consistent data release in manet using light weight verification algorithm with high node mobility

©IJCERT 44 | P a g e

ISSN (Online): 2349-7084

International Journal of Computer Engineering In Research Trends (IJCERT)

Volume 1, Issue 1, July 2014, PP 44-53

www.ijcert.org

Consistent Data Release in MANET Using Light

Weight Verification

Algorithm with High Node Mobility

B.Natraj Kumar1 ,M.Tech Research Scholar,

M.Sri Lakshmi2, Assistant Professor,

Dr.S.Prem Kumar3, Head of the Department

Department of CSE, G.Pullaiah College of Engineering and Technology

JNTU Anatapur, Andhra Pradesh, India

ABSTRACT: - This paper addresses data aggregation and data packets problems for extremely

dynamic mobile temporary networks and Wireless sensor Networks thereby resulting in a timely

and reliable reduction in each communication and energy consumption. However there may be

node failures in existing systems Associate in an aggregation framework doesn't address

problems with false sub-aggregate values down to compromised nodes resulting in massive

errors in base station computed aggregates once data is transferred through mobile device

nodes. It cannot conjointly transfer data when nodes fail at the intermediate level. This paper

proposes a completely unique light-weight verification rule and Position primarily based

timeserving Routing (PTR) protocol that reduces node failure and knowledge loss problems.

Theoretical analysis and simulation prove that PTR and also the novel light-weight verification

rule succeed glorious performance below high node quality with acceptable overhead.

Conjointly the new void handling theme performs expeditiously.

Keywords: Geographic routing, opportunistic forwarding, reliable data delivery, void handling, mobile ad hoc

network, Base station, data aggregation, hierarchical aggregation, in-network aggregation, sensor network

security, synopsis diffusion

http://www.ijcert.org/

B.Natraj Kumar, M.Sri Lakshmi,Dr.S. Prem Kumar

International Journal of Computer Engineering In Research Trends (IJCERT ) 45 | P a g e

1. INTRODUCTION

Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) and MOBILE adhoc networks (MANETs) are used more and more in several

applications [1] like wild environment observance, fire detection, and military police work. Once preparation within

the field device nodes organize themselves into a multihop network, the bottom station being the central

management purpose. Sometimes device nodes are greatly hampered by thanks to computation capabilities and

energy reserves. an on the spot detected Information assortment technique from networks would be to forward every

device node’s reading to the bottom station, through alternative intermediate nodes, before the bottom station

processes received knowledge. However its disadvantage is its high value relating to communication overhead (or

energy spent).Wireless networks gained interest thanks to benefits led to by multihop, infrastructure-less

transmission. However, high node quality remains a difficulty thanks to error prone wireless channels and dynamic

configuration, moving even reliable knowledge delivery in MANETs, particularly in challenged environments.

standard topology-based MANET routing protocols (e.g., DSDV, AODV, DSR [1]) are at risk of node quality a

reason being predetermination of associate degree end-to-end route before knowledge transmission. Thanks to

perpetually and quick dynamic configuration, settled route maintenance may be a drawback. Discovery and recovery

procedures client each time and energy. Knowledge packets are either lost or delayed for long once a path break, till

route reconstruction resulting in transmission interruption.

Computing aggregates in-network (combining partial results at intermediate nodes throughout message routing) in

giant WSNs considerably lowers the quantity of communication and also the resultant energy consumed. Knowledge

acquisition systems for WSNs [2], [3] construct a spanning tree unmoving at the bottom station to perform

aggregation on the tree. Necessary aggregates thought-about embrace Count, and Sum. it\'s simple to generalize

aggregates to predicate Count (e.g., sensors with readings beyond a hundred units) and add. Also, Count and add are

often accustomed pc Average. Add formula also can figure variance and applied math Moment of any order. Tree-

based aggregation approaches don\'t settle for communication losses thanks to node and transmission failures,

common in WSNs.Location data is employed by geographic routing (GR) [2] to forward knowledge packets, in hop-

by-hop Routing fashion. Greedy forwarding selects following hop forwarder with biggest progress toward

destination whereas void handling mechanism to route around communication voids [3]. there\ ought no to maintain

end-to-end routes, resulting in GR’s potency and quantifiability; however it\'s sensitive to location data [4] quality.

In greedy forwarding operations, a comparatively isolated neighbor is chosen because the next hop. Once the node

goes far away from the Sender’s coverage space, transmission fails. In GPSR [5] (a noted geographic routing

protocol), the mackintosh layer Failure feedback offers packet another reroute probability. However simulation

reveals that it\'s incapable of maintaining performance once node quality will increase. One packet transmission

ends up in multiple receptions thanks to the printed nature of the wireless medium. Once such transmission is that

the backup, the routing protocol’s hardiness is greatly increased. Time serving routing [6], [7], [8] incontestable

multicast-like routing strategy. This paper addresses this drawback. The analysis community planned exploitation

multipath routing techniques to forward sub-aggregates [2]. Aggregates like Min and liquid ecstasy are duplicate-

insensitive and then this approach provides a fault-tolerant resolution. a unique Position-based timeserving Routing

(PTR) protocol wherever many forwarding candidates’ cache packets exploitation mackintosh interception was

Consistent Data Release in MANET Using Light Weight Verification



planned. once the simplest forwarder fails to forward packets insure time slots, suboptimal candidates forward them

in turns in an exceedingly domestically fashioned order. So, as long in concert candidate with success receives and

forwards packets, knowledge transmission is uninterrupted. Doable multipath is exploited on a per packet basis on

the fly, resulting in glorious hardiness for PTR.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows: we have a tendency to gift the protocol style of PTR and

complementary mechanisms in Section a pair of. VDVH is pictured in Section three. Section four analyses the

impact of node quality on packet delivery and divulges the advantages led to by the participation of forwarding

candidates. Redundancy in PTR, including memory consumption and duplicate relaying thanks to timeserving

forwarding also will be mentioned. In Section five, we have a tendency to appraise the performance of planned

schemes by simulation and compare them with alternative routing protocols. Section vi reviews the connected work

and conclusions are given in Section seven.

2. POSITION-BASED OPPTRTUNISTIC ROUTING

2.1 Overview

PTR style is predicated on geographic routing and opportunistic forwarding. The nodes area unit thought to

remember of their location and their direct neighbor’s positions. Neighborhood location data is changed through a

one-hop beacon or through riding piggyback within the knowledge packet header. It’s thought that location

registration and search service that map node addresses to locations is obtainable as in [5] for the destination

position. this could be accomplished through use of the many styles of location service [11],[12]. During this

situation, economical and reliable ways that are accessible. Destination location will be transmitted by low bit rate

and long vary radios, that area unit enforced as periodic beacons, additionally through replies once the supply

requests it.

When a supply node plans to transmit a packet, it gets destination location 1st once that it's connected to the packet

header. Due to the destination node’s movement, a multihop path could diverge from the ultimate location’s true

location with a packet being born although it's been delivered within the destination neighborhood. Further

destination node checks area unit introduced to handle such problems. The packet forwarding node checks the

neighbor list at each hop to examine whether or not destination is inside transmission vary. If so, the packet is

directly forwarded to the destination, almost like destination location prediction theme delineated in [4]. Although

such identification checks before greedy forwarding supported location data, path divergence result will be relieved.

For a packet to be received by multiple candidates in standard expedient forwarding either informatics broadcast or a

routing integration and Macintosh protocol is adopted. the previous is liable to Macintosh collision thanks to lack of

collision turning away support for broadcast packet in current 802.11, whereas for the latter it wants complicated

coordination that isn't straightforward to implement. PTR uses a theme almost like the Macintosh multicast mode

delineated in [13]. The packet is transmitted asunicast (the best forwarder creating the most important positive



progress towards destination becomes subsequent hop) in informatics layer and multiple reception is thru Macintosh

interception. Use of RTS/CTS/DATA/ACK greatly lowers the collision and nodes inside the sender’s transmission

vary may snoop on a packet with success with smart likelihood thanks to medium reservation.

As knowledge packets area unit transmitted multicast-like every is known with a novel tuple (src_ip, seq_no)

wherever src_ip becomes the informatics address of supply node and seq_no the corresponding sequence variety.

Every node encompasses a monotonically increasing sequence variety, associate degrees an ID Cache-to record

packets ID (src_ip,seq_no) that were received recently. Receipt of a packet with same ID ends up in it being

discarded. Otherwise, it's forwarded to the receiver to subsequent hop, or keep in a very Packet List if received by a

forwarding candidate. It’s born once the receiver isn't given. The packet within the Packet List is shipped out once

awaiting a selected variety of your time slots or discarded if identical packet is received once more throughout the

waiting amount (this suggests that a much better forwarder has already meted out the task).PTR’s routing situation is

illustrated in Fig. 1. in a very traditional scenario sans link break, the packet is forwarded by subsequent hop node

(nodes A, E) and forwarding candidates (nodes B, C; nodes F, G) area unit suppressed (the same packet in Packet

List is dropped) by subsequent hop node’s transmission. If node A fails to deliver the packet (node A has taken away

and then cannot receive the packet), node B, the forwarding candidate with high priority relays packet and

suppresses the lower priority candidate’s forwarding (node C) and node S. By mistreatment Macintosh layer

feedback, node S removes node A from neighbors list and selects a replacement next hop node for the next packets.

The interface queue packets taking node A because the next hop get a second likelihood to reroute. A packet force

back from Macintosh layer won't be rerouted if node S overhears node B’s forwarding.

Figure 1: Position-Based Opportunistic Routing

2.2 Selection and Prioritization of Forwarding Candidates

One of PTR’s main issues is choice and prioritization of forwarding candidates. only forwarding space nodes [14]

would be backup nodes. The sender decides the forwarding space and also the next hop node. A forward space node

meets the subsequent 2 conditions: 1) it makes positive progress toward the destination; and 2) its distance to future

hop node mustn't be over a wireless node’s 0.5 transmissions vary (i.e., R=2) in order that all forwarding will didates

can hear from each other. In Fig. 1, the forwarding space is that self-enclosed by the daring curve. the realm nodes




beside node A (i.e., nodes B, C), area unit potential candidates. Of the specified variety of backup nodes, some are

going to be chosen as forwarding candidates. A forwarding candidate’s priority is set by its distance to the

destination. The nearer the destination, higher is that the priority. Once a node sends or forwards a packet, it selects

future hop forwarder and additionally the forwarding candidates among neighbors. The forwarder list includes next

hop and also the candidate list. Formula one provides the tactic to select/prioritize the forwarder list. Candidate list

is hooked up to the packet header and updated hop by hop. Solely candidates list such nodes are going to be

forwarding candidates. The lower the node’s index within the candidate list, the upper its priority.

Before conniving a replacement forwarder list, it refers to the forwarding table, to examine whether or not a

legitimate item for that destination continues to be on the market. The forwarding table engineered throughout

knowledge packet transmissions is maintained simply than a routing table. It may even be thought of a trade-off

between potency and quantifiability. As forwarding table institution is predicated on native info it's created in

minimum time. Hence, Associate in nursing ending time will be assailing things maintained to stay the table tiny.

The table records solely current active flows, whereas in ancient protocols, route ending time decrease would wish

additional resources to reconstruct.

2.3 Limitation on Possible Duplicate Relaying

Due to nodes’ movement and collisions, a number of forwarding candidates may not receive a packet forwarded by

next hop node or a better priority candidate, leading to some duplicate relaying. Once the forwarding candidate

adopts constant situation as a next hop node, it additionally calculates a candidate list and in an exceedingly worst

case situation, a packet’s propagation space can embody the complete circle with the destination because the center

and therefore the radius might be adequate the distance between supply and destination. To limit duplicate relaying,

solely supply forwarded packet and therefore the next hop node are transmitted in associate timeserving fashion and

cached by multiple candidates. In alternative words, solely supply and next hop node calculate the candidate list,

whereas it's empty for the packet relayed by a forwarding candidate. Thus, a packet’s propagation space is restricted

to an explicit band between supply and destination. Also, with ID cache, duplicate packets ar quickly born while not

being propagated additional..

2.4 MAC Modification and Complementary Techniques

2.4.1 MAC Interception

The broadcast nature of 802.11 Macintosh is leveraged: nodes at intervals sender vary receive the signal. However

its RTS/CTS/DATA/ACK mechanism is simply appropriate unicast. It sends knowledge to any or all broadcast

packets with CSMA. Hence, collision primarily based packet loss dominates multicast-like routing protocols

performance. Here, packet transmission state of affairs was altered. A packet is distributed via unicast in an

exceedingly network layer, to the simplest node electoral by greedy forwarding because the next hop. This ensures



full utilization of the collision rejection supported by 802.11 MAC. On the receiver facet, MAC-layer address filter

is changed, even once knowledge packet’s next hop isn't the receiver. It’s delivered to the higher layer with a touch

within the packet header proving this packet was overheard. PTR more processes it. So, an edge of broadcast and

unicast (MAC support) is achieved.

3. ASSOCIATED MECHANISM

Castelluccia et al [13] projected an easy and incontrovertibly secure encoding permitting encrypted knowledge to be

with efficiency and additively aggregate.simply a standard addition is required for cipher-text aggregation. Theme

security is predicated on the in distinguish ability property of a pseudorandom operate (PRO), a typical crypto

graphical primitive. it had been established that aggregation supported this could with efficiency reckon applied

mathematics values, like mean, variance, and perceived data’s variance, whereas achieving nice information

measure savings. to shield aggregate data’s integrity, AN end-to-end combination authentication theme was created

that was secure against outsider-only attacks.Su et al [14] instructed a way to realize best rate allocation for

knowledge aggregation in wireless device networks. First, a rate allocation downside was developed as a network

utility maximization downside; some of variable substitutions on the initial downside was created attributable to its

non-convexity and reworked it into an approximate problem, which is plan convex. Then duality theory was applied

to decompose the approximate downside into a rate management sub-problem and a programming sub-problem.

Supported this, a distributed algorithmic program for joint rate management and programming is meant, and was

established to approach randomly near the optimum of the approximate downside. Theoretical analysis/simulations

prove that approximate resolutions are able to do near-optimal performance.Boppana et al [15] evaluated 2

representative SDA schemes realistically exploitation TOSSIM machine for analyses. To validate knowledge

aggregation techniques implementation of information was through use of an analytical model. Results reveal that

it's necessary to cut back transmitted packets range than the general range of bits transmitted. With low duty cycles

and low device knowledge generation likelihood, even straightforward concatenation of device knowledge, that

lowered the amount of packets transmitted, was as effective because the a lot of refined SDA schemes; once device

knowledge square measure generated a lot of of times, SDA schemes that don't need intermediate nodes decode

device knowledge to present 100 percent higher network lifespan. Daabaj et al [16] developed a reliable load-

balancing routing (RLBR) protocol for network lifespan maximization supported reliability-oriented protocols and

ancient energy-aware routing protocols. RLBR uses Channel State data (CSD) e.g., RSSI and LQI, link estimation

supported packet transmissions e.g., success reception magnitude relation (PRR) and packet error magnitude relation

(PER), and residual energy capability as well as alternative parameters, e.g., source id, CRC, hop count, aggregation

load, and latency to make a price operate for choosing the foremost reliable and energy economical route towards

the bottom station. In alternative words, RLBR lowered energy consumed for packet transmissions by embedding

routing data in overheard packets and lowering management traffic. Hence, it maintains low packet error magnitude

relation and improves packet delivery whereas minimizing redundant packet transmission and/or retransmissions

throughout the network. .




It permits adaptation of quantity of traffic to network fluctuations property and energy expenditure.Virmani et al

[17] projected DLMT and CLMT algorithms to increase node life. Redistributed lifespan maximizing tree (DLMT)

is a component of nodes with magnified energy to be chosen as knowledge aggregating oldsters whereas Centralized

lifespan maximizing Tree (CLMT) showcases options with bottleneck node Identification to gather knowledge

centrally among a given set of nodes. Simulation results reveal that useful lifespan is increased by 147% once

knowledge is aggregate via DLMT and by 139% once knowledge is aggregate via CLMT. Projected DLMT

algorithmic program discovered thirteen further lifespan saving while not increasing delay. In Figure two, Packet

delivery magnitude relation shows outstanding increase once the tree depth is taken into account during this tree

structures.Peng et al [18] instructed a reliable knowledge aggregation/dissemination framework with respect to plan

of action networks. The framework combines disruption tolerant networking blessings and an adaptational device

knowledge aggregation methodology to confirm reliable knowledge delivery. Experimental model system design

was developed and enforced to demonstrate capabilities of the instructed knowledge aggregation and dissemination

framework. A relevant demonstration situation supported an information aggregation Map was developed for system

analysis. In Figure three, take a look at results showed that the projected framework inferred meaningful messages

from raw device knowledge accurately and dependably delivered messages to correct destinations. This projected

framework can be lasting resolution benefitting current and future system level style of plan of action network

architectures.

4. ANALYSIS

Theoretical analysis on POR’s lustiness and overhead comprehensive of memory consumption and duplicate

relaying also will be mentioned during this section. Because the focus is on node quality, a perfect wireless channel

is assumed and unit disc graph model employed by default: a link between 2 nodes exists if the gap between them is

a smaller amount than a selected threshold. Once 2 nodes area unit set inside every other’s’ coverage vary (R),

failure proof bidirectional knowledge transmission between them is achieved. POR’s main concern is its overhead as

a result of opportunist forwarding, as many packet copies have to be compelled to be cached in forwarding

candidates leading to a lot of memory consumption, and duplicate relaying. This becomes attainable if the

suppression theme fails thanks to node quality. However it'll be conferred later as a not significant issue. Simply

node quality forwarding failure into consideration} and therefore the impact of unreliable wireless links isn't taken

into account. It’s felt that in lightweight traffic case with MAC layer enforced theme, node quality is believed to be

the most issue that ends up in packet forwarding failure.

5. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

To evaluate POR performance, the algorithmic rule was simulated in numerous mobile network topologies in NS-2.

It absolutely was compared with AOMDV (a multipath routing protocol) and GPSR (a representative geographic

routing protocol). Common parameters were utilized within the simulations. Improved random method purpose



while not pausing is employed to model nodes’ quality with minimum node speed being set to one m/s. the most

speed is varied to vary network quality degree. The subsequent metrics compare performance:

Packet delivery quantitative relation: The ratio of knowledge packets variety received at the destination(s)

to the information packet variety sent by source(s).

End-to-end delay: the typical and median end-to-end delay square measure evaluated, alongside additive

delay distribution operate.

Path length: Average end-to-end path length (number of hops) for productive packet delivery.

Packet forwarding times per hop (FTH): Average times a packet is forwarded from routing layer

perspective to deliver information packet over every hop.

Packet forwarding times per packet (FTP): the days a packet is forwarded from routing layer perspective to

deliver information packet from supply to destination.

Among metrics, FTH and FTP appraise the quantity of duplicate forwarding. For unicast vogue routing protocols,

packet reroute caused by path break accounts for FTH being bigger than one. Except for packets that aren't delivered

to destination(s), efforts already created in forwarding packets remains thought of in FTH calculations.

Figure 2. Analytical delivery time ratio versus node ability




Figure 3. Analytical delivery Accuracy ratio versus node ability

5. CONCLUSION

This paper addresses the matter of reliable knowledge delivery in extremely dynamic MANETs. Constantly

changing configuration makes typical unplanned routing protocols incapable of satisfactory performance. Just in

case of constant link breaks attributable to node quality, substantial knowledge packets are lost or endure long

latency before property is restored. Impressed by timeserving routing, a completely unique MANET routing

protocol PTR that takes advantage of geographic routing’s unsettled property and also the broadcast nature of

wireless medium is planned additionally to choosing next hop, many forwarding candidates precise in case of link

break. Investing on natural backup within the air, broken routes are recovered in time. The involvement of

forwarding candidates against node quality and overhead attributable to timeserving forwarding is analyzed.

Simulation any confirms PTR’s effectiveness: high packet delivery quantitative relation is achieved with low delay

and duplication.

REFRENCES:

[1] Madden, S., Franklin, M. J., Hellerstein, J. M., & Hong, W.(2002). TAG: A tiny aggregation service for ad-hoc

sensor networks. ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, 36(SI),131-146.

[2] Law, Y. W., Palaniswami, M., &Phan, R. C. W. (2009). Secure Data Aggregation in Wireless Sensor Networks.

Guide to Wireless Sensor Networks, 533-559.



[3] Considine, J., Li, F., Kollios, G., & Byers, J. (2004, March). Approximate aggregation techniques for sensor

databases. In Data Engineering, 2004. Proceedings. 20th International Conference on (pp. 449-460). IEEE.

[4] Garofalakis, M., Hellerstein, J. M., &Maniatis, P. (2007,April). Proof sketches: Verifiable in-network

aggregation. In Data Engineering, 2007. ICDE 2007. IEEE 23rd International Conference on (pp. 996-1005). IEEE.

[5] Yu, H. (2011). Secure and highly-available aggregation queries in large-scale sensor networks via set

sampling.Distributed Computing, 23(5), 373-394.

[6] Frikken, K. B., & Dougherty IV, J. A. (2008, March). An efficient integrity-preserving scheme for hierarchical

sensor aggregation. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Wireless network security (pp. 68-76). ACM.

[7] Broch, J., Maltz, D. A., Johnson, D. B., Hu, Y. C., &Jetcheva, J. (1998, October). A performance comparison of

multi-hop wireless ad hoc network routing protocols. In Proceedings of the 4th annual ACM/IEEE international

conference on Mobile computing and networking (pp. 85-97). ACM.

[8] Karp, B., & Kung, H. T. (2000, August). GPSR: Greedy perimeter stateless routing for wireless networks. In

Proceedings of the 6th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking (pp. 243-254). ACM.

[9] Arad, N., &Shavitt, Y. (2009). Minimizing recovery state in geographic ad hoc routing. Mobile Computing,

IEEE Transactions on, 8(2), 203-217.

[10] Ganesan, D., Govindan, R., Shenker, S., &Estrin, D. (2001).Highly-resilient, energy-efficient multipath routing

in wireless sensor networks. ACM SIGMOBILE Mobile Computing and Communications Review, 5(4), 11-25.

[11] Ye, Z., Krishnamurthy, S. V., &Tripathi, S. K. (2003, March). A framework for reliable routing in mobile ad

hoc networks.

In INFOCOM 2003. Twenty-Second Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications. IEEE

Societies (Vol. 1, pp. 270-280). IEEE.