MANET Router Configuration Recommendations

This memorandum describes a pragmatic set of configuration recommendations for MANETs, as well as provides a rationale for why these recommendations are sound. While there may be other equally valid ways of configuring a MANET, the recommendations in this memorandum have the merit of being supported by an existence proof (there're running networks in existence, configured according to these recommendations), and they require neither modifications to the IP stack nor to upper-layer protocols or applications

Security Issues in the Optimized Link State Routing Protocol version 2 (OLSRv2)

Mobile Ad hoc NETworks (MANETs) are leaving the confines of research laboratories, to find place in real-world deployments. Outside specialized domains (military, vehicular, etc.), city-wide community-networks are emerging, connecting regular Internet users with each other, and with the Internet, via MANETs. Growing to encompass more than a handful of ``trusted participants'', the question of preserving the MANET network connectivity, even when faced with careless or malicious participants, arises, and must be addressed. A first step towards protecting a MANET is to analyze the vulnerabilities of the routing protocol, managing the connectivity. By understanding how the algorithms of the routing protocol operate, and how these can be exploited by those with ill intent, countermeasures can be developed, readying MANETs for wider deployment and use. This memorandum takes an abstract look at the algorithms that constitute the Optimized Link State Routing Protocol version 2 (OLSRv2), and identifies for each protocol element the possible vulnerabilities and attacks -- in a certain way, provides a ``cookbook'' for how to best attack an operational OLSRv2 network, or for how to proceed with developing protective countermeasures against these attacks

Vulnerability Analysis of the Optimized Link State Routing Protocol version 2 (OLSRv2)

Mobile Ad hoc NETworks (MANETs) are leaving the confines of research laboratories, to find place in real-world deployments. Outside specialized domains (military, vehicular, etc.), city-wide community-networks are emerging, connecting regular Internet users with each other, and with the Internet, via MANETs. Growing to encompass more than a handful of ``trusted participants'', the question of preserving the MANET network connectivity, even when faced with careless or malicious participants, arises, and must be addressed. A first step towards protecting a MANET is to analyze the vulnerabilities of the routing protocol, managing the connectivity. By understanding how the algorithms of the routing protocol operate, and how these can be exploited by those with ill intent, countermeasures can be developed, readying MANETs for wider deployment and use. This paper takes an abstract look at the algorithms that constitute the Optimized Link State Routing Protocol version 2 (OLSRv2), and identifies for each protocol element the possible vulnerabilities and attacks -- in a certain way, provides a ``cookbook'' for how to best attack an operational OLSRv2 network, or for how to proceed with developing protective countermeasures against these attacks

Study of Multipoint-to-Point and Broadcast Traffic Performance in RPL

Recent trends in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) have suggested converging to such being IPv6-based. to this effect, the Internet Engineering Task Force has chartered a Working Group to develop a routing protocol specification, enabling IPv6-based multi-hop Wireless Sensor Networks. This routing protocol, denoted RPL, has been under development for approximately a year, and this memorandum takes a critical look at the state of advancement hereof: it provides a brief algorithmic description of the protocol, and discusses areas where -- in the authors view -- further efforts are required in order for the protocol to become a viable candidate for general use in WSNs. Among these areas is the lack of a proper broadcast mechanism. This memorandum suggests two such broadcast mechanisms, both aiming at (i) exploiting the existing routing state of RPL, while (ii) requiring no additional state maintenance, and studies the performance of RPL and of these suggested mechanisms.Les tendances récentes dans les réseaux de capteurs sans fil (Wireless Sensor Networks --WSNs) suggèrent une convergence vers des réseaux IPv6. A cet effet, l'IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) a mis sur pied un groupe de travail pour élaborer la spécification d'un protocole de routage s'appliquant aux réseaux de capteurs sans fil multi-hop basés sur IPv6. Ce protocole de routage, appelé RPL, est en cours de développement depuis environ un an. Cet article présente un examen critique de son état d'avancement. Après une brève description algorithmique du protocole, une discussion est proposée sur des domaines, où selon les auteurs, des efforts supplémentaires sont nécessaires pour que le protocole puisse devenir candidat viable à une utilisation généralisée dans les réseaux de capteurs sans fil. Parmi ces domaines se trouve l'absence d'un mécanisme de diffusion approprié. Cet article suggère deux mécanismes de diffusion, tous deux avec l'objectif (i) de pouvoir exploiter l'état de routage actuel du protocole RPL (ii) sans requérir à une maintenance supplémentaire de cet état. Il étudie également les performances de RPL et des deux mécanismes de diffusion proposés

A Comparative Performance Study of the Routing Protocols LOAD and RPL with Bi-Directional Traffic in Low-power and Lossy Networks (LLN)

Routing protocols for sensor networks are often designed with explicit assumptions, serving to simplify design and reduce the necessary energy, processing and communications requirements. Different protocols make different assumptions -- and this memorandum carefully considers those made by the designers of RPL -- an IPv6 routing protocol for such networks, developed within the IETF. Specific attention is given to the predominance of bi-directional traffic flows in a large class of sensor networks, and this memorandum therefore studies the performance of RPL for such flows. As a point of comparison, a different protocol, called LOAD, is also studied. LOAD is derived from AODV and supports more general kinds of traffic flows. The results of this investigation reveal that for scenarios where bi-directional traffic flows are predominant, LOAD provides similar data delivery ratios as RPL, while incurring less overhead and being simultaneously less constrained in the types of topologies supported

Multipoint-to-Point and Broadcast in RPL

Recent trends in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) have suggested converging to such being IPv6-based. to this effect, the Internet Engineering Task Force has chartered a Working Group to develop a routing protocol specification, enabling IPv6-based multi-hop Wireless Sensor Networks. This routing protocol, denoted RPL, has been under development for approximately a year, and this memorandum takes a critical look at the state of advancement hereof: it provides a brief algorithmic description of the protocol, and discusses areas where -- in the authors view -- further efforts are required in order for the protocol to become a viable candidate for general use in WSNs. Among these areas is the lack of a proper broadcast mechanism. This memorandum suggests two such broadcast mechanisms, both aiming at (i) exploiting the existing routing state of RPL, while (ii) requiring no additional state maintenance, and studies the performance of RPL and of these suggested mechanisms

Yet Another Autoconf Proposal (YAAP) for Mobile Ad hoc NETworks

This memorandum addresses the issues of automatic address and prefix configuration of MANET routers. Specifically, the paper analyzes the differences between "classic IP networks" and MANETs, emphasizing the interface, link, topology, and addressing assumptions present in "classic IP networks". The paper presents a model for how this can be matched to the specific constraints and conditions of a MANET - i.e., how MANETs can be configured to adhere to the Internet addressing architecture. This sets the stage for development of a MANET autoconfiguration protocol, enabling automatic configuration of MANET interfaces and prefix delegation. This autoconfiguration protocol is characterized by (i) adhering strictly to the Internet addressing architecture, (ii) being able to configure both MANET interface addresses and handle prefix delegation, and (iii) being able to configure both stand-alone MANETs, as well as MANETs connected to an infrastructure providing, e.g., globally scoped addresses/prefixes for use within the MANET. The protocol is specified through timed automatons which, by way of model checking, enable verification of certain protocol properties. Furthermore, a performance study of the basic protocol, as well as of various optimization and extensions hereto, is conducted based on network simulations.Cet article aborde les questions liées à la configuration automatique des adresses et préfixes dans les routeurs MANET. Plus spécifiquement, il analyse les différences entre les « réseaux IP classiques » et les réseaux MANET, en mettant l'accent sur l'interface, les liens et la topologie. Il étudie les hypothèses sous-jacentes dans les réseaux IP classiques et présente un modèle satisfaisant ces hypothèses dans le contexte spécifique des contraintes et conditions d'un réseau MANET, permettant par exemple de configurer les réseaux MANET de sortent qu'ils adhèrent à l'architecture d'adressage d'Internet. Les bases sont ainsi posées pour le développement d'un protocole d'auto configuration MANET, permettant la configuration automatique des interfaces MANET et la délégation automatique de préfixes. Ce protocole de configuration automatique se caractérise (i) par son adhérence stricte à l'architecture d'adressage d'Internet, (ii) par sa double capacité de configuration des interfaces MANET et de délégation de préfixes, et enfin (iii) par son aptitude à configurer aussi bien des réseaux MANETS indépendants que des réseaux MANET connectés à une infrastructure fournissant par exemple des adresses et préfixes à portée globale pour leur utilisation dans MANET. Le protocole est défini au travers d'automates temporels, qui grâce à un modèle de contrôle, permettent de vérifier certaines propriétés du protocole. En outre, une étude des performances du protocole de base, ainsi que de diverses optimisations et extensions, a été conduite à partir de simulations de réseau

Comparative Study of RPL-Enabled Optimized Broadcast in Wireless Sensor Networks

Recent trends have suggested convergence to Wireless Sensor Net- works (WSNs) becoming IPv6-based. To this effect, the Internet Engineering Task Force has chartered a Working Group to develop a routing protocol specification, enabling IPv6-based multi-hop WSNs. The current effort of this working group is development of a unicast routing protocol denoted RPL. RPL constructs a “DAG-like” logical structure with a single root, at which the majority of the traffic flows terminate, and assumes restrictions on network dynamics and traffic generality, in order to satisfy strict constraints on router state and processing. This memorandum investigates the efficient network-wide broadcast mechanisms in WSNs, using the logical structure already established by RPL. The aim hereof is to impose minimal additional state requirements on WSN routers, beyond that already maintained by RPL. This memorandum presents a selection of such broadcast mechanisms for RPL routed WSNs, and evaluates their performances. As part of this evaluation, the memorandum compares with MPR Flooding – an established efficient flooding optimization, widely used in MANETs.Les tendances récentes suggèrent une convergence des réseaux de capteurs sans fils (WSNs ou Wireless Sensor Networks) vers IPv6. C'est pourquoi l'IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) a mis en place un groupe de travail, chargé de spécifier un protocole de routage permettant aux réseaux de capteurs sans fil multi-sauts de fonctionner avec IPv6. Les efforts du groupe de travail se concentrent actuellement sur le développement d'un protocole de routage unicast appelé RPL. RPL construit une architecture logique de type DAG (graphe orienté acyclique) avec un noeud racine unique sur lequel se termine la majorité des flux de trafic, et suppose des restrictions sur les dynamiques du réseau et sur les types de trafic supportés afin de satisfaire les contraintes fortes des routeurs en terme d'états et de traitement. Cet article examine la possibilité de fournir aux réseaux de capteurs sans fil des mécanismes efficaces de broadcast (diffusion), en utilisant la structure logique déjà proposée par RPL. Le but est ici de ne pas imposer d'exigences supplémentaires aux routeurs WSN fonctionnant déjà avec RPL. De tels mécanismes de broadcast pour les réseaux WSN utilisant le routage RPL, l'article en présente plusieurs et évalue leur performance. Dans le cadre de cette évaluation, ils sont comparés aux mécanismes reconnus et efficaces d'optimisation de diffusion du protocole MPR Flooding, largement utilisé dans les réseaux MANETs

A Simple Address Autoconfiguration Mechanism for OLSR

International audienceIn this paper, we develop a simple autoconfiguration mechanism for OLSR networks. The mechanism aims at solving the simple, but common, probem of one or more new nodes emerging in an existing network. We propose a simple solution, which allows these new nodes to acquire an address and participate in the network. Our method is simple, both algorithmically and in the requirements to the network. While we recognize that this is a partial solution to the general autoconfiguration problem, we argue that the mechanism described in this paper will satisfy the requirements from a great number of real-world situations

Delay Tolerant Routing with OLSRv2

This memorandum proposes a simple mechanism for enabling basic delay tolerant networking with off-the-shelf MANET routing protocols - with the objective being to enable trading off slightly longer data delivery delays against resilience to a temporary lack of connectivity between a router and the ultimate destination of an IP datagram. As part of testing the benefit of said mechanism, an extreme network mobility model is proposed, entitled the "PopUp model": a router appears in the network, and operates normally - then may disable and disappear from the network to appear later elsewhere. Observed to cause severely degraded performance for MANET routing proto- cols, this model is used for testing the proposed mechanism in OLSRv2-routed MANETs. The proposed mechanism shows to vastly increase the data deliv- ery ration, with reasonably low increases in delays and control traffic overhead incurred.Ce memorandum présente un mécanisme simple de routage tolérant aux délais pour des protocoles de routage MANET - avec l'objectif d'être capable de balancer des délais de remise de données légèrement plus élevés et la résistance contre un manque de connectivité entre un routeur et la destination ultime d'un datagramme IP. Afin de tester le bénéfice d'un tel mécanisme, un modèle extrême de mobilité de réseaux est proposé, nommé "modèle popup" : un routeur apparait dans le réseau et fonctionne normalement - puis peut être désactivé et disparaitre du réseau afin de réapparaitre ultérieurement à un autre endroit. Ayant observé une forte dégradation de la performance des protocoles de routage de MANET, ce modèle est utilisé pour tester le mécanisme proposé dans des MANETs tournant le protocole de routage OLSRv2. Le mécanisme proposé augmente largement le taux de remise des données avec des augmentations de délai et de trafic de contrôle relativement basses