Table 1 Comparing the 3TCA architecture with the current research work
From: Intrusion tolerant QoS provision in mobile multihop relay networks
Research work | Characteristics | Shortcomings |
|---|---|---|
Self optimization HandOver (HO) mechanism,[4] | Reduces HO numbers and optimizes channel scanning | -Does not consider security issues-Uses GPS |
Fast HO scheme, [5] | Minimizes collisions in order to achieve fast HO | Does not consider security issues |
Speed sensitive HO scheme, [6] | Speed sensitive HO under hierarchical cellular system | Does not consider security issues |
Path selection method, [7] | Secures the routing for MMR networks | Does not consider QoS issues |
QITAR, [8] | Achieves QoS and intrusion tolerance for ad hoc networks | -Vulnerable to high-speed mobility-May experience scalability problems |
MERQIT, [9] | Achieves QoS and intrusion tolerance for mesh networks | -Clusterheads are mobile nodes that may experience attacks and leave the network-Isolates malicious nodes |
WSN-TUM, [13] | Fault-intrusion tolerant framework for sensor networks | -Split the packet on fragments and send them on disjoint routes. However MMR networks use the same route as the routing architecture is a tree rooted at the MR-BS-Global QoS is hard to guarantee since each fragment uses a different route with different QoS constraints-All sensors participate in the securization effort. For MMR networks, this should be the task of the MR-BS |
SPR, MLR and SecMLR, [14] | Secure routing protocols for sensor networks | -Intrusion tolerance is simply achieved by setting up routing tables with multiple entries to specified gateways-If the scheme is adopted for MMR networks, it can be only implemented on the backbone-QoS constraints are not considered |
Our method | -Architecture designed for MMR networks-Achieves QoS and intrusion tolerance for MMR networks-Compensates HO delays-Detects attacks and compensates their impact on the agreed QoS | Â |