New Scheme for Secured Routing in MANET

International Journal of Computer Science, Engineering and Applications (IJCSEA) Vol.2, No.4, August 2012
DOI : 10.5121/ijcsea.2012.2402 11
New Scheme for Secured Routing in MANET
Sima 1
and Ashwani Kush2
1
Department of Computer Engineering, Karnal institute of Tech & Mgt., Karnal
simasingh.2009@gmail.com
2
Department of Computer Science, University College, Kurukshetra Univ. Kurukshetra
akush20.@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is an autonomous system of mobile nodes. Each node operates not only
as an end system, but also as a router to forward packets. The nodes are free to move about and organize
themselves into a network. These cause extra challenges on security. In this paper, evaluation of prominent
on-demand routing protocol i.e. AODV,MAODV,RAODV has been done by varying the network size. An
effort has been carried out to do the performance evaluation of these protocols using random way point
model. The simulator used is NS 2.34. The performance of either protocol has been studied by using a self
created network scenario with respect to pause time.
KEYWORDS
AODV, MAODV,RAODV,Evaluation, MobileNetwork Protocols, Wireless Network, Mobile Network, Virus,
Worms &Trojon
1. INTRODUCTION
A Mobile ad hoc network is a group of wireless mobile computers (or nodes); in which nodes
collaborate by forwarding packets for each other to allow them to communicate outside range of
direct wireless transmission. Ad hoc networks require no centralized administration or fixed
network infrastructure such as base stations or access points, and can be quickly and
inexpensively set up as needed [7]. MANET is a kind of wireless ad-hoc network and it is a self-
configuring network of mobile routers (and associated hosts) connected by wireless links – the
union of which forms an arbitrary topology. The routers, the participating nodes act as router, are
free to move randomly and manage themselves arbitrarily; thus, the network's wireless topology
may change rapidly and unpredictably. Such a network may operate in a standalone fashion, or
may be connected to the larger Internet [1].
Mobile ad hoc networks present different threats due to their very different properties. These
properties open up very different security risks from conventional wired networks, and each of
them affects how security is provided and maintained. [13]In mobile ad hoc networks
(MANETs), routing is a primary issue attracting large amounts of attention[14,15]. Early research
efforts have yielded many well-known routing protocols such as AODV[16], DSR[8], TORA[18]
which assume perfectly cooperative network.
AODV is an adhoc routing protocol. [4]. AODV routing protocol [2, 3, 11] is collectively based
on DSDV [9] and DSR [8, 10]. AODV uses route expiry, dropping some packets when a route
expires and a new route must be found [12].

12
2. PROPOSED PLAN
A New protocol has been proposed titled RAODV modifying MAODV [17] Protocol. In
RAODV protocol malicious nodes are detected . Then using NS-2 simulator a comparative study
of three protocols AODV , MAODV & RAODV has been carried out for 10, 25 and 50 nodes .
The simulation has been performed using TCL scripts. The simulation results have been obtained
with the help of three metrics as Packet delivery ratio, End To End Delay and Throughput. The
results of AODV, MAODV & RAODV are represented in the form of Graph. Using these graphs
AODV, MAODV & RAODV performance comparison have been made. To carry out the analysis
a malicious node has been introduced in the script. This node when comes in direct
communication contact with the routing nodes, results in hacker attack. This causes fall of
packets. This performance has been studied using extensive simulations with varying scripts. The
proposed scheme takes care of this node and the authors remove this node and generate a new
path. This new path will be secured and will result in stable and secured routing.
3. ALGORITHM DESCRIPTION
In proposed algorithm there are three parts as Route Request, Route Reply & Data Transmission.
Route request phase is started using Source and Destination nodes. At the time of route request it
uses malicious and non malicious nodes. Nodes are verified one by one as ; if node status is
True then this node enters in to the Non_Malicious array & if node status is False then this node
enters in to the Malicious_array.
In Route reply it starts from 1 to TN(Total no of nodes ). If status of node = TRUE All the
possible routes will be searched by RREP. Then available route will be selected by the RREP
broadcasting. It Repeat procedure until it reaches source node. Source node will select the path
for data transmission based on the shortest path algorithm. In Data Transmission it starts from
initial to final node, .if node id between S (Source Node) & D (Destination Node) then it set
status of this node = TRUE otherwise it set status of this node = FALSE.
A. Algorithm Section 1 : Route Request Section
Step 1: Activate and Initialize the following variables
: hackers // Count Number of hackers.
: id //identification number for nodes
: hack_Node hackerNode[TN];
: Non_MaliciousNode[TN];
: TN // Total Nodes;
Step 2: At the time of Route Request verify Node Status
// Checking one by one node status
//=TRUE/FALSE with help of loop
Step 3: Initalize loop for detecting hacker Nodes
: Set i= 1; i<=TN; i++;
: if nodeST== “FALSE”
hacker++;
:hack_Node[i]=Node;
:else if nodeST== “TRUE”;
: Non_MaliciousNode[i]=Node;
B. Algorithm Section 2 : Route Replyt Section
Step 1: Destination Node rebroadcast the RREP like the RREQ
Step 2: Step 3: Initalize loop for Route Reply
(a) Set i= 1; i<=TN; i++;

13
(b) if NodeST=Non_MaliciousNode[i] .
All the possible routes will be searched by RREP.
(c) Then available route will be selected by the RREP broadcasting.
(d) Repeat steps c and d until it reaches to source node.
Step 3: Source node will select the path for data transmission based on the shortest path.
C. Algorithm Section 3 : Data Packet Transmission.
Step1: Set ST of each Node //STATUS
(a) Set S=SI //SI = Source ID
(b) Set D=DI //DI = Destination ID
Step 2: After receiving an overhearing message. node will compare the data packet send by it.
with the identification value.
: For( i =1; i<=TN; i++)
: If (nodeID>= S && nodeID<=D)
nodeST[i]= “TRUE”
Step 3: if any node does not receives overhearing message or nodeid does not match then
successor node is declared as malicious node by setting its
nodeST = “FALSE”
Step 4: After detecting malicious node an error message will be generate by the node and send
it to the source node. Source node will declare it as a malicious node by making its
ST = “FALSE” in the routing table and the present route will be deactivated.
4. SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT
The simulations were performed using Network Simulator 2 (Ns-2.34) [6], particularly popular in
the ad hoc networking community. The source-destination pairs are spread randomly over the
network .installed in Fedora Linux 12. The results have been derived by writing a tcl script and
generating corresponding trace and nam files. TCP agents have been used to analyze the traffic.
The mobility model used is random waypoint model in a square area. The area configurations
used are 650 meter x 650 meter for 10 nodes, 750 meter x 750 meter for 35 and 1000 meter x
1000 meter for 50 nodes. The packet size is 512 bytes. The packets start from a random location
with a random speed. Same scenario has been used for performance evaluation of all AODV,
MAODV and RAODV protocols. Simulation parameters are shown in
Table-1: Simulation Parameters
Parameter Value
Number of nodes 10,25,50
Pause Time 500,400,300,200,100
Environment Size 650*650,750*750 1000*1000
Traffic pattern CBR (Constant Bit Rate)
Packet Size 512 bytes
Queue Length 50
Simulator ns-2.34
Antenna Type Omni directional

14
5. PERFORMANCE EVALUTION
RFC 2501 describes a number of quantitative metrics that can be used for evaluating the
performance of a routing protocol for mobile wireless ad-hoc networks. Some of these
quantitative metrics [5] are defined as follow:
A. Packet Delivery Ratio:
It is defined as the ratio of data packets received at the destination over the data packets sent by
the source.
Packet Delivery Fraction = X100
The performance of the protocols decreases as the pause time decreases & the performance of the
protocols increases as the pause time increases.
Graph 1-3 shows PDR for 10,25,50 nodes. Performance for 10 nodes are shown in Graph-1. It
shows that RAODV performs very well. But the difference in the performance of AODV &
RAODV is too less because the no. of nodes are very less and also the no of hackers are less.
Performance for 25 nodes have been shown in Graph-2. As predicted the PDR in case of
malicious attacks decreases. As the pause time increases the performance of RAODV decreases.
But still the performance of RAODV is much better then MAODV. Graph-3 shows the
performance for 50 nodes but the performance difference of RAODV and MAODV is high as
compare to Graph-2 . It shows that as the no of nodes are increasing hacker affect also increases.

15
B. Average end to end data delay:
This is the average time involved in delivery of data packets from the source node to the
destination node. To compute the average end-to-end delay, add every delay for each successful
data packet delivery and divide that sum by the number of successfully received data packets.
Packet Delivery Fraction =
It can be seen that increasing in pause time results various changes in behavior of AODV
,MAODV & RAODV for end-to end delay . Graph 4-6 shows End To End Delay using 10,25,50
nodes. Performance of 10 nodes have been shown in Graph-4. It shows that the difference
collapses as the pause time increasing same result for 25 nodes in Graph-5. But Graph-6 shows as
no of nodes increases RAODV performances decreases.

16
C. Throughput:
Graph 7-9 shows Throughput using 10, 25, 50 nodes. Performances for 10 nodes are shown in
Graph-7. It shows that RAODV performs very well. Performance for 25 nodes has been shown
in Graph-8. Still the difference is too less. But the performance of RAODV is much better then
MAODV. Graph-9 shows the performance of 50 nodes but the performance difference of
RAODV and MAODV is high as compare to Graph-8. It shows that as the no of nodes are
increasing hacker affect also increases.

17
Figure 1. Spam traffic sample
6. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, performance evaluation of AODV,MAODV & RAODV have been carried out using
various metrics The results have been analyzed using a random way point self created network
scenario. The general observation from various simulations show that the RAODV protocol
performs better. In case of 10 nodes it detect almost all hackers as no of hackers are very less. As
the no of nodes increases no of hackers also increases but RAODV protocol perform very well. It
provides better security compared to other protocols like AODV. The proposed RAODV provides
better security to data packets for sparse and significant security for denser medium. This study
can be enhanced for 75 & 100 nodes. This will provide real life situations and provide a robust
and effective solution for security. format.
REFERENCES
[1] S. Corson, J. Macker. Mobile Ad hoc Networking (MANET): Routing Protocol Performance Issues
and Evaluation Considerations. IETF RFC2501, 1999.
[2] Kush, A., Taneja, S.: A Survey of Routing Protocols in Mobile Adhoc Networks International Journal
of Innovation, Management and Technology 1(3), 279–285 (2010)
[3] Perkins, C., Royer, E.B., Das, S.: Adhoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV). Routing IETF
Internet Draft (2003)
[4] S.R. Das, R. Castaneda, J. Yan, and R. Sengupta. Comparative performance evaluation of. protocols
for mobile, ad hoc networks. In 7th Int. Conf. on Computer Communications and Networks (IC3N),
pages 153–161, October 1998.
[5] Kioumourtzis, G.: Simulation and Evaluation of Routing Protocols for Mobile Adhoc Networks.
Thesis, Master of Science in Systems Engineering and Master of Science in Computer Science, Naval
Postgraduate School, Monterey, California (2005)
[6] NS-2 Network simulator http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns.
[7] Geetha Jayakumar and Gopinath Ganapathy, ―Performance Comparison of Mobile Ad-hoc Network
Routing Protocol‖, International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security (IJCSNS),
VOL.7 No.11, pp. 77-84 November 2007.
[8] D. B. Johnson and D. A. Maltz, “Dynamic Source Routing in Ad-Hoc Ad hoc Networks," Mobile
Computing, ed. T. Imielinski and H. Korth, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1996, pp. 153-181
[9] C. E. Perkins and P. Bhagwat, “Highly Dynamic Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector. Routing
(DSDV) for Mobile Computers,” SIGCOMM, London, UK, August 1994, pp. 234-244.
[10] E. M. Royer and C. Toh, “A Review of Current Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc Mobile. Wireless
Networks,” IEEE Personal Communications, pp. 46–55, April 1999.
[11] C. Perkins, Ad hoc On demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing, IETF Internet draft (1997),
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draftietf-manet-aodv-00.txt..

18
[12] Samir R. Das, Robert Castaneda and Jiangtao Yan, “Simulationbased performance evaluation of
routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks”.
[13] http://www.ids.nic.in/tnl_jces_Jun_2011/PDF.
[14] Seyed Mehdi Moosavi, Marjan Kuchaki Rafsanjani, “An Algorithm for Cluster Maintenance Based
on Membership Degree of Nodes for MANETs”, “International Journal of Advancements in
Computing Technology (IJACT)”,AICIT, vol.3, no.4, pp.73-78, 2011.
[15] He XU, Suo-ping WANG, Ru-chuan WANG, “A Novel RFID Reader System Framework basedon
Peer-to-Peer Network”, “International Journal of Advancements in Computing Technology
(IJACT)”,AICIT, vol.3, no.3, pp.104-110, 2011.
[16] C. E. Perkins and E. M. Royer, “Ad hoc On-DemandDistance Vector Routing”, In Proceedings of
IEEE WMCSA, pp. 90-100, 1999.
[17] Sima ,A. Kush, “Malicious Node Detection in MANET” in Computer Engineering and Intelligent
Systems ISSN 2222-1719 Vol 2, No.4,pp. 6-13, 2011
[18] Vincent D. Park and M.Scott Corson. A highly adaptive distributed routing algorithm for mobile
wireless networks. In Proceedings of INFOCOM 1997, 1997
Authors
Sima is working as a Head and Assistant Professor in Department of Computer Science
& Engineering, Karnal institute of Tech. & Mgt Kunjpura, Karnal. She is M.Tech from
Ch. Devilal University Sirsa, Master of Science (Computer Science) from Mahrishi
Dayanand University Rohtak. She has got published Six papers in
National/International Conferences/Seminars. Her research interests are in Mobile Ad
hoc Networks. Ms. Sima is currently carrying out PhD research work in association
with Kurukshetra University.
Dr Ashwani Kush is a member of IAENG. He is working as Head and Associate
Professor in Department of Computer Science & Applications, University College,
Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra. He has done PhD in computer science in
association with Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India and Kurukshetra
University, Kurukshetra, India. He is professional Member of ACM, IEEE, SCRA,
CSI INDIA and IACSIT Singapore. He has more than 60 research papers to his credit
in various International/National Journals and Conferences. His 15 books has been
published in computer science for undergraduate and school students. His research
interests are in Mobile Ad hoc Networks, E-Governance and Security. Dr. Kush has chaired many sessions
in International Conferences in USA and Singapore. He is member of Syllabus Committee, Time table and
Quiz Contests of Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, India.

New Scheme for Secured Routing in MANET

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to New Scheme for Secured Routing in MANET (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

New Scheme for Secured Routing in MANET