skip to main content
10.1145/1978582.1978588acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesewdcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Coarse-grained resilience benchmarking using logic score of preferences: ad hoc networks as a case study

Authors Info & Claims
Published:11 May 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

Ad hoc networks are self-configuring multi-hop wireless networks whose routing protocols are extremely sensitive to the occurrence of accidental and malicious faults. However, the behaviour exhibited by such protocols varies from one to another. This context motivates the importance of using resilience benchmarking strategies to evaluate, compare and select the most suitable routing protocol alternative, among those available, for each application. Experience shows that such selection process is very complex, since requiring the simultaneous consideration a wide set of different performance, resilience, energy consumption and cost measures. This selection can turn into a complex task when the effect of a big number of perturbations (attacks and accidental faults) is considered on a big variety of protocols. The use of general scores, resulting from the aggregation of different measures, provide an interesting way of obtaining a macroscopic view of the behaviour exhibited by evaluated targets. The idea is to reduce the number of candidates, and then use more fine-grained measures in order to compare only the finally retained candidates. This paper works on this idea by proposing the use of the Logic Score Preferences (LSP) technique to combine and aggregate performance, resilience and energy consumption measures into a single global score. The use of this score will be limited to the very first steps of resilience benchmarking, where decision making is hard for benchmark performers due to the number and variety of available measures. The use of the approach is illustrated through a case study where an ad hoc routing protocol, olsrd v. 0.6.0, is evaluated in the presence of accidental faults and attacks. This contribution must not be considered as a replacement of, but rather as a complement to the typical comparison and selection activities deployed during resilience benchmarking.

References

  1. Imad Aad. Impact of denial of service attacks on ad hoc networks. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw., 16(4):791--802, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. I. F. Akyildiz et al. Wireless mesh networks: a survey. IEEE Radio Communications, 43: S23--S30, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. David Andrés, Jesús Friginal, Juan-Carlos Ruiz, and Pedro Gil. An attack injection approach to evaluate the robustness of ad hoc networks. In IEEE Pacific Rim International Symposium on Dependable Computing (PRDC), pages 228--233, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Jasmeet Chhabra et al. Real-world experiences with an interactive ad hoc sensor network. In Proceedings of the 2002 International Conference on Parallel Processing Workshops, pages 143--151, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. J. J. Dujmovic and R. Elnicki. A DMS Cost/Benefit Decision Model: Mathematical Models for Data Management System Evaluation, Comparison, and Selection. National Bureau of Standards, Washington D. C., No. GCR 82-374. NTIS No. PB 82-170150, 1982.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Laura Marie Feeney. An energy consumption model for performance analysis of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks. Mob. Netw. Appl., 6:239--249, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Jesus Friginal, David de Andres, Juan-Carlos Ruiz, and Pedro Gil. On selecting representative faultloads to guide the evaluation of ad hoc networks. In Fifth Latin American Symposium on Dependable Computing (LADC), 2011 - On printing.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Hillsdale WMN. {Online}. Available: http://dashboard.open-mesh.com/overview2.php?id=Hillsdale, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. J. H. James, B. Chen, and L. Garrison. Implementing voip: a voice transmission performance progress report. IEEE Communication Magazine, 42:36--41, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Hung-Chin Jang, Yao-Nan Lien, and Tzu-Chieh Tsai. Rescue information system for earthquake disasters based on manet emergency communication platform. In International Conference on Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing (IWCMC), pages 623--627, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Liqun Li, Guoliang Xin, Limin Sun, and Yan Liu. Qvs: Quality-aware voice streaming for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 2009 29th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, ICDCS '09, pages 450--457, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Weiquan Lu, Winston K. G. Seah, Edwin W. C. Peh, and Yu Ge. Communications support for disaster recovery operations using hybrid mobile ad-hoc networks. In Proceedings of the 32nd IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks, pages 763--770, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Michael F. Morris. Kiviat graphs: conventions and figures of merit. In ACM Sigmetrics Performance Evaluation Review, volume 3, pages 2--8, 1974. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. P. Serrano et al. A CARMEN mesh experience: deployment and results. In 10th IEEE WoWMoM, pages 1--8, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Y. Zhou et al. Balancing the hidden and exposed node problems with power control in csma/cabased wireless networks. In IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), pages 683--688, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    EWDC '11: Proceedings of the 13th European Workshop on Dependable Computing
    May 2011
    106 pages
    ISBN:9781450302845
    DOI:10.1145/1978582

    Copyright © 2011 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 11 May 2011

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader