Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://drsr.daiict.ac.in//handle/123456789/259
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorSrivastava, Sanjay
dc.contributor.authorChaturvedi, Manish Shivshankar
dc.date.accessioned2017-06-10T14:37:59Z
dc.date.available2017-06-10T14:37:59Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.identifier.citationChaturvedi, Manish Shivshankar (2009). Cooperation enforcement mechanisms in wireless adhoc networks. Dhirubhai Ambani Institute of Information and Communication Technology, viii, 92 p. (Acc.No: T00222)
dc.identifier.urihttp://drsr.daiict.ac.in/handle/123456789/259
dc.description.abstractWireless adhoc networks are autonomous, infrastrutureless networks where there are no dedicated routers or base stations and nodes are expected to cooperate in Wireless performing routing duties to keep network connected. Cooperation can be assumed if all nodes belong to single authority (e.g. military service or disaster management). But in applications where nodes do not belong to single authority and have limited resources (energy of battery driven devices), like pervasive computing or ubiquitous computing environment, one can not deny possibility of node selfishness. Also as there is no central authority to control node behavior, one can not deny possibility of node maliciousness. Many cooperation enforcement schemes are proposed in literature, and every scheme is shown to perform better under its own set of assumptions. These assumptions are different for different schemes. So, we aim at defining common set of assumptions and comparing selected schemes on this common ground with respect to packet delivery ratio, energy consumption, routing and other control overhead. We find that with the traffic scenario where nodes do not need services of one another at the same time, the cooperation schemes are not effective in dealing with node selfish ness. We also find that, while dealing with malicious nodes, all cooperation schemes perform better than Dynamic Source Routing(DSR) protocol in improving packet de- livery ratio(PDR), but this improvement comes at the cost of significant increase in routing control packets overhead and energy consumption of cooperation enforcement schemes is higher than that of DSR. Also they fail in punishing misbehaving nodes and the PDR of malicious nodes is comparable to that of good nodes.
dc.publisherDhirubhai Ambani Institute of Information and Communication Technology
dc.subjectWireless ad-hoc networks
dc.subjectRouting
dc.subjectComputer network management
dc.subjectComputer network architectures
dc.subjectQuality control
dc.subjectWireless communication systems
dc.subjectAd-hoc networks
dc.subjectAccess control
dc.subjectRouters
dc.subjectComputer network protocols
dc.classification.ddc621.384 CHA
dc.titleCooperation enforcement mechanisms in wireless adhoc networks
dc.typeDissertation
dc.degreeM. Tech
dc.student.id200711034
dc.accession.numberT00222
Appears in Collections:M Tech Dissertations

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
200711034.pdf
  Restricted Access
730.98 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open Request a copy


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.