITY

The preventive solution to protect information is to encrypt

packets, but data encryption does not prevent malicious nodes

from eavesdropping

it require more processor time to encryption and decryption

process.

Since packets follow multi-hop routes and pass through mobile

nodes, a malicious node can participate in routing, include itself in

routes, and drop all packets it gets to forward.

11

Randomize delivery path algorithm

This protocol is based on DSDV and designed mainly to overcome

Dropping data packets attack caused by malicious nodes.

Security attacks such as DoS (Denial of service)

Resource consumption attack

12


In Proposed algorithm ,

a randomization process for packet deliveries

In this process,

It randomly picks up a neighboring node as the next hop for the current packet transmission.

The exclusion for the next hop selection avoids transmitting two consecutive packets in the

same link,

The randomized pickup prevents attackers from easily predicting routing paths for the coming

transmitted packets.

13

Routing Table

14 An Example of the Routing Table for the Node N4


15

Network Simulator -NS2

NS2 components:

Tcl (Tool command language) is open script language which is used to program NS2;

Tk is a development tool of graphical interface which can help users to develop graphical

interface in graphic environment;

OTcl is an object oriented extension based on Tcl/Tk and it has its own class hierarchy;

NS is the core of this software package, and also object-oriented simulator programming with

C++, with OTcl interpreter to be front end;

To observe and analyze the simulation results NS2 provides selectable Xgraph.

For Animation of network ,the component Tool Nam (Network animator).

16

Network Simulator -NS2

flags:

[......]: [

source node ip : port_number

destination node ip (-1 means broadcast) : port_number

ip header ttl

ip of next hop (0 means node 0 or broadcast)

]

Ex.

s 76.0 _98_ AGT --- 1812 cbr 32 [0 0 0 0] ------- [98:0 0:0 32 0]

As Application 0 (port number) on node 98 sent a CBR packet whose ID is 1812 and size is 32

bytes, at time 76.0 second, to application 0 on node 0 with TTL is 32 hops. The next hop is not

decided yet.

17

NS2 Simulation Process

18

NS USER

Extend to

add new

module

recompile NS2

program

OTCL Test

script

Run

NS2

simulatio

n

analyze

of NS2

simulation

end

modify

otcl script

modify

c++

script

Add c++ class modify object properties and

approaches associate otcl class and c++ class variable

bind

Topological definition

parameter set data flow

Analyze

Trace File

How NS works

19

20

1. Tcl script which define a sample wireless network scenario, will find out the

results in trace file for existing routing protocol DSDV which uses shortest

path routing algorithm.

2. We developed new protocol based on DSDV using randomized path delivery

algorithm and find out results for same Otcl script and collect results in trace

file.

(Trace file is a formatted textual record of the process of simulation)

3. Plot & compare graphs for PDR and avg delay ratio, jitter(the variation of

single-trip times between the transmitted packets) using xgraph or

Microsoft excel tool.

NS2 Simulation Process

Algorithm comparison techniques

We will compare algorithms on following performance metrics

1. Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR): It shows how successful a protocol is in delivering

packets from source to destination.

PDR[%] = 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑑𝑁1 𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠

𝑆𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠𝑛1

𝑥 100

2. Average End to End delay: This is the average end to end delay of all successfully

transmitted data packets from source to destination.

Avg_end_end_delay = (𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒−𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒)𝑛𝑖

𝑃𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑒𝑡𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑑𝑛1

The calculated result will be in the form of trace file and will be plotted with the help

of Microsoft Excel 2007 tool or Xgraph.

21

We find out experimental results on above performance metric in following scenario as

for Random position and random node movement.

We had written tcl script for topologies with 10 to 50 nodes and performance is measured

for DSDV and RDSDV protocol

Results of performance metric are plotted and compared using xgraph tool.

Because of path variation, jitter value is larger for this protocol as compared DSDV

protocol and as increases as number of nodes increases.

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

22

Network Simulation Parameter

Sr.no Parameters Values

1 Network interface/channel type Wireless

2 Radio-propagation model TwoRayGround

3 Network interface type Phy/ WirelessPhy

4 packet size 512 bytes

5 Interface queue type Queue/DropTail / PriQueue

6 Max packet in IFQ 50

7 Number of mobile Nodes 10, 30, 50, 70, 90, 110

8 Simulation area size 500 x 500 , 1000 x 1000

9 Simulation duration 150 second

10 Transmission range of each node 250 m

11 Mobility model Random

12 Routing protocols RDSDV ,DSDV

23

24

For Recent Technology , inventions , innovation To Download slides, programs, tutorials , assignments and more visit http://arvindpandeblog.blogspot.in http://www.facebook.com/digitalpadm

continue watching..



Scenario 1 Network dimension : 500 x 500 m JITTER VARIATION

Number of

Nodes

Jitter of DSDV

Protocol

Jitter of Randomized

DSDV

30 0.001883 0.002108

50 0.002121 0.004522

70 0.002130 0.003985

90 0.001875 0.005734

110 0.002143 0.003625

0

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.01

0.012

30 50 70 90 110

JITT

ER

VA

LUES

NUMBER OF NODES

Jitter variation

Jitter of DSDV Protocol

Jitter of Randomized DSDV

Above figure shows the jitter variation for network size 500 X 500 m for nodes 30 to 110.

It shows the jitter values of RDSDV protocol are more than the values of DSDV. Hence the path variation more than existing DSDV protocol.

25

Scenario 1 Network dimension : 500 x 500 m PDR VARIATION

Number of

Nodes

PDR of DSDV

Protocol

PDR of Randomized

DSDV

30 99.79 99.84

50 99.38 99.65

70 99.32 99.70

90 99.51 99.91

110 99.35 99.85

Above figure shows the PDR variation for network size 500 X 500 m for nodes 30 to 110.

These results shows the PDR values of RDSDV protocol are more than the values of DSDV. Hence the PDR variation more than existing DSDV protocol.

98

98.5

99

99.5

100

30 50 70 90 110PD

R V

AR

IATI

ON

%

NUMBER OF NODES

PDR of DSDV Protocol

PDR of Randomized DSDV

26

Scenario 1 Network dimension : 500 x 500 m AVERAGE END-END DELAY VARIATION

Number of

Nodes

AVERAGE

DELAYOF DSDV

Protocol

AVERAGE DELAYof

Randomized DSDV

30 140.14 112.81

50 123.88 126.11

70 152.92 150.33

90 132.98 116.54

110 143.35 118.68

Above figure shows the average end to end delay variation for network size 500 X 500 m for nodes 30 to 110.

These results shows the average end to end delay values of RDSDV protocol are less than the values of DSDV. Hence the average end to end delay variation of RDSDV protocol is

less than existing DSDV protocol

0

50

100

150

200

30 50 70 90 110

Average End to end delay variation (ms)

AVERAGE DELAY OF DSDV Protocol

AVERAGE DELAY of Randomized DSDV

27

Scenario 2 Network Dimension : 800 x 800 m JITTER VARIATION

Number of

Nodes

Jitter of DSDV

Protocol


DSDV 30 0.0022 0.003835

50 0.0031 0.005409

70 0.0022 0.006259

90 0.0012 0.003178

110 0.0024 0.010487


These results shows the jitter values of RDSDV protocol are more than the values of DSDV. Hence the path variation of RDSDV protocol is more than existing DSDV protocol.

0

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.01

0.012

30 50 70 90 110

JIT

TER

VA

LUES

NUMBER OF NODES

Jitter variation

Jitter of DSDV Protocol

Jitter of Randomized DSDV

28


Number of

Nodes

PDR of DSDV

Protocol

PDR of Randomized

DSDV

30 99.22 99.72

50 98.02 99.8

70 97.91 99.38

90 95.68 97.12

110 98.66 98.55


These results shows the PDR values of RDSDV protocol are more than the values of DSDV. Hence the PDR variation of RDSDV protocol is more than existing DSDV protocol for

nodes 50,70 and 90 and nearly equal for 30 and 110 nodes.

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

30 50 70 90 110

PD

R V

AR

IATI

ON

%

NUMBER OF NODES

PDR Variation %

PDR of DSDV Protocol PDR of Randomized DSDV

29


Number of

Nodes

AVERAGE

DELAYOF DSDV

Protocol

AVERAGE DELAY of

Randomized DSDV

30 138.24 129.41

50 163.12 127.03

70 158.24 152.17

90 191.92 192.92

110 144.05 133.78


. These results shows the average end to end delay values of RDSDV protocol are less than the values of DSDV for 30 to 90 nodes but delay is more for nodes 110.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

30 50 70 90 110

Average End to end delay variation



30


Number of

Nodes

Jitter of DSDV

Protocol


DSDV

30 0.002867 0.002997

50 0.002820 0.003928

70 0.002720 0.004069

90 0.003141 0.003969

110 0.003462 0.0168


.These results shows the jitter values of RDSDV protocol are more than the values of DSDV. Hence the path variation of RDSDV protocol is more than existing DSDV protocol

0

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.01

0.012

0.014

0.016

0.018

30 50 70 90 110

JIT

TER

VA

LUES

NUMBER OF NODES

Jitter variation

Jitter of DSDV Protocol Jitter of Randomized DSDV

31


Number of

Nodes

PDR of DSDV

Protocol

PDR of Randomized

DSDV

30 98.82 99.39

50 99.47 98.17

70 99.91 99.91

90 97.10 96.12

110 97.90 88.84



nodes 30.for nodes 50 and 70 it is equal and 90 and less for nodes 90 ,110 nodes.

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

30 50 70 90 110

PD

R V

AR

IATI

ON

%

NUMBER OF NODES

PDR Variation %


32


Number of

Nodes

AVERAGE

DELAYOF DSDV

Protocol

AVERAGE DELAY of

Randomized DSDV

30 172.91 151.30

50 203.81 181.16

70 153.44 183.93

90 191.92 170.56

110 267.16 358.27


These results shows the average end to end delay values of RDSDV protocol are less than the values of DSDV for 30 to 90 nodes but delay is more for nodes 110

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

30 50 70 90 110

Average end to end delay variation



33

Scenario 4 Network dimension : 1000 x 1000 m SPEED 10 m/s JITTER VARIATION

Number of

Nodes

Jitter of DSDV

Protocol


DSDV

30 0.002867 0.002997

50 0.002820 0.003928

70 0.002720 0.004069

90 0.003141 0.003969

110 0.003462 0.0168

Above figure shows the jitter variation for speed 10 m/s for nodes 30 to 110.


0

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.01

0.012

0.014

0.016

0.018

30 50 70 90 110

JIT

TER

VA

LUES

NUMBER OF NODES

Jitter Variation



34

Scenario 4 Network dimension : 1000 x 1000 m speed 10 m/s PDR VARIATION

Number of

Nodes

PDR of DSDV

Protocol

PDR of Randomized

DSDV

30 98.84 99.19

50 98.15 98.88

70 99.01 99.12

90 98.22 98.56

110 99.85 99.53

Above figure shows the PDR variation for speed 10 m/s for nodes 30 to 110.


nodes 30 and 90. Nodes 110 it is slightly more than less than DSDV protocol.

97

97.5

98

98.5

99

99.5

100

30 50 70 90 110

PD

R V

AR

IATI

ON

%

NUMBER OF NODES

PDR Variation %



35

Scenario 4 Network dimension : 1000 x 1000 m speed 10 m/s AVERAGE END-END DELAY VARIATION

Number of

Nodes

Average Delay of

DSDV Protocol

Average Delay of

Randomized DSDV

30 140.14 112.81

50 132.88 126.11

70 158.92 150.33

90 132.98 116.54

110 143.35 118.68


These results shows the average end to end delay values of RDSDV protocol are less than the values of DSDV for 30 to 110 nodes.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

30 50 70 90 110

Average End to end delay variation %



Scenario 3 Network dimension : 1000 x 1000 m AVG END END VARIATION

36


Number of

Nodes

Jitter of DSDV

Protocol


DSDV

30 0.003614 0.003937

50 0.00375 0.004937

70 0.003716 0.00442

90 0.002614 0.004682

110 0.00398 0.010232



0

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.01

0.012

30 50 70 90 110

JIT

TER

VA

LUES

NUMBER OF NODES

Jitter variation %



37


Number of

Nodes

PDR of DSDV

Protocol

PDR of Randomized

DSDV

30 98.07 98.16

50 99.21 99.74

70 98.89 99.32

90 98.29 99.51

110 98.15 99.35



nodes 50 and 110. For Nodes 30 it is equal to DSDV protocol.

97

97.5

98

98.5

99

99.5

100

30 50 70 90 110

PD

R V

AR

IATI

ON

%

NUMBER OF NODES

PDR variation %



38


Number of

Nodes

Average Delay of

DSDV Protocol

Average Delay of

Randomized DSDV

30 172.91 151.30

50 203.81 181.16

70 153.44 183.93

90 191.92 170.56

110 267.16 358.27

Above figure shows the average end to end delay variation for speed 20 m/s for nodes 30 to 110.

These results shows the average end to end delay values of RDSDV protocol are less than the values of DSDV for 30 to 90 nodes. But for nodes 110 it s more than DSDV.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

30 50 70 90 110

Average End to end delay variation %



Scenario 5 Network dimension : 1000 x 1000 m AVG END END VARIATION

39


Number of

Nodes

Jitter of DSDV

Protocol


DSDV

30 0.004014 0.004251

50 0.00315 0.006272

70 0.003636 0.00442

90 0.001902 0.002182

110 0.00338 0.011232



0

0.002

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.01

0.012

30 50 70 90 110

JIT

TER

VA

LUES

NUMBER OF NODES

Jitter variation



40


Number of

Nodes

PDR of DSDV

Protocol

PDR of Randomized

DSDV

30 98.82 99.39

50 99.47 98.17

70 99.91 99.91

90 97.10 96.12

110 97.90 88.84



nodes 30 70, 110. For Nodes 50 and 90 it is equal to DSDV protocol.

84

86

88

90

92

94

96

98

100

102

30 50 70 90 110

PD

R V

AR

IATI

ON

%

NUMBER OF NODES

PDR Variation %



41


Number of

Nodes

Average Delay of

DSDV Protocol

Average Delay Of

Randomized DSDV

30 135.63 126.81

50 139.88 136.11

70 142.16 139.33

90 129.18 166.54

110 138.52 211.68

Above figure shows the average end to end delay variation for speed 30 m/s for nodes 30 to 110.

These results shows the average end to end delay values of RDSDV protocol are less than the values of DSDV for 30 to 70 nodes. For nodes 90 and 110 it is more than DSDV

protocol

0

50

100

150

200

250

30 50 70 90 110

Average End to end delay variation (ms)



Scenario 6 Network dimension : 1000 x 1000 m AVG END END DELAY VARIATION

42

Number of Nodes Jitter of DSDV Protocol Jitter of Randomized DSDV

10 0.002326 0.004419

20 0.002079 0.003297

30 0.002049 0.017927

40 0.002118 0.022340

50 0.001920 0.033860

Table 1 show that, the jitter value is greater for randomized DSDV protocol as compared to DSDV protocol

for topologies with different number of nodes.

Figure 1: Jitter values variation for DSDV and R-DSDV protocol

Table 1: Jitter value variation under Random Movement

43

Number of Nodes PDR (%) End to End Delay (ms)

DSDV R-DSDV DSDV R-DSDV

10 99.70 98.41 131.72 137.89

20 99.89 99.55 145.897 138.13

30 99.67 98.69 128.168 140.31

40 99.43 99.31 146.926 149.69

50 98.56 98.76 135.226 120.90

Figure 2: PDR, End to End Delay values variation for DSDV and R-DSDV protocol

Table 2: PDR & End To End Delay Variation under Random Node Movement

Table 2 shows PDR, End to End Delay values variation for DSDV and R-DSDV protocol

44

To protect information and resources from attacks and misbehavior. We have proposed randomized delivery path protocol.

In order to minimize the probability that packets are eavesdropped over a specific link, a randomization process for packet deliveries.

In this process, randomly picks up a neighboring node as the next hop for the current packet transmission.

The exclusion for the next hop selection avoids transmitting two consecutive packets in the same link, and the randomized pickup prevents attackers from easily predicting routing paths for the coming transmitted packets.

Experimental results shows that jitter value is greater and increases as number of nodes increases hence prove that each packet transmitted at different path to destination.

The PDR and End to End Delay metrics of R-DSDV protocol are closer to the metrics for DSDV protocol under same topology.

We conclude that security attacks can be avoided by this process without reducing the performance.

CONCLUSION

45

46 Chin-Fu Kuo, Member, IEEE, Ai-Chun Pang, Member, IEEE, and Sheng-Kun Chan Dynamic Routing with Security Considerations IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PARALLEL AND DISTRIBUTED SYSTEMS, VOL. 20, NO. 1,

Shrikant Upadhyay and Aditi Kumari “Comparison and performance analysis of reactive type AODV and proactive type DSDV routing protocol for wireless mobile ad-hoc network, using NS-2 simulator” JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER INNOVATIONS Vol. 2(10), pp. 36-47, March 2012 Nitish pathak, neelam sharma “Mobile ad-hoc network: optimization of routing algorithms for mobility model” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REVIEWS IN COMPUTING 10th april 2012. vol. 9 A Survey of Secure Mobile Ad Hoc Routing Protocols Loay Abusalah, Ashfaq Khokhar, and Mohsen

Guizani IEEE COMMUNICATIONS SURVEYS & TUTORIALS, VOL. 10, NO. 4, FOURTH QUARTER 2008 G. Apostolopoulos, V. Peris, P. Pradhan, and D. Saha, “Securing Electronic Commerce: Reducing the

SSL Overhead,”IEEE Network, 2000. S. Bohacek, J.P. Hespanha, K. Obraczka, J. Lee, and C. Lim, “Enhancing Security via Stochastic Routing,” Proc. 11th Int’l Conf.Computer Comm. and Networks (ICCCN), 2002.

D. Collins, Carrier Grade Voice over IP. McGraw-Hill, 2003.P. Papadimitratos and Z.J. Haas, “Secure

Routing for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks,” in Proceedings of the SCS Communication Networks and Distributed Systems Modeling and Simulation Conference (CNDS 2002), San Antonio, TX, Jan. 27-31, 2002 FreeS/WAN, http://www.freeswan.org, 2008.

Gojmerac, T. Ziegler, F. Ricciato, and P. Reichl, “Adaptive Multipath Routing for Dynamic Traffic Engineering,” Proc. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conf. (GLOBECOM), 2003.

47

For Recent Technology , inventions , innovation To Download slides, programs, tutorials , assignments and more visit http://arvindpandeblog.blogspot.in http://www.facebook.com/digitalpadm

Thanks for watching



Randomized delivery paths for secure data transmission in ad hoc network NS2 ( MANET)

Engineering

Transcript of Randomized delivery paths for secure data transmission in ad hoc network NS2 ( MANET)