International Journal of Computer Networking, Wireless and Mobile Communications (IJCNWMC) ISSN 2250-1568 Vol.

3, Issue 1, Mar 2013, 55-64 TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

RELATIVE WEIGHT OPTIMIZED LINKING SCHEME FOR ROUTE OPTIMIZATION IN ADHOC NETWORK
SHAIK SHAVALI Professor, Computer Science and Engineering Department, Lords Institute of Engineering and Technology, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Hyderabad, India

ABSTRACT
In ad-hoc networks, routing is primarily concerned with connectivity. Present routing algorithms, proactive or on demand, source routing or table driven, typically characterize the network with a single metric such as hop count, and use shortest path algorithms to compute paths. These shortest-path based routing algorithms are not adequate for applications with quality-of-service requirements, such as bandwidth guarantees. First, we separate the underlying scheduling problem and quantify the feasibility of flows. This becomes the feasibility conditions of the proposed reliable routing mechanism. We present the mathematical abstraction of the existing routing scheme problem which allows the maximum reliability to the traffic in a flow to carry with maximum reliability for paths which are closest to the optimum level.

KEYWORDS: Weight Optimized Links, Traffic Flow and Optimal Routing INTRODUCTION
Ad-hoc networks are completely autonomous wireless temporary networks estabished using a group of mobile devices primarily for martial, emergency and relief scenarios, where no infrastructure is available. It is a group of mobile nodes which do not require a centralized administration or a fixed network infrastructure. Unlike fixed hardwired networks with physical defence at firewalls and gateways, attacks on ad hoc networks can come from all directions and may target any node. Mobile ad hoc networks are paradigms for mobile communication [1] in which mobile nodes are dynamically and arbitrarily located in such a manner that communication between nodes does not rely on any underlying static network infrastructure. The communication medium is broadcast and the nodes in a mobile ad hoc network are usually portable mobile devices with constrained resources, Such as power, computation ability and storage capacity. Due to the lack of infrastructure and the limited transmission range of a node in a mobile ad hoc network, a node has to rely on neighbor nodes to route a packet to the destination node. In particular, all network functions are based on the node cooperation. Currently, routing protocols for mobile ad hoc network, such as the Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) [2] and the Ad hoc On Demand Distance Vector Routing Protocol (AODV) [3] are based on the assumption that all nodes will cooperate. Without node cooperation, in a Mobile ad hoc network, no route can be established; no packet can be forwarded. Another ad-hoc network routing approach is cluster based philosophy. P. Krishna et al. propose that the adhoc network is clustered as a two-level network graph [11, 12,]; the upper level is the cluster-level connected graph, and the lower level is the origin node-level connected graph. At first it constructs overlapping clusters structure in the network. Each node should maintain not only intra-cluster topology information but also the inter cluster topology. The traditional routing algorithms can be applied in the infrastructure. Z.J. Haas et al. propose the zone routing scheme [13, 14], which is somewhat similar to the cluster-based approach. For each mobile node it maintains all the links within the defined radius, the so-called zone. This maintained range for each node is alike to the cluster. When a route request is issued, it searches within the zone. Moreover, the inter-zone searching is executed by multicasting request message to its boundary nodes. The boundary nodes proceed with the same route searching strategy. Finally the route or failure message is replied. The performance of Mobile Ad hoc networks (MANET) depends on the cooperation of all active nodes. However, supporting a MANET is a

56

Shaik Shavali

cost-intensive activity for a mobile node. We can identify two types of uncooperative nodes: faulty or malicious and selfish. Faulty/malicious behavior refers to the broad class of Misbehavior in which nodes are either faulty and therefore cannot follow a protocol, or are intentionally malicious and try to attack the system. Selfish nodes misbehave to save power or to improve their access to service relative to others [4]. Malicious intentions result in misbehavior as exemplified by denial of service attacks. Regardless of the motivation for misbehavior its impact on the mobile ad-hoc network proves to be detrimental, decreasing the performance and the fairness of the network, and in the extreme case, resulting in a nonfunctional network [5].Specifically, in mobile ad-hoc networks, nodes do not rely on any routing infrastructure but relay on packets for each other. Thus communication in mobile ad-hoc networks functions properly only if the participating nodes cooperate in routing and forwarding [6]. Therefore nodes assume themselves that other nodes would forward the packet. This selfish or malicious intention of nodes can significantly degrade the performance of mobile ad-hoc-networks by denial of service [7]. Many contributions to prevent misbehavior have been submitted so far, such as payment schemes for network services, secure routing protocols,[8] intrusion detection [9], economic incentives and distributed reputation systems to detect and isolate misbehaved nodes. In this approach a routing scheme is developed for adhoc network, where the routes are derived based on the node trustiness and nodes current power condition, it is required that in a network as nodes lose its trustiness the data flow may get blocked and secondly the node may be trusty but may have very low power which will also result in blockage. While discovering a route it is needed that we must discover a route based on nodes trustiness as well as nodes which have higher power, wherein conventional approaches finalizes the route based on either trustiness or on power only, in this paper we outline a routing scheme based on both the evaluative parameters to finalize a route, this way the routes will be more reliable in adhoc network hence improving the network performance The rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section II describes the various approaches in adhoc networks. Routing constraints seen in adhoc networks are presented in section III. The proposed methods for optimal route selection are presented in Section IV. The simulation results are provided in section V. Section VI presents the conclusion. Finally Section VII concludes the paper.

ROUTING APPROCH IN AD HOC NETWORKS

The routing scheme in ad-hoc networks is more challenging than traditional networks in terms of dynamic network topology. However, in ad-hoc networks the routing scheme is an important factor to improve the network efficiency. Recently there have been some researches on routing in ad-hoc networks. Based on the traditional routing method, loosely source routing, D.B. Johnson et al. propose on demand dynamic source routing [2] in ad-hoc networks. A mobile host propagates the route discovery message all over the network while a routing request is being issued. Each node that is forwarding this route discovery message adds its address into the source list. Finally the message reaches the destination node. The complete path from source to destination is listed in the packet. The route is replied to the source node. The routes discovered in this way or by hearing routing message in its neighborhood are recorded in the cache.

ROUTING CONSTRAINTS
This section focus on the problem of misbehaving among the nodes of a network. A Mobile Ad Hoc Network (MANET) is a collection of mobile nodes (hosts) which communicate with each other via wireless links either directly or relying on other nodes as routers. The operation of MANETs does not depend on pre-existing infrastructure or base stations. Network nodes in MANETs are free to move randomly. In an open MANET [18], different mobile nodes with different goals share their resources in order to ensure global connectivity. However, some resources are consumed quickly

Relative Weight Optimized Linking Scheme for Route Optimization in ADHOC Network

57

as the nodes participate in the network functions. For instance, battery power is considered to be most important in a mobile environment. An individual mobile node may attempt to benefit from other nodes, but refuse to share its own resources. Such nodes are called selfish or misbehaving nodes, and their behavior is termed selfishness or misbehavior [2]. One of the major sources of energy consumption in mobile nodes of MANETs is wireless transmission [3]. A selfish node may refuse to forward data packets for other nodes in order to conserve its own energy. In MANETs, routing misbehavior can severely degrade the performance at the routing layer. Specifically, nodes may participate in the route discovery and maintenance processes but refuse to forward data packets. Routes containing such nodes will be eliminated from consideration. The source node will be able to choose an appropriate route to send its data. In the existing routing schemes energy consumption is also a major issue. For many ad-hoc networks, the nodes are small and portable, imposing stringent constraints on the battery size and power. As a node sends, receives or forwards packets, the energy of the node is decremented accordingly. Once the energy of the node reaches zero, the node is shutdown (a node death) and is considered terminated by the system. Since the ad-hoc routing protocol determines which nodes will forward the packets and the amount of routing overhead each node needs, the type of protocol definitely affects the energy performance of the system. The protocols affect the energy dynamics in two ways first, the routing overhead affects the amount of energy used for sending and receiving the routing packets, and second, the chosen routes affects which nodes will have a faster decrease in energy.

ROUTING SCHEME
The essence of intelligent query Routing lies in recognizing that a single distributed algorithm may not find the best path. Consequently, we compute several candidate paths and choose the best amongst them. This is admittedly a heuristic, and we provide simulation results to demonstrate significant improvements in admission ratio (up to 30%) over other routing algorithms. A flow request includes the source, destination, and bandwidth requirement. intelligent query Routing is executed at the source node based on the local view of the network topology and available bandwidth. The candidate paths are simply the best paths Computed by a number of source-routing algorithms. All of these algorithms are polynomial and lightweight, hence the total computational complexity is manageable intelligent query Routing uses the following candidate paths: Widest Shortest Path (WSP). Choose the shortest path. If multiple choices, pick the widest path. Same as [3]. WSP Complement (WSPC). Remove all links used by WSP, and select the WSP in the remaining graph. Shortest Feasible Path (SFP). Assume a simple 2-hop interference model (see below) as the feasibility criterion, and choose the shortest feasible path. OSPF-like Weighted Path Cost (OSPF): Akin to the OSPF [8] algorithm, assign a cost to each link, and choose the path with the least total cost. Shortest Widest Path (SWP). Look for the widest path available. If multiple choices, pick the shortest. Some of the above paths may be the same, in which case we have fewer than five candidates. A few of the above algorithms need more explanations. The OSPF cost associated with each link is given by + (C i), where i is the available bandwidth on link i and is a small quantity used to ensure strictly positive costs. Also, SFP and SWP requires calculating the path width, defined as the maximal flow rate that satisfies the feasibility constraints. According to the 2-hop interference model, each link on a path only interferes with links that are two hops before and after. Let be the required bandwidth on the path. Then the feasibility constraint is

58

Shaik Shavali

inew is then used to evaluate the path width in SFP and SWP. Note that the routing algorithms and the link state protocol are independent parts of INTELLIGENT QUERY Routing. If we developed a more efficient/accurate link state algorithm, we could immediately use it in conjunction with the routing schemes. Alternately, any other sophisticated routing algorithm could also be used to choose candidate paths. Distributed Admission Control and Path Comparison Once the candidate paths are chosen, we send out a flow setup packet along each path, the entire path being included in the setup packet. Admission control is carried out distributed at each hop in the path, by evaluating the node constraints. To check if the flow is admissible, each node on the path checks its updated node constraints, by including the new flow. Let ij be link is slack on node Qj . Then, for each link i pi, we need to ensure

two flavors of intelligent query routing intelligent query r-width (intelligent query rw) and intelligent query rcost (intelligent query rc), based on the metric of comparison is proposed. Intelligent query r-width chooses the candidate path with the largest width, where width of path pi is given by wpi = minipi. and intelligent query r cost chooses the candidate path with the minimum cost, where cost of path is given by c = Pi2 + (C i). Both these metrics can be evaluated distributed, and accumulated as the probe packet proceeds hop by hop along the path. When multiple probe packets reach the destination, the destination simply chooses the path which has the best cumulative metric. It then sends a path confirmation back to the source, and nodes along the path reserve the resources to carry the flow. If any of the candidate paths is invalid (due to the source having outdated information), or if any of the nodes on the path have inadequate capacity the request probe is simply dropped. If no request reaches the destination, it is unable to respond, and the source node times out. The flow is then rejected as inadmissible. Note that this architecture admits a fair degree of flexibility. we may choose some paths using intelligent query r-width while other paths are chosen with intelligent query r-cost simply by indicating the choice in the probe packet. Further, any other metric is also applicable, as long as the metric is monotonic and cumulative. Control Overhead The link state protocol is periodic in nature. All link state changes (if any) related to position, topology, or available bandwidth, are accumulated over an aggregation period of T seconds, and then broadcast to all neighbors. The state change information propagates across the network, taking T seconds to pass each hop. Thus we are upper bounded to N=T updates per second in the entire network, where N is the number of nodes. By choosing appropriate values of T and T, we can limit the control overhead. Setting up an intelligent query Routing flow requires the sending of 5 probe packets, and one confirmation packet in return. The number of links traversed by each of these is the length of the path, thus the total control overhead 6 * path length. This may be favorably compared with a flooding protocol like AODV-QoS [6], or AQOR [14], where the path setup message is broadcast on every link of the network. Also, all flow paths are meant to have soft states that time out after a period of inactivity hence there is no need for a tear-down protocol.

Relative Weight Optimized Linking Scheme for Route Optimization in ADHOC Network

59

Re-Routing In any ad-hoc routing protocol, it is important to deal with the issue of re-routing, more so when we want to provide QoS. In this matter, we do not propose any novel scheme, but instead adopt the re-routing ideas advocated by Xue and Ganz in AQOR [14]. They observe that only the destination node is equipped to identify QoS violations. Consequently, they delegate the responsibility of detecting all failures (link faults or QoS violations) to the destination node. Upon discovering a violation, the AQOR destination node initiates re-routing by broadcasting a route update message back to the source, which re-routes traffic to the path of the first update message. This works because an ad-hoc path is fairly symmetric each node having a single queue for its packets going in all directions [14]. Similarly, when an intelligent query Routing destination node detects a violation, it too performs a route update. It does so by choosing candidate paths back to the source node, and sends out probe packets. The source node picks the best candidate path, and re-routes its traffic to this new path. The node constraints provide necessary and/or sufficient conditions for a feasible schedule to exist. In reality, a distributed MAC (like 802.11) may choose a less optimal schedule. To take this effect into consideration, we can augment intelligent query Routing to include measurements. A node divides its total time into four parts transmitting time, receiving time, noisy time, and idle time [13]. Assuming that the traffic seen by an ad-hoc node over a suitable time period is representative of the average, the measured available bandwidth i on link i is given by i = idle/total *C, where C is the channel capacity. In measurement-based intelligent query Routing, the nodes exchange the value of this available bandwidth i. When a new flow is to be admitted, the source node uses its knowledge of i in the network to generate the candidate paths (Sec. III-C). since we have no knowledge of the scheduling inefficiencies ahead of time. However, once the flow starts, the nodes on the path recomputed inew by measuring and this new value propagated through the network is used for admitting future flows. Guaranteeing Quality with Row Constraints While the node constraints cannot account for inefficiencies in scheduling, we can evaluate another set of constraints that can indeed offer those guarantees. These row constraints are evaluated by ensuring that the sum of flows at all interference neighbors of a link does not exceed the channel capacity:

In [16], the authors showed that the row constraints provide sufficient conditions for a feasible schedule to exist, and that the schedule may be found in a distributed manner using a greedy algorithm. The problem with the row constraints is that they may be arbitrarily far from the necessary conditions, and hence too restrictive. However, we may use the row constraints and the node constraints in parallel in a network [16] making use of the row constraints only for critical applications.

INFORMATION TRANSFORMATION APPROACH

An important characteristic of the Resource Evaluators is that, although their management mechanism is resource and/or system specific, their operational interface as well as the reporting mechanism is uniform and interoperable at the application level. A node can be defined for each domain. For each node, there is a Node Evaluator, which is in charge of the admission control, resource allocation, failure recovery and other management functionality for this domain. It is quite often the case that resources in a local group can't satisfy certain requests. In such cases, it is the Node Evaluator's task to consult with other groups of resources until the request can be

60

Shaik Shavali

satisfied. Two variants of the resource information scheme were considered. strategy, where the Node Evaluator keeps current status on each resource.

One was a centralized information The other is a decentralized strategy,

where the Node Evaluator has only available and busy status of the resources. The first approach has the potential advantage of quick decision making upon a resource request. The Node Evaluator keeps detailed information, such as the bandwidth, delay, reliability and jitter for a switch. However this design has a major drawback in the network traffic overhead it will produce. Since states might change rapidly for many resources, updating the system with detailed information could potentially add a great deal of traffic. Moreover, if a state change occurs at the resource level during the request processing, the information may not be current anyway. The preferred approach minimizes the bandwidth usage by the resource management framework. The Node Evaluator is notified when a resource becomes available and subsequently if it becomes busy , but it is not notified of the exact current state of the resource. The resource allocation decision is delayed until the Node Evaluator queries the appropriate Resource

Evaluators. This communication schema causes traffic after each application service request is raised, however, in most common cases, such as management of switches, application service requests occur much less frequently than do resource status changes. It is noteworthy that the rough information prevents the Node Evaluator from When resources do not meet the basic

checking resources that are clearly not able to meet a QoS agreement.

service criteria, no further updates are sent. This policy reduces significantly the management overhead. The selection of a resource consists of three steps: selecting all suitable resources, consulting these suitable resources and making the final selection. We define the criterion of busy for each resource type in terms of its resource-specific parameters. The Resource Evaluator maintains this information, which is local to the resource. Upon a request, only resources of the correct type that are available and not busy need to be queried. The final resource selection, and hence the Resource Evaluators response to the query, depends on the QoS type. For Guaranteed service, the resource is chosen from among those that can meet the requirements. For Priority and Best Effort service, the Resource Evaluator calculates the benefit function value (weighted sum of different factors) and includes this value in its reply to the Node Evaluator. After comparing these benefit function values, the Node Evaluator makes the final resource selection. Since the administrator-provided benefit function may differ from one request type to another a static table for all resource types would not work. For example, for a printing job, the

benefit function might be a weighted sum of different factors such as speed and print quality; the benefit function for a switch might be a function of total throughput and maximum delay and/or jitter. Therefore, each Resource

Evaluator corresponds to a certain type of resource (e.g., cameras, printers, scanners, or network bandwidth). To develop this approach a hybrid mode of communication for high rate service is developed. Measures for optimal transport of multimedia application data have to account for a) application utilities which determine how much applications benefit from resources allocated to them b) the variation of underlying network characteristics with time and c) the constrains imposed by the transport mechanisms of the application data over the underlying networks. We address these issues below for the types of applications discussed. For the flows that are constrained to traverse a single access technology, a suitable interface for communication has to be chosen. The conventional best-interface selection techniques, for example the highest capacity or lowest bit rate, may fail as these 1) represent the instantaneous characteristics of networks, which vary especially for wireless access networks 2) do not account for the utility functions of the flows, and 3) do not consider the existing traffic on the access networks. The optimal interface selection in this scenario warrants the stochastic characterization of the variation of network characteristics such as available bit rate and delay, and the maximization of the reward gained by the flow if

Relative Weight Optimized Linking Scheme for Route Optimization in ADHOC Network

61

the pertinent interface is selected for communication. The access networks can be characterized by modeling the network statistics such as available bit rate and round trip time The applications which do not mandate data transport over a single access network, allow for better striping of data over access networks in multi-homed systems, thus resulting in better QoS for the multimedia applications and better utilization of access networks. The distributed approach for media streaming over hybrid access networks is evaluated. 1. When the streaming systems have access to DR characteristics of the video streams, the rate allocation problem can be solved via a convex optimization framework to minimize the sum of expected distortions of all participating streams. A distributed approximation to the optimization enables autonomous rate allocation at each streaming system and suggests the optimal rate that the flow can be allocated on each access interface. The distributed evaluation is done periodically for each flow, and the rate allocation is revised. 2. When the media information is not accessible by the devices, optimal rate allocation can be used for optimal bandwidth utilization on the access networks by guaranteeing a lower bound on a cost function that models the deviation of rate allocated to a stream from the rate available on a network. for the evaluation of such network a simulation perspective design approach is developed, and the result obtained are as outlined below,

SIMULATION OBSERVATION
The evaluation is carried over a structured network layout with different network units. The Proposed controlling approach is applied to the developed network and is evaluated with the CORBA based approach for its evaluation. The results observed are as outlined below,
86 84 82 80 Delivery ratio(%) 78 76 74 72 70 68 CORBA Adaptive control

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4 0.5 0.6 Mean Traffic offered

0.7

0.8

0.9

Figure 1: Delivery Ratio v/s offered Traffic Plot For the evaluation of the developed system the offered traffic is varied and the delay observed over different traffic is observed. The Delivery ratio is observed to be improved for the adaptive rate controlling because the adaptive approach to resource allocation.
2.4 CORBA Adaptive control

2.2

Communincation Delay(sec)

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

10

20

30

40 50 60 70 Forwarded Frame counts

80

90

100

Figure 2: Observed Communication Delay v/s Offered Frame Counts

62

Shaik Shavali

The observed communication delay due to trafficking is observed. it is observed that as the frame data offered in the network increases the delay offered in the network for the packet forwarding is lower in case of adaptive approach in comparison to conventional approach.
85 80 75 System Throughput(%) 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 CORBA Adaptive control

10

20

30

40 50 60 70 Forwarded Frame counts

80

90

100

Figure 3: System throughput Over Offered Traffic For the developed approach the system throughout is evaluated over the variable frame rate, the throughput is observed to be improved with Offered frame counts in contrast to conventional approach.

CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents an efficient routing scheme with the integral approach of trustiness and power as the measuring factors. With the approach of these two integrated factors a relative improvement in evaluative factors for communication throughput, minimization in communication delay and improvement in delivery ratio. Thus the proposed scheme provides an efficient routing by detecting malicious nodes in ad-hoc networks. By the incorporation of this approaches network performance is extended for larger value of tolerance for distributed networks.

REFERENCES
1. C. Siva Ram Murthy and B. S. Manoj, Ad Hoc Wireless Networks: Architectures and Protocols Prentice Hall, 2004. 2. D. Johnson, D. Maltz, Y. Hu, and J. Jetcheva, The dynamic source routing protocol for mobile ad hoc networks. Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force,Mar. 2001. 3. C.E.Perkins and E.M.Royer Ad hoc on demand distance vector routing, Proceedings of IEEE Workshop on Mobile computing systems and Applications 1999, pp. 90-100, February 1999. 4. Zhang and W. Lee, Intrusion Detection in wireless Ad-hoc networks, in Proceedings of MOBICOM 2000, pp. 275283, 2000. 5. Yi-Chun Hu, Adrian Perrig, A Survey of Secure Wireless Ad Hoc Routing, IEEE Security and Privacy May/June 2004. 6. P. Michiardi and R. Molva, CORE: A Collaborative Reputation Mechanism to enforce node Cooperation in mobile Ad hoc networks, Sixth IFIP conference on security communications, and multimedia (CMS 2002), Portoroz, Slovenia, 2002.

Relative Weight Optimized Linking Scheme for Route Optimization in ADHOC Network

63

7.

S. Marti, T. Giuli, K. Lai, and M. Baker, Mitigating routing Misbehavior in mobile Ad hoc networks, in Proceedings of MOBICOM 2000, pp. 255265, 2000.

8.

Kimaya Sanzgiri, Bridget Dahill, Brian Neil Levine, Clay Shields and Elizabeth M. Belding-Royer, A Secure Routing Protocol for Ad Hoc Networks, National Science Foundation.

9.

Wei Wang, Hong Man, and Yu Liu, An Intrusion Detection System in Ad Hoc Networks: A Social Network Analysis Approach, IEEE 2009.

10. R. Bhattacharya and A. Ephremides, A distributed multicast routing protocol for ad-hoc (flat) mobile wireless networks, in: IEEE PIMRC 97 Helsinki, Finland (September 1997). 11. P. Krishna, N.H. Vaidya, M. Chatterjee and D.K. Pradhan, A clusterbased approach for routing in dynamic networks, ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communications Review (CCR) (1997). 12. D. Kim, S. Ha and Y. Choi, K-hop cluster-based dynamic source routing in wireless ad-hoc packet radio network, in: IEEE VTC 98, Ottawa, Canada (May 1998) 13. Z.J. Haas and M.R. Pearlman, The zone routing protocol (ZRP) for ad hoc networks, Internet Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force (November 1997). 14. Z.J. Haas, The relaying capability of the reconfigurable wireless networks, in: IEEE VTC 97, Phoenix, AZ (1997). 15. V. Bharghavan and B. Das, Routing in ad hoc networks using minimum connected dominating sets, in: IEEE International Conference on Communications (1997). 16. R. Dube, C.D. Rais, K.Y. Wang and S.K. Tripathi, Signal stability based adaptive routing (SSA) for ad-hoc mobile networks, IEEE Personal Communications (February 1997). 17. Y.B. Ko and N.H. Vaidya, Using location information to improve routing in ad hoc networks, Technical Report 97-013, Computer Science, Texas A&M University (December 1997). 18. H. Miranda and L. Rodrigues, .Preventing sel_shness in open mobile ad hoc networks, in Proc. of the Seventh CaberNet Radicals Workshop, October 2002.