Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploiting Selfishness, Altruism and Common Welfare to Enhance Performance of Routing Protocols for Mobile Ad hoc Networks

  • Published:
Wireless Personal Communications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mobile Ad hoc Networks are sensitive to selfish behavior that may occur due to restricted power or other resources. Several approaches have been investigated so far to address this problem. In many of them, upon detection, a selfish node is punished with isolation from network services access and in most cases with no possibility for redemption. In this paper, we show that selfish behavior can be exploited to improve network performance. We modify an existing routing protocol by introducing an altruism coefficient to model the overall satisfaction of every node from the network services. When the altruism coefficient is increased, the selfish behavior is decreased. We extend our approach by introducing a common welfare factor, which actually enforces the nodes to cooperate when the network connectivity is critical. A network simulator is utilized to show the impact of our schemes on the performance of the routing protocol when selfish nodes are present in the network.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siva Ram Murthy, C., & Manoj, B. S. (2004). Ad Hoc wireless networks: Architectures and protocols. London: Pearson, Education.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Abolhasan, M., Wysocki, T., & Dutkiewicz, E. (2004). A review of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks. Ad Hoc Networks, 2(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cai, R. J., Tan, W. C. W., & Chong, P. H. J. (2017). An overview of trust-based routing design under adversarial mobile ad hoc network environment. Wireless Personal Communications, 96(3), 3923–3946.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kshirsagar, V. H., Kanthe, A. M., & Simunic, D. (2018). Trust based detection and elimination of packet drop attack in the mobile ad-hoc networks. Wireless Personal Communications, 100(2), 311–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Velloso, P. B., Laufer, R. P., Cunha, D. D. O., Duarte, O. C. M., & Pujolle, G. (2010). Trust management in mobile ad hoc networks using a scalable maturity-based model. IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, 7(3), 172–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Sivakami, R., & Nawaz, G. K. (2016). A radical block to byzantine attacks in mobile ad hoc networks. Wireless Personal Communications, 87(2), 485–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Poongodi, T., & Karthikeyan, M. (2016). Localized secure routing architecture against cooperative black hole attack in mobile ad hoc networks. Wireless Personal Communications, 90(2), 1039–1050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ubarhande, S. D., Doye, D. D., & Nalwade, P. S. (2017). A secure path selection scheme for mobile ad hoc network. Wireless Personal Communications, 97(2), 2087–2096.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cho, J. H., & Chen, R. (2013). On the tradeoff between altruism and selfishness in MANET trust management. Ad Hoc Networks, 11(8), 2217–2234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Samara, C., Karapistoli, E., & Economides, A. A. (2012). Performance comparison of MANET routing protocols based on real-life scenarios. In 2012 4th International congress on ultra-modern telecommunications and control systems and workshops (ICUMT) (pp. 870–877). IEEE.

  11. Kampitaki, D., & Economides, A. A. (2014). Simulation study of MANET routing protocols under FTP traffic. Procedia Technology, 17, 231–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaur, P., Kaur, D., & Mahajan, R. (2017). Simulation based comparative study of routing protocols under wormhole attack in manet. Wireless Personal Communications, 96(1), 47–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Purohit, K. C., Dimri, S. C., & Jasola, S. (2017). Performance evaluation of various MANET routing protocols for adaptability in VANET environment. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, 8(2), 690–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Singh, S. K., Duvvuru, R., & Singh, J. P. (2014). Performance impact of TCP and UDP on the mobility models and routing protocols in MANET. In D. Mohapatra, & S. Patnaik (Eds.), Intelligent computing, networking, and informatics. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (Vol. 243, pp. 895–901). New Delhi: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Alslaim, M. N., Alaqel, H. A., & Zaghloul, S. S. (2014, April). A comparative study of MANET routing protocols. In 2014 Third international conference on e-Technologies and networks for development (ICeND) (pp. 178–182). IEEE.

  16. Macker, J. (1999). Mobile ad hoc networking (MANET): Routing protocol performance issues and evaluation considerations, IETF request for comments 2501.

  17. Marti, S., Giuli, T. J., Lai, K., & Baker, M. (2000, August). Mitigating routing misbehavior in mobile ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of the 6th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking (pp. 255–265). ACM.

  18. Hernandez-Orallo, E., Serrat, M. D., Cano, J. C., Calafate, C. T., & Manzoni, P. (2012). Improving selfish node detection in MANETs using a collaborative watchdog. IEEE Communications Letters, 16(5), 642–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Subramaniyan, S., Johnson, W., & Subramaniyan, K. (2014). A distributed framework for detecting selfish nodes in MANET using Record-and Trust-Based Detection (RTBD) technique. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking, 2014(1), 205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kang, N., Shakshuki, E. M., & Sheltami, T. R. (2010, November). Detecting misbehaving nodes in MANETs. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on information integration and web-based applications & services (pp. 216–222). ACM.

  21. El-Haleem, A. M. A., Ali, I. A., Ibrahim, I. I., & El-Sawy, A. R. H. (2011). TRIDNT: Isolating Dropper nodes with some degree of Selfishness in MANET. In International conference on computer science and information technology (pp. 236–247). Springer, Berlin.

  22. Hernandez-Orallo, E., Olmos, M. D. S., Cano, J. C., Calafate, C. T., & Manzoni, P. (2015). CoCoWa: A collaborative contact-based watchdog for detecting selfish nodes. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 14(6), 1162–1175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Tarannum, R., & Pandey, Y. (2012, March). Detection and deletion of selfish MANET nodes-a distributed approach. In 2012 1st international conference on recent advances in information technology (RAIT) (pp. 152–156). IEEE.

  24. Das, D., Majumder, K., & Dasgupta, A. (2015). Selfish node detection and low cost data transmission in MANET using game theory. Procedia Computer Science, 54, 92–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Naserian, M., & Tepe, K. (2009). Game theoretic approach in routing protocol for wireless ad hoc networks. Ad Hoc Networks, 7(3), 569–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Djenouri, D., & Badache, N. (2009). On eliminating packet droppers in MANET: A modular solution. Ad Hoc Networks, 7(6), 1243–1258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Menaka, R., Ranganathan, V., & Sowmya, B. (2017). Improving performance through reputation based routing protocol for manet. Wireless Personal Communications, 94(4), 2275–2290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Sengathir, J., & Manoharan, R. (2017). Co-operation enforcing reputation-based detection techniques and frameworks for handling selfish node behaviour in MANETs: A review. Wireless Personal Communications, 97(3), 3427–3447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Yoo, Y., & Agrawal, D. P. (2006). Why does it pay to be selfish in a MANET? IEEE Wireless Communications, 13(6), 87–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Djahel, S., Nait-Abdesselam, F., & Zhang, Z. (2011). Mitigating packet dropping problem in mobile ad hoc networks: Proposals and challenges. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 13(4), 658–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Urpi, A., Bonuccelli, M., & Giordano, S. (2003). Modelling cooperation in mobile ad hoc networks: A formal description of selfishness. In WiOpt’03: Modeling and optimization in mobile, ad hoc and wireless networks (pp. 10-pages).

  32. Komathy, K., & Narayanasamy, P. (2007). Study of co-operation among selfish neighbors in MANET under evolutionary game theoretic model. In International conference on signal processing, communications and networking, 2007. ICSCN’07. (pp. 133–138). IEEE.

  33. Azni, A. H., Ahmad, R., Noh, Z. A. M., Basari, A. S. H., & Hussin, B. (2012). Correlated node behavior model based on semi Markov process for MANETS. arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.4319.

  34. Kampitaki, D. G., Karapistoli, E. D., & Economides, A. A. (2014). Evaluating selfishness impact on MANETs. In 2014 international conference on telecommunications and multimedia (TEMU), (pp. 64–68). IEEE.

  35. Kampitaki, D. G., & Economides, A. A. (2016). Novel routing protocol for mobile ad hoc networks with selfish and altruistic nodes. In 2016 International conference on telecommunications and multimedia (TEMU) (pp. 1–5). IEEE.

  36. Johnson, D., Hu, Y. C., & Maltz, D. (2007). The dynamic source routing protocol (DSR) for mobile ad hoc networks for IPv4 (No. RFC 4728). Retrieved online from: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4728.txt.

  37. https://www.nsnam.org/.

  38. Cheng, Y., Çetinkaya, E. K., & Sterbenz, J. P. (2012, March). Dynamic source routing (DSR) protocol implementation in ns-3. In Proceedings of the 5th international ICST conference on simulation tools and techniques (pp. 367–374). ICST (Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering).

  39. Wu, H., Nabar, S., & Poovendran, R. (2011, March). An energy framework for the network simulator 3 (ns-3). In Proceedings of the 4th international ICST conference on simulation tools and techniques (pp. 222–230). ICST (Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Interdepartmental Programme of Postgraduate Studies in Information Systems, Computer Networks and Telematics Applications Lab (CONTALab), University of Macedonia, 54636, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Dimitra G. Kampitaki & Anastasios A. Economides

Authors
  1. Dimitra G. Kampitaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anastasios A. Economides
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dimitra G. Kampitaki.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kampitaki, D.G., Economides, A.A. Exploiting Selfishness, Altruism and Common Welfare to Enhance Performance of Routing Protocols for Mobile Ad hoc Networks. Wireless Pers Commun 103, 2377–2390 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-018-5914-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-018-5914-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation