View of SECURE, STABLE & BALANCED AODV (AODV-SSB) FOR MOBILE AD-HOC NETWORK

(1)

ACCENT JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS ECOLOGY & ENGINEERING Peer Reviewed and Refereed Journal (International Journal) ISSN-2456-1037

Vol.04,Special Issue 07, (RAISMR-2019) November 2019, Available Online: www.ajeee.co.in/index.php/AJEEE

1

SECURE, STABLE & BALANCED AODV (AODV-SSB) FOR MOBILE AD-HOC NETWORK

1Swati Sahu

Computer Science & Engg. Department,

Vaishnavi Institute of Technology and Science, Bhopal M.P., India

2Prof. Sumit Sharma

Computer Science & Engg. Department,

Vaishnavi Institute of Technology and Science, Bhopal M.P., India

Abstract:- Since the last 20 years lots of work has been done to enhance working capability of AODV (Ad-hoc on demand distance vector) Routing protocol for Mobile Ad-hoc Network.

Performance of AODV has been improved by some modifications in its working procedure by many other researchers. A small amount of changed in the existing parameters value have been done, enhanced, and the rest parameters has been trade-offs. In this research work, AODV has been modified in such a way to improve its stability, security and balancing. Obviously, performance has been improved in terms of various parameters. A simulation has been performed using N.S-2.34 to achieve better performance of modified SSB-AODV (Secure Stable & Balanced AODV) in presence of Black-hole attackers. Better results have been generated & compared with existing SSB-AODV in terms of Routing Overhead, Packet Delivery Ratio Avg. Delay.

Keywords:- Security, Trust, Stability, Balancing, Error.

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 What is a Network?

A Network is a collection of autonomous computer and other devices interconnected by the communication channel.

1.2 Ad-hoc Network

A Mobile Ad-hoc Network (MANET) is a collection of wireless mobile nodes forming a temporary network without using any centralized access point, infrastructure, or centralized administration.

1.3 Routing

In internetworking, the process of moving a packet of data from source to destination.

Routing is usually performed by a dedicated device called a router. Routing is a key feature of the Internet because it enables messages to pass from one computing device to another and eventually reach the target machine. Each intermediary computing device performs routing by passing along the message to the next computing device.

2. CONCEPT OF AODV

In AODV, the network is silent until a connection is required. If any node needs a connection, broadcasts a request for connection. It Broadcast RREQ (Route Request) towards destination, which reply by RREP (Route Reply), a unicost message using shortest path chosen on the basis of Trust Value, Load , Minimum hop Count. Source then sends Data Packet using a secure path. On the successful delivery of this packet destination reply using same path by RREP-ACK.

On Failure, intermediate node replies to source using RERR message.

2.1 Packet format Used in AODV

 RREQ (Route Request): Broadcasted for searching the shortest path

 RREP (Route Reply): Unicasted by destination for informing about the shortest path.

 Data Packet: Sent with the address of destination and on the shortest path.

 RERR (Route Error): Send by intermediate node on the failure of the forwarded path

(2)

2 2.2 Problem Definition

Ad-hoc network suffers many issues at different layers. Here at Network Layer we address following problems

1. Security of packet transmitted from the Source to destination in a wireless network is a big issue. Apart from that now a days, we more price on reduction of possibility of failure of control packets (RREQ, RREP, REER) during communications.

2. If it is frequent failure of control packets during the communication then identification of cause of that.

3. If the attackers are presents in the network than identification & removal of the attackers is another issue.

4. How Good Nodes can get reward for their honest behavior, credit can be given to identify them from other legitimate, neutral, attacker nodes.

2.3 Proposed Work

The main objective of this research work is to improve the performance of AODV [14]

routing protocol in an ad-hoc network.

 During transmission through the station understanding the cause of failure of packets in the network is a big concerned.

 If it is due to attackers, present in the network with varying different number of nodes then identification and removal of it is big concerned.

 Attackers’ identification and their removal is also the work of major concerned but also motivation to the good node is also must be appreciable.

 Designing of a protocol to perform better than existing AODV variant is also matter of concern in this work.

 The Performance of Modified AODV will be compared with original AODV on the basis of following Parameters.

2.4 Proposed Algorithm

 Step 1: Initialize Trust Value of each node (Say N)

 Step 2: Broadcasted RREQ message to discover a route and decrease the Trust Value (TV) of each node by -M (TV= N-M)

 Step 3: If RREQ message is received by destination then shortest path is made available by uni-casting a RREP back to the source route (It makes two entries in the routing table one is for next node and another is for the node there after) and increase Trust Value of each node in shortest path by +2M and Go to step 8.

 Step 4: Source node will send Data Packet to the Destination node using shortest path

 Step 5: If link is broken then apply local route repair mechanism to recover the route

 Step 6: If route is available after local route repair then send data packet through repaired path and Go to step 8.

Else forward data packet to next to next node for success

 Step 7: If route is available then send data packet through repaired path.

 Step 8: Observed the Trust value of each node in the shortest path.

 Step 9: If the Trust value is <= (N-5M) then declare the node as attacker node and calculate the PDR of each node.

 Step 10: If PDR = 0 then declare the node as black hole attacker and go to step 15.

 Step 11: If 0 < PDR < 0.6 then declare node as average node and go to step 15.

 Step 12: If the Trust value is >= (N-5M) then declares the node as Secured node and go to step 16.

 Step 13: Send SSB-RERR to source node. If the first bit of the SSB-RERR packet is 1 then it is stable /prioritize packet, if the second bit is also 1 then it is having information about attacker.

 Step 14: If first bit of security info field is 1 then attacker is present, if second bit is 1 then check PDR, if PDR is 0 then declare as a black hole attack and if third bit is 1 then exclude the node from network.

 Step 15: Go to step 1.

 Step 16: End

(3)

3

As per the above algorithm, we have offered some credit values to good nodes to increase their participations in the network as well as behaving in a good manner.

3. RESULT & ANALYSIS 3.1 Routing Overhead

S.No Pause

Time Routing Overhead AODV-

SPB AODV-

SSB Decrement In %

1 0 5.00 4.00 20

2 30 10.0 09.0 10 3 60 20.0 17.0 9 4 120 30.0 26.0 13.3 5 300 60.0 56.0 6.67 6 600 80.0 77.0 3.75

As per the above table it can be founded that Routing Overhead is always better than the exiting AODB-SPB protocol for routing in wireless network. It was the main target of this work and has been achieved reduction in node failure and also identification & removal of none performing nodes. Finally we are getting here 20 % advantages in Routing Overhand over AODV-SPB

3.2 Packet Delivery Ratio

S.No Pause

Time PDR (%) AODV-

SPB AODV-

SSB Improvement In %

1 0 92 96 4.34

2 30 94 96.5 2.12

3 60 95 97 2.10

4 120 96 98 2.08

5 300 97 99 1.9

6 600 98 99 1.8

7 900 99 99.9 1.7

As per the above table it can be founded that PDR is always better than the exiting AODB- SPB protocol for routing in wireless network. Although it was not a target to improve the PDR of this work but even than it was desired and shows compatibility. Finally we are getting here 4 % advantages in PDR over AODV-SPB

3.3 Average Delay

S.No Pause

Time Avg. Delay AODV-

SPB AODV-

SSB Decrements in (%)

1 0 1.5 1.3 13.33

2 30 0.5 0.3 40

3 60 1.8 1.5 16.66

4 120 1.9 1.6 13

5 300 2 1.7 14

6 600 2.2 1.8 15

7 900 2.5 2.3 17

It can be observed in above diagram that the outcome of this research is that improvement in stability, security and balanced behavior of nodes in terms of reduced routing overhead in network environment. As we know source does not stop sending the data packet until

(4)

4

gets the route error packet (SSB-RRER). If it gets this packet as soon as possible it stop sending data packets which effects network overhead and congestion in the network.

Average Delay decreases up to 40 %.

4. CONCLUSION & FUTURE WORK 4.1 Conclusion

The outcome of this research is that improvement in stability, security and balanced behavior of nodes in a less congestion and reduced routing overhead network environment.

As we know source does not stop sending the data packet until gets the route error packet (SSB-RRER). If it gets this packet as soon as possible it stop sending data packets which effects network overhead and congestion in the network. And information regarding attacker and its type helps to avoid choosing attackers (accidentally) in shortest path Finally simulation done on NS 2.34 which decreases the Routing Overhead up to 20 %, Avg.

Delay decreases up to 40% Packet Delivery Ratio increases to 2%.

4.2 Future Work

In future few algorithms can be design to overcome effect of attackers in pair as well as Grey hole and other attacks. Routing protocol for ad-hoc networks: Additionally the proposed solution is in most cases not tested in a real environment. Therefore, future studies should rather be devoted to actual implementation than a simulation. Only such an approach can ultimately verify a protocol’s utility in future ad-hoc network. Finally, it should be kept in mind that the trade-off between routing overhead, congestion, energy, security and Quality of Services are challenging issues to resolve all problems together.

However, the list is still open for continuous emerging new technology in FANET, VANET REFERENCES

1. J. Singh, P. Singh and S. Rani, “Enhanced Local Repair AODV (ELRAODV)” IEEE International Conference on Advances in Computing, Control, and Telecommunication Technologies, 12 January 2010, pp. 787-2019.

2. W. Ningning and C. Yewen, “Improved AODV protocol with Lower Route Cost and Smaller Delay” , IEEE Fourth International Conference on Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation ,15 April 2018, pp. 7-11.

3. H. Rehman and L. Wolf, “Performance Enhancement in AODV with Accessibility Prediction”, IEEE International Conference on Sensor Network, 12 January 2018, pp. 1-6.

4. S. Mittal and P. Kaur, “Performance Comparison Of AODV, DSR and ZRP Routing Protocols In MANET’S”

, IEEE International Conference on Advances in Computing Control and Telecommunication ,12 January 2017, pp. 165-169.

5. S.J. Lee and M. Gerla, “AODV-BR: Backup Routing in Ad hoc Networks”, IEEE Wireless Communication and Networking Conference, Vol. 3 January 2016, pp. 1311-1316.

6. A. Boukerche, “A Simulation Based Study of On-Demand Routing Protocols for Ad-hoc Wireless Networks”, IEEE Simulation Symposium, January 2008, pp. 85-93.

7. N. Moghim, “An Improvement On Ad-hoc Wireless Network Routing Based On AODV”, The 8^th International Conference Communication Systems, ICCS 2010, vol.2, November 2016, pp. 1068 – 1070.

8. Q. Wang, “A Robust Routing Protocol For Wireless Mobile Ad-hoc Networks”, The 8th International Conference on Communication Systems, vol.2 , 25 Nov 2019, pp. 1071– 1075.

9. Yusuke, “AODV Multipath Extension uses Source Route Lists with Optimized Route Establishment”, International Workshop on Wireless Ad-hoc Networks, 3 June 2014, pp. 63 – 67.

10. V.N. Talooki, “Performance Comparison of Routing Protocols For Mobile Ad-hoc Networks”, Asia-Pacific Conference on Communications (APCC’ 10), 1 September 2018, pp. 1 – 5.

11. S.A. Hussain, E. Garcia and M. Idrees, “Throughput Enhancement in AODV Routing Using Mobility Awareness”, 9th International Multi Topic Conference, IEEE INMIC 2005, July 2015, pp. 1-4.

12. Z. Qiang and Z. Hongbo, “An optimized AODV protocol in mobile ad hoc Network”, IEEE, April 2014, pp.

1-4.

13. A. Klein, “Performance Comparison and Evaluation of AODV, OLSR, and SBR in Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks”, IEEE, Wireless Pervasive Computing 2008 (ISWPC 2008), Jan 2017, pp. 571-575.

14. H.P. Wang and L. Cui, “An Enhanced AODV for Mobile Ad-hoc Network”, Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, Kunming, 15 July 2018.

15. K. Agarwal and L.K. Awasthi, “Enhanced AODV Routing Protocol for Ad hoc Networks”, 16^th International Conference on Networks (ICON 2008), 12 December 2018, pp. 1-5.

16. Umang Singh, B. V. R. Reddy, M. N. Hoda, "GNDA: Detecting good neighbour nodes in ad-hoc routing protocol," Second International conference of Emerging Trend in Information Technology, pp. 235-238, 2018.