Wireless ad hoc network

A wireless ad hoc network[1] (WANET) or mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is a

decentralized type of wireless network. The network is ad hoc because it does not rely on a pre-
existing infrastructure, such as routers in wired networks or access points in wireless networks.
Instead, each node participates in routing by forwarding data for other nodes, so the
determination of which nodes forward data is made dynamically on the basis of network
connectivity and the routing algorithm in use.[2]

In the Windows operating system, ad hoc is a communication mode (setting) that allows
computers to directly communicate with each other without a router. Wireless mobile ad hoc
networks are self-configuring, dynamic networks in which nodes are free to move.

Such wireless networks lack the complexities of infrastructure setup and administration,
enabling devices to create and join networks "on the fly".[3]

Each device in a MANET is free to move independently in any direction, and will therefore
change its links to other devices frequently. Each must forward traffic unrelated to its own use,
and therefore be a router. The primary challenge in building a MANET is equipping each device
to continuously maintain the information required to properly route traffic. This becomes
harder as the scale of the MANET increases due to 1) the desire to route packets to/through
every other node, 2) the percentage of overhead traffic needed to maintain real-time routing
status, 3) each node has its own goodput to route independent and unaware of others needs,
and 4) all must share limited communication bandwidth, such as a slice of radio spectrum. Such
networks may operate by themselves or may be connected to the larger Internet. They may
contain one or multiple and different transceivers between nodes. This results in a highly
dynamic, autonomous topology. MANETs usually have a routable networking environment on
top of a link layer ad hoc network.

Contents
History on packet radio
Early work on MANET
Applications
Mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs)
Vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs)
Smartphone ad hoc networks (SPANs)
Wireless mesh networks
Army tactical MANETs
Air Force UAV Ad hoc networks
Navy ad hoc networks
Wireless sensor networks
Ad hoc network of robots
Disaster rescue ad hoc network
 Hospital ad hoc network
Data monitoring and mining
Challenges
Advantages for users
Implementation difficulties
Side effects
Radios and Modulation
Protocol stack
Routing
Proactive routing
Distance vector routing
Reactive routing
Flooding
Hybrid routing
Position-based routing
Technical requirements for implementation
Medium-access control
Simulation
Emulation testbed
Mathematical models
Security
Trust management
See also
References
Further reading
External links

History on packet radio

The earliest wireless data network was called PRNET, the
packet radio network, and was sponsored by Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in the early
1970s. Bolt, Beranek and Newman Inc. (BBN) and SRI
International designed, built, and experimented with these
earliest systems. Experimenters included Robert Kahn,[4]
Jerry Burchfiel, and Ray Tomlinson.[5] Similar experiments
took place in the amateur radio community with the x25 A Stanford Research Institute's
protocol. These early packet radio systems predated the Packet Radio Van, site of the first
Internet, and indeed were part of the motivation of the three-way internetworked
original Internet Protocol suite. Later DARPA experiments transmission.
included the Survivable Radio Network (SURAN) project,[6]
which took place in the 1980s. A successor to these systems was fielded in the mid-1990s for the
US Army, and later other nations, as the Near-term digital
radio.

Another third wave of academic and research activity

started in the mid-1990s with the advent of inexpensive
802.11 radio cards for personal computers. Current wireless
ad hoc networks are designed primarily for military
utility.[7] Problems with packet radios are: (1) bulky
elements, (2) slow data rate, (3) unable to maintain links if
mobility is high. The project did not proceed much further Initial, large-scale trials of the Near-
until the early 1990s when wireless ad hoc networks were term digital radio, February 1998.
born.

Early work on MANET

The growth of laptops and 802.11/Wi-Fi wireless networking have made MANETs a popular
research topic since the mid-1990s. Many academic papers evaluate protocols and their
abilities, assuming varying degrees of mobility within a bounded space, usually with all nodes
within a few hops of each other. Different protocols are then evaluated based on measures such
as the packet drop rate, the overhead introduced by the routing protocol, end-to-end packet
delays, network throughput, ability to scale, etc.

In the early 1990s, Charles Perkins from SUN Microsystems USA, and Chai Keong Toh from
Cambridge University separately started to work on a different Internet, that of a wireless ad
hoc network. Perkins was working on the dynamic addressing issues. Toh worked on a new
routing protocol, which was known as ABR – associativity-based routing.[8] Perkins eventually
proposed DSDV – Destination Sequence Distance Vector routing, which was based on
distributed distance vector routing. Toh's proposal was an on-demand based routing, i.e. routes
are discovered on-the-fly in real-time as and when needed. ABR[9] was submitted to IETF as
RFCs. ABR was implemented successfully into Linux OS on Lucent WaveLAN 802.11a enabled
laptops and a practical ad hoc mobile network was therefore proven[10][11][12] to be possible in
1999. Another routing protocol known as AODV was subsequently introduced and later proven
and implemented in 2005.[13] In 2007, David Johnson and Dave Maltz proposed DSR –
Dynamic Source Routing.[14]

Applications
The decentralized nature of wireless ad hoc networks makes them suitable for a variety of
applications where central nodes can't be relied on and may improve the scalability of networks
compared to wireless managed networks, though theoretical and practical limits to the overall
capacity of such networks have been identified. Minimal configuration and quick deployment
make ad hoc networks suitable for emergency situations like natural disasters or military
conflicts. The presence of dynamic and adaptive routing protocols enables ad hoc networks to
be formed quickly. Wireless ad hoc networks can be further classified by their applications:

Mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs)

A mobile ad hoc network (MANET) is a continuously self-configuring, self-organizing,
infrastructure-less[15] network of mobile devices connected without wires. It is sometimes
known as "on-the-fly" networks or "spontaneous networks".[16]

Vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs)

VANETs are used for communication between vehicles and roadside equipment.[17] Intelligent
vehicular ad hoc networks (InVANETs) are a kind of artificial intelligence that helps vehicles to
behave in intelligent manners during vehicle-to-vehicle collisions, accidents. Vehicles are using
radio waves to communicate with each other, creating communication networks instantly on-
the-fly while vehicles move along roads. VANET needs to be secured with lightweight
protocols.[18]

Smartphone ad hoc networks (SPANs)

A SPAN leverages existing hardware (primarily Wi-Fi and Bluetooth) and software (protocols)
in commercially available smartphones to create peer-to-peer networks without relying on
cellular carrier networks, wireless access points, or traditional network infrastructure. SPANs
differ from traditional hub and spoke networks, such as Wi-Fi Direct, in that they support
multi-hop relays and there is no notion of a group leader so peers can join and leave at will
without destroying the network. Most recently, Apple's iPhone with version 8.4 iOS and higher
have been enabled with multi-peer ad hoc mesh networking capability,[19] in iPhones, allowing
millions of smart phones to create ad hoc networks without relying on cellular communications.
It has been claimed that this is going to "change the world".[20]

Wireless mesh networks

Mesh networks take their name from the topology of the resultant network. In a fully connected
mesh, each node is connected to every other node, forming a "mesh". A partial mesh, by
contrast, has a topology in which some nodes are not connected to others, although this term is
seldom in use. Wireless ad hoc networks can take the form of a mesh networks or others. A
wireless ad hoc network does not have fixed topology, and its connectivity among nodes is
totally dependent on the behavior of the devices, their mobility patterns, distance with each
other, etc. Hence, wireless mesh networks are a particular type of wireless ad hoc networks,
with special emphasis on the resultant network topology. While some wireless mesh networks
(particularly those within a home) have relatively infrequent mobility and thus infrequent link
breaks, other more mobile mesh networks require frequent routing adjustments to account for
lost links.[21]

Army tactical MANETs

Military or tactical MANETs are used by military units with emphasis on data rate, real-time
requirement, fast re-routing during mobility, data security, radio range, and integration with
existing systems.[22] Common radio waveforms include the US Army's JTRS SRW, Persistent
System's WaveRelay and the Domo Tactical Communications (DTC) MeshUltra Tactical
Waveform. Ad hoc mobile communications come in well to fulfill this need, especially its
infrastructureless nature, fast deployment and operation. Military MANETs are used by military
units with emphasis on rapid deployment, infrastructureless, all-wireless networks (no fixed
radio towers), robustness (link breaks are no problem), security, range, and instant operation.

Air Force UAV Ad hoc networks

Flying ad hoc networks (FANETs) are composed of unmanned aerial vehicles, allowing great
mobility and providing connectivity to remote areas.[23]

Unmanned aerial vehicle, is an aircraft with no pilot on board. UAVs can be remotely controlled
(i.e., flown by a pilot at a ground control station) or can fly autonomously based on pre-
programmed flight plans. Civilian usage of UAV include modeling 3D terrains, package delivery
(Logistics), etc.[24]

UAVs have also been used by US Air Force[25] for data collection and situation sensing, without
risking the pilot in a foreign unfriendly environment. With wireless ad hoc network technology
embedded into the UAVs, multiple UAVs can communicate with each other and work as a team,
collaboratively to complete a task and mission. If a UAV is destroyed by an enemy, its data can
be quickly offloaded wirelessly to other neighboring UAVs. The UAV ad hoc communication
network is also sometimes referred to UAV instant sky network. More generally, aerial MANET
in UAVs are now (as of 2021) successfully implemented and operational as mini tactical
reconnaissance ISR UAVs like the BRAMOR C4EYE from Slovenia.

Navy ad hoc networks

Navy ships traditionally use satellite communications and other maritime radios to
communicate with each other or with ground station back on land. However, such
communications are restricted by delays and limited bandwidth. Wireless ad hoc networks
enable ship-area-networks to be formed while at sea, enabling high speed wireless
communications among ships, enhancing their sharing of imaging and multimedia data, and
better co-ordination in battlefield operations.[26] Some defense companies (such as Rockwell
Collins and Rohde & Schwartz) have produced products that enhance ship-to-ship and ship-to-
shore communications.[27]

Wireless sensor networks

Sensors are useful devices that collect information related to a specific parameter, such as noise,
temperature, humidity, pressure, etc. Sensors are increasingly connected via wireless to allow
large scale collection of sensor data. With a large sample of sensor data, analytics processing can
be used to make sense out of these data. The connectivity of wireless sensor networks rely on
the principles behind wireless ad hoc networks, since sensors can now be deploy without any
fixed radio towers, and they can now form networks on-the-fly. "Smart Dust" was one of the
early projects done at U C Berkeley, where tiny radios were used to interconnect smart dust.[28]
More recently, mobile wireless sensor networks (MWSNs) have also become an area of
academic interest.

Ad hoc network of robots

Robots are mechanical systems that drive automation and perform chores that would seem
difficult for humans. Efforts have been made to co-ordinate and control a group of robots to
undertake collaborative work to complete a task. Centralized control is often based on a "star"
approach, where robots take turns to talk to the controller station. However, with wireless ad
hoc networks, robots can form a communication network on-the-fly, i.e., robots can now "talk"
to each other and collaborate in a distributed fashion.[29] With a network of robots, the robots
can communicate among themselves, share local information, and distributively decide how to
resolve a task in the most effective and efficient way.[30]

Disaster rescue ad hoc network

Another civilian use of wireless ad hoc network is public safety. At times of disasters (floods,
storms, earthquakes, fires, etc.), a quick and instant wireless communication network is
necessary. Especially at times of earthquakes when radio towers had collapsed or were
destroyed, wireless ad hoc networks can be formed independently. Firemen and rescue workers
can use ad hoc networks to communicate and rescue those injured. Commercial radios with
such capability are available on the market.[31][32]

Hospital ad hoc network

Wireless ad hoc networks allow sensors, videos, instruments, and other devices to be deployed
and interconnected wirelessly for clinic and hospital patient monitoring, doctor and nurses alert
notification, and also making senses of such data quickly at fusion points, so that lives can be
saved.[33][34]

Data monitoring and mining

MANETS can be used for facilitating the collection of sensor data for data mining for a variety of
applications such as air pollution monitoring and different types of architectures can be used for
such applications.[35] A key characteristic of such applications is that nearby sensor nodes
monitoring an environmental feature typically register similar values. This kind of data
redundancy due to the spatial correlation between sensor observations inspires the techniques
for in-network data aggregation and mining. By measuring the spatial correlation between data
sampled by different sensors, a wide class of specialized algorithms can be developed to develop
more efficient spatial data mining algorithms as well as more efficient routing strategies.[36]
Also, researchers have developed performance models for MANET to apply queueing
theory.[37][38]

Challenges
Several books[39][40] and works have revealed the technical and research challenges[41][42]
facing wireless ad hoc networks or MANETs. The advantages for users, the technical difficulties
in implementation, and the side effect on radio spectrum pollution can be briefly summarized
below:

Advantages for users

The obvious appeal of MANETs is that the network is decentralised and nodes/devices are
mobile, that is to say there is no fixed infrastructure which provides the possibility for
numerous applications in different areas such as environmental monitoring [1], [2], disaster
relief [3]–[5] and military communications [3]. Since the early 2000s interest in MANETs has
greatly increased which, in part, is due to the fact mobility can improve network capacity,
shown by Grossglauser and Tse along with the introduction of new technologies.[43]

One main advantage to a decentralised network is that they are typically more robust than
centralised networks due to the multi-hop fashion in which information is relayed. For example,
in the cellular network setting, a drop in coverage occurs if a base station stops working,
however the chance of a single point of failure in a MANET is reduced significantly since the
data can take multiple paths. Since the MANET architecture evolves with time it has the
potential to resolve issues such as isolation/disconnection from the network. Further
advantages of MANETS over networks with a fixed topology include flexibility (an ad hoc
network can be created anywhere with mobile devices), scalability (you can easily add more
nodes to the network) and lower administration costs (no need to build an infrastructure
first).[44][45]

In summary:

Highly performing network.

No expensive infrastructure must be installed
Quick distribution of information around sender
No single point of failure.
multi hop
scalability

Implementation difficulties
With a time evolving network it is clear we should expect variations in network performance
due to no fixed architecture (no fixed connections). Furthermore, since network topology
determines interference and thus connectivity, the mobility pattern of devices within the
network will impact on network performance, possibly resulting in data having to be resent a lot
of times (increased delay) and finally allocation of network resources such as power remains
unclear.[43] Finally, finding a model that accurately represents human mobility whilst
remaining mathematically tractable remains an open problem due to the large range of factors
that influence it.[46] Some typical models used include the random walk, random waypoint and
levy flight models.[47][48] [49][50]

In summary:

All network entities may be mobile, so a very dynamic topology is needed.

Network functions must have a high degree of adaptability.
There are no central entities, so operations must be managed in a completely distributed
manner.
Battery constraints

Side effects
 Use of unlicensed frequency spectrum, contributing to radio spectrum pollution.

Radios and Modulation

Wireless ad hoc networks can operate over different types of radios. All radios use modulation
to move information over a certain bandwidth of radio frequencies. Given the need to move
large amounts of information quickly over long distances, a MANET radio channel ideally has
large bandwidth (e.g. amount of radio spectrum), lower frequencies, and higher power. Given
the desire to communicate with many other nodes ideally simultaneously, many channels are
needed. Given radio spectrum is shared and regulated, there is less bandwidth available at lower
frequencies. Processing many radio channels requires many resources. Given the need for
mobility, small size and lower power consumption are very important. Picking a MANET radio
and modulation has many trade-offs; many start with the specific frequency and bandwidth
they are allowed to use.

Radios can be UHF (300 – 3000 MHz), SHF (3 – 30 GHz), and EHF (30 – 300 GHz). Wi-Fi ad
hoc uses the unlicensed ISM 2.4 GHz radios. They can also be used on 5.8 GHz radios.

The higher the frequency, such as those of 300  GHz, absorption of the signal will be more
predominant. Army tactical radios usually employ a variety of UHF and SHF radios, including
those of VHF to provide a variety of communication modes. At the 800, 900, 1200, 1800 MHz
range, cellular radios are predominant. Some cellular radios use ad hoc communications to
extend cellular range to areas and devices not reachable by the cellular base station.

Next generation Wi-Fi known as 802.11ax provides low delay, high capacity (up to 10Gbit/s)
and low packet loss rate, offering 12 streams – 8 streams at 5 GHz and 4 streams at 2.4 GHz.
IEEE 802.11ax uses 8x8 MU-MIMO, OFDMA, and 80 MHz channels. Hence, 802.11ax has the
ability to form high capacity Wi-Fi ad hoc networks.

At 60 GHz, there is another form of Wi-Fi known as WiGi – wireless gigabit. This has the ability
to offer up to 7Gbit/s throughput. Currently, WiGi is targeted to work with 5G cellular
networks.[51]

Circa 2020, the general consensus finds the 'best' modulation for moving information over
higher frequency waves to be Orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing, as used in 4G LTE,
5G, and Wi-Fi.

Protocol stack
The challenges[39][52] affecting MANETs span from various layers of the OSI protocol stack. The
media access layer (MAC) has to be improved to resolve collisions and hidden terminal
problems. The network layer routing protocol has to be improved to resolve dynamically
changing network topologies and broken routes. The transport layer protocol has to be
improved to handle lost or broken connections. The session layer protocol has to deal with
discovery of servers and services.

A major limitation with mobile nodes is that they have high mobility, causing links to be
frequently broken and reestablished. Moreover, the bandwidth of a wireless channel is also
limited, and nodes operate on limited battery power, which will eventually be exhausted. These
factors make the design of a mobile ad hoc network challenging.
The cross-layer design deviates from the traditional network design approach in which each
layer of the stack would be made to operate independently. The modified transmission power
will help that node to dynamically vary its propagation range at the physical layer. This is
because the propagation distance is always directly proportional to transmission power. This
information is passed from the physical layer to the network layer so that it can take optimal
decisions in routing protocols. A major advantage of this protocol is that it allows access of
information between physical layer and top layers (MAC and network layer).

Some elements of the software stack were developed to allow code updates in situ, i.e., with the
nodes embedded in their physical environment and without needing to bring the nodes back
into the lab facility.[53] Such software updating relied on epidemic mode of dissemination of
information and had to be done both efficiently (few network transmissions) and fast.

Routing
Routing[54] in wireless ad hoc networks or MANETs generally falls into three categories,
namely: (a) proactive routing, (b) reacting routing, and (c) hybrid routing.

Proactive routing
This type of protocols maintains fresh lists of destinations and their routes by periodically
distributing routing tables throughout the network. The main disadvantages of such algorithms
are:

Respective amount of data for maintenance.

Slow reaction on restructuring and failures.

Example: Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (OLSR)

Distance vector routing

As in a fix net nodes maintain routing tables. Distance-vector protocols are based on calculating
the direction and distance to any link in a network. "Direction" usually means the next hop
address and the exit interface. "Distance" is a measure of the cost to reach a certain node. The
least cost route between any two nodes is the route with minimum distance. Each node
maintains a vector (table) of minimum distance to every node. The cost of reaching a
destination is calculated using various route metrics. RIP uses the hop count of the destination
whereas IGRP takes into account other information such as node delay and available
bandwidth.

Reactive routing
This type of protocol finds a route based on user and traffic demand by flooding the network
with Route Request or Discovery packets. The main disadvantages of such algorithms are:

High latency time in route finding.

Excessive flooding can lead to network clogging.[55]
However, clustering can be used to limit flooding. The latency incurred during route discovery
is not significant compared to periodic route update exchanges by all nodes in the network.

Example: Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector Routing (AODV)

Flooding

Is a simple routing algorithm in which every incoming packet is sent through every outgoing
link except the one it arrived on. Flooding is used in bridging and in systems such as Usenet and
peer-to-peer file sharing and as part of some routing protocols, including OSPF, DVMRP, and
those used in wireless ad hoc networks.

Hybrid routing
This type of protocol combines the advantages of proactive and reactive routing. The routing is
initially established with some proactively prospected routes and then serves the demand from
additionally activated nodes through reactive flooding. The choice of one or the other method
requires predetermination for typical cases. The main disadvantages of such algorithms are:

1. Advantage depends on number of other nodes activated.

2. Reaction to traffic demand depends on gradient of traffic volume.[56]

Example: Zone Routing Protocol (ZRP)

Position-based routing
Position-based routing methods use information on the exact locations of the nodes. This
information is obtained for example via a GPS receiver. Based on the exact location the best
path between source and destination nodes can be determined.

Example: "Location-Aided Routing in mobile ad hoc networks" (LAR)

Technical requirements for implementation

An ad hoc network is made up of multiple "nodes" connected by "links."

Links are influenced by the node's resources (e.g., transmitter power, computing power and
memory) and behavioral properties (e.g., reliability), as well as link properties (e.g. length-of-
link and signal loss, interference and noise). Since links can be connected or disconnected at
any time, a functioning network must be able to cope with this dynamic restructuring,
preferably in a way that is timely, efficient, reliable, robust, and scalable.

The network must allow any two nodes to communicate by relaying the information via other
nodes. A "path" is a series of links that connects two nodes. Various routing methods use one or
two paths between any two nodes; flooding methods use all or most of the available paths.[57]

Medium-access control
In most wireless ad hoc networks, the nodes compete for access to shared wireless medium,
often resulting in collisions (interference).[58] Collisions can be handled using centralized
scheduling or distributed contention access protocols.[58] Using cooperative wireless
communications improves immunity to interference by having the destination node combine
self-interference and other-node interference to improve decoding of the desired signals.

Simulation
One key problem in wireless ad hoc networks is foreseeing the variety of possible situations that
can occur. As a result, modeling and simulation (M&S) using extensive parameter sweeping and
what-if analysis becomes an extremely important paradigm for use in ad hoc networks. One
solution is the use of simulation tools like OPNET, NetSim or ns2. A comparative study of
various simulators for VANETs reveal that factors such as constrained road topology, multi-
path fading and roadside obstacles, traffic flow models, trip models, varying vehicular speed
and mobility, traffic lights, traffic congestion, drivers' behavior, etc., have to be taken into
consideration in the simulation process to reflect realistic conditions.[59]

Emulation testbed
In 2009, the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) and Naval Research Laboratory (NRL)
developed a Mobile Ad-Hoc Network emulation testbed, where algorithms and applications
were subjected to representative wireless network conditions. The testbed was based on a
version of the "MANE" (Mobile Ad hoc Network Emulator) software originally developed by
NRL.[60]

Mathematical models
The traditional model is the random geometric graph. Early work included simulating ad hoc
mobile networks on sparse and densely connected topologies. Nodes are firstly scattered in a
constrained physical space randomly. Each node then has a predefined fixed cell size (radio
range). A node is said to be connected to another node if this neighbor is within its radio range.
Nodes are then moved (migrated away) based on a random model, using random walk or
brownian motion. Different mobility and number of nodes present yield different route length
and hence different number of multi-hops.

These are graphs consisting of a set of nodes placed according to a point process in some usually
bounded subset of the n-dimensional plane, mutually coupled according to a boolean
probability mass function of their spatial separation (see e.g. unit disk graphs). The connections
between nodes may have different weights to model the difference in channel attenuations.[58]
One can then study network observables (such as connectivity,[61] centrality[62] or the degree
distribution[63]) from a graph-theoretic perspective. One can further study network protocols
and algorithms to improve network throughput and fairness.[58]

Security
Most wireless ad hoc networks do not implement any
network access control, leaving these networks vulnerable to
resource consumption attacks where a malicious node
injects packets into the network with the goal of depleting
the resources of the nodes relaying the packets.[64]

To thwart or prevent such attacks, it was necessary to

employ authentication mechanisms that ensure that only
authorized nodes can inject traffic into the network.[65]
Even with authentication, these networks are vulnerable to
packet dropping or delaying attacks, whereby an
intermediate node drops the packet or delays it, rather than
promptly sending it to the next hop. A randomly constructed geometric
graph drawn inside a square
In a multicast and dynamic environment, establishing
temporary 1:1 secure 'sessions' using PKI with every other
node is not feasible (like is done with HTTPS, most VPNs, etc. at the transport layer). Instead, a
common solution is to use pre-shared keys for symmetric, authenticated encryption at the link
layer, for example MACsec using AES-256-GCM. With this method, every properly formatted
packet received is authenticated then passed along for decryption or dropped. It also means the
key(s) in each node must be changed more often and simultaneously (e.g. to avoid reusing an
IV).

Trust management
Trust establishment and management in MANETs face challenges due to resource constraints
and the complex interdependency of networks. Managing trust in a MANET needs to consider
the interactions between the composite cognitive, social, information and communication
networks, and take into account the resource constraints (e.g., computing power, energy,
bandwidth, time), and dynamics (e.g., topology changes, node mobility, node failure,
propagation channel conditions).[66]

Researchers of trust management in MANET suggested that such complex interactions require
a composite trust metric that captures aspects of communications and social networks, and
corresponding trust measurement, trust distribution, and trust management schemes.[66]

Continuous monitoring of every node within a MANET is necessary for trust and reliability but
difficult because it by definition is dis-continuous, 2) it requires input from the node itself and
3) from its 'nearby' peers.

See also
Ad hoc wireless distribution service
Delay-tolerant networking
Independent basic service set (IBSS)
List of ad hoc routing protocols
Mobile wireless sensor network
Personal area network (PAN)
Smart meter
 Wi-Fi Direct
Wireless community network
Wireless mesh network
Wireless sensor networks

References
1. Toh, C. K. (1997). Wireless ATM & Ad Hoc Networks, 1997, Kluwer Academic Press (https://
books.google.com/books?id=0hMfAQAAIAAJ). ISBN 9780792398226.
2. Morteza M. Zanjireh; Ali Shahrabi; Hadi Larijani (2013). ANCH: A New Clustering Algorithm
for Wireless Sensor Networks (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257373717). 27th
International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications
Workshops. WAINA 2013. doi:10.1109/WAINA.2013.242 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2FWAINA
.2013.242).
3. Toh, Chai Keong (2002). Ad Hoc Mobile Wireless Networks. Prentice Hall Publishers.
ISBN 9780130078179.
4. "Robert ("Bob") Elliot Kahn" (http://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/kahn_4598637.cfm).
A.M. Turing Award. Association for Computing Machinery.
5. J. Burchfiel; R. Tomlinson; M. Beeler (May 1975). Functions and structure of a packet radio
station (http://www.computer.org/csdl/proceedings/afips/1975/5083/00/50830245.pdf)
(PDF). National Computer Conference and Exhibition. pp. 245–251.
doi:10.1145/1499949.1499989 (https://doi.org/10.1145%2F1499949.1499989).
6. Beyer, Dave (October 1990). "Accomplishments of the DARPA SURAN Program - IEEE
Conference Publication". doi:10.1109/MILCOM.1990.117536 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2FMI
LCOM.1990.117536). S2CID 57373343 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:5737334
3).
7. ARRL's VHF Digital Handbook. American Radio Relay League. 2008. pp. 1–2.
8. Toh, Chai Keong (1997). "Associativity-Based Routing for Ad Hoc Mobile Networks".
Wireless Personal Communications Journal. 4 (2): 103–139. doi:10.1023/A:1008812928561
(https://doi.org/10.1023%2FA%3A1008812928561). S2CID 14335563 (https://api.semantics
cholar.org/CorpusID:14335563).
9. Toh, Chai Keong. "IETF MANET DRAFT: Long-lived Ad Hoc Routing based on the Concept
of Associativity" (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-manet-longlived-adhoc-routing
).
10. Toh, Chai Keong (2002). Ad Hoc Mobile Wireless Networks. Prentice Hall Publishers.
ISBN 9780130078179.
11. "Experimenting with an Ad Hoc Wireless Network on Campus: Insights & Experiences",
ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, Vol. 28, No. 3, 2001" (http://ftp.math.ut
ah.edu/pub/tex/bib/toc/sigmetrics.html#28(4):March:2001).
12. Toh, Chai K. (2001-12-03). "7: Implementation of Ad Hoc Mobile Networks". Ad Hoc Mobile
Wireless Networks (https://books.google.com/books?id=9fUchlgTXDQC). Prentice Hall.
ISBN 9780132442046.
13. Chakeres, Ian D. "AODV Implementation Design and Performance Evaluation" (https://ebel
ding.cs.ucsb.edu/sites/default/files/publications/ijwmc05.pdf) (PDF).
14. Johnson, D.; Hu, Y.; Maltz, D. (February 2007). The Dynamic Source Routing Protocol
(DSR) for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks for IPv4 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4728).
IETF. doi:10.17487/RFC4728 (https://doi.org/10.17487%2FRFC4728). RFC 4728 (https://da
tatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc4728).
15. "Ad Hoc Mobile Wireless Networks:Protocols and Systems, 2001" (https://www.pearson.ch/
HigherEducation/PrenticeHall/EAN/9780130078179/Ad-Hoc-Mobile-Wireless-Networks-Prot
 HigherEducation/PrenticeHall/EAN/9780130078179/Ad-Hoc-Mobile-Wireless-Networks-Prot
ocols-and-Systems).
16. "Spontaneous Networking by Laura Feeney, IEEE Communications, 2001".
CiteSeerX 10.1.1.960.8621 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.960.
8621).
17. Martinez; Toh; Cano; Calafate; Manzoni (2010). "Emergency Services in Future Intelligent
Transportation Systems Based on Vehicular Communication Networks". IEEE Intelligent
Transportation Systems Magazine. 2 (2): 6–20. doi:10.1109/MITS.2010.938166 (https://doi.
org/10.1109%2FMITS.2010.938166). S2CID 206470694 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/Co
rpusID:206470694).
18. I. Z., Ahmed; T. M. Mohamed; R. A. Sadek (2017). "A low computation message delivery
and authentication VANET protocol". 2017 12th International Conference on Computer
Engineering and Systems (ICCES), Cairo, Egypt: 204–211.
doi:10.1109/ICCES.2017.8275303 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2FICCES.2017.8275303).
ISBN 978-1-5386-1191-3. S2CID 25800906 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:2580
0906).
19. "MultipeerConnectivity from Apple" (https://developer.apple.com/reference/multipeerconnect
ivity).
20. "How an Underappreciated iOS 7 Feature Will Change the World by Mike Elgan" (http://ww
w.cultofmac.com/271225/appreciated-ios-7-feature-will-change-world/). 2014-03-22.
21. " "Everyone is a node: How Wi-Fi Mesh Networking Works by Jerry Hildenbrand, 2016" (http
://www.androidcentral.com/how-wifi-mesh-networks-work?_ga=2.118951497.1982325821.1
494489061-1333092243.1494489050). 2016-10-13.
22. Toh; Lee; Ramos (2002). "Next Generation Tactical Ad Hoc Mobile Wireless Networks" (http
s://www.researchgate.net/publication/228887934). TRW Systems Technology Journal.
23. Antonio Guillen-Perez; Ramon Sanchez-Iborra; Maria-Dolores Cano; Juan Carlos Sanchez-
Aarnoutse; Joan Garcia-Haro (2016). WiFi networks on drones. ITU Kaleidoscope: ICTs for
a Sustainable World (ITU WT). pp. 1–8. doi:10.1109/ITU-WT.2016.7805730 (https://doi.org/1
0.1109%2FITU-WT.2016.7805730). ISBN 978-9-2612-0451-8. S2CID 43655770 (https://api.
semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:43655770).
24. "The future is here: Five applications of UAV technology" (http://www.vision-systems.com/art
icles/2013/12/the-future-is-here-five-applications-of-uav-technology.html). 2013-12-06.
25. "U.S. Air Force Chief Scientist: Stealth Drones and Killer Swarms Could Be Coming Soon" (
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/us-air-force-chief-scientist-stealth-drones-killer-swar
ms-19546). 2017-02-23.
26. "We connect your naval forces by Rohde & schwartz" (https://cdn.rohde-schwarz.com/pws/d
l_downloads/dl_common_library/dl_brochures_and_datasheets/pdf_1/Naval_communicatio
ns_bro_en_3606-7830-62_v0100.pdf) (PDF).
27. "The first fully mobile, cross-platform ad hoc IP network utilizing legacy radio systems" (https
://www.rockwellcollins.com/-/media/Files/Unsecure/Products/Product_Brochures/Communc
ation_and_Networks/Modems/SubNet_Relay_brochure.ashx).
28. "A Study on Smart Dust Networks, Linkoping University, 2011" (https://onlinecourses.nptel.a
c.in/noc17_cs07/preview).
29. "Protocols and Applications of Ad-hoc Robot Wireless Communication Networks: An
Overview" (http://www.ewp.rpi.edu/hartford/~ernesto/S2013/EP/MaterialsforStudents/Guardi
/Wang2005-RobotWirelessCommunicationNetworks.pdf) (PDF).
30. "Ad-hoc Wireless Network Coverage with Networked Robots that cannot Localize, 2009" (ht
tps://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~jrb/papers/adhoc-icra-2009.pdf) (PDF).
31. "GoTenna Militrary-Grade Mesh Networking" (https://cdn.rohde-schwarz.com/pws/dl_downlo
ads/dl_common_library/dl_brochures_and_datasheets/pdf_1/Naval_communications_bro_e
n_3606-7830-62_v0100.pdf) (PDF).
32. "GoTenna Pro meshing radio aspires to deploy next to rescue, fire and security teams" (http
32. "GoTenna Pro meshing radio aspires to deploy next to rescue, fire and security teams" (http
s://techcrunch.com/2017/03/27/gotenna-pro-meshing-radio-aspires-to-deploy-next-to-rescue
-fire-and-security-teams/).
33. Bader, Roland; Pinto, Michele; Spenrath, Felix; Wollmann, Philipp; Kargl, Frank (2006).
"BigNurse: A Wireless Ad Hoc Network for Patient Monitoring". BigNurse: A Wireless Ad
Hoc Network for Patient Monitoring, 2006. pp. 1–4. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.397.7540 (https://cites
eerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.397.7540).
doi:10.1109/PCTHEALTH.2006.361691 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2FPCTHEALTH.2006.361
691). ISBN 978-1-4244-1085-9. S2CID 14208144 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID
:14208144).
34. Toshiyo Tamura; Takahiro Kawada; Masaki Sekine (2007). "The home health care with the
ad-hoc network system". The home health care with the ad-hoc network system, 2007.
pp. 307–310. doi:10.1109/SICE.2007.4420997 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2FSICE.2007.4420
997). ISBN 978-4-907764-27-2. S2CID 35790010 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID
:35790010).
35. Ma, Y.; Richards, M.; Ghanem, M.; Guo, Y.; Hassard, J. (2008). "Air Pollution Monitoring and
Mining Based on Sensor Grid in London" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC37
14656). Sensors. 8 (6): 3601–3623. Bibcode:2008Senso...8.3601M (https://ui.adsabs.harvar
d.edu/abs/2008Senso...8.3601M). doi:10.3390/s8063601 (https://doi.org/10.3390%2Fs8063
601). PMC 3714656 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3714656).
PMID 27879895 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27879895).
36. Ma, Y.; Guo, Y.; Tian, X.; Ghanem, M. (2011). "Distributed Clustering-Based Aggregation
Algorithm for Spatial Correlated Sensor Networks". IEEE Sensors Journal. 11 (3): 641.
Bibcode:2011ISenJ..11..641M (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011ISenJ..11..641M).
CiteSeerX 10.1.1.724.1158 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.724.
1158). doi:10.1109/JSEN.2010.2056916 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2FJSEN.2010.2056916).
S2CID 1639100 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:1639100).
37. Kleinrock, Leonard (1975). "Packet Switching in Radio Channels: Part I--Carrier Sense
Multiple-Access Modes and Their Throughput-Delay Characteristics". IEEE Transactions on
Communications. 23 (12): 1400–1416. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.475.2016 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.
edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.475.2016). doi:10.1109/TCOM.1975.1092768 (https://doi
.org/10.1109%2FTCOM.1975.1092768). S2CID 5879608 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/C
orpusID:5879608).
38. Shi, Zhefu; Beard, Cory; Mitchell, Ken (2008). "Tunable traffic control for multihop CSMA
networks". MILCOM 2008 - 2008 IEEE Military Communications Conference. pp. 1–7.
doi:10.1109/MILCOM.2008.4753376 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2FMILCOM.2008.4753376).
ISBN 978-1-4244-2676-8. S2CID 9755353 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:97553
53).
39. Murthy, C. Siva Ram; Manoj, B. S. (May 2004). Ad hoc Wireless Networks: Architectures
and Protocols. Prentice Hall PTR. ISBN 9780133007060.
40. Toh, C. K. (1997). Wireless ATM & Ad Hoc Networks, 1997, Kluwer Academic Press (https://
books.google.com/books?id=0hMfAQAAIAAJ). ISBN 9780792398226.
41. "Research Challenges for Ad hoc mobile wireless networks, University of Essex, 2005" (http
://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~kunyang/seminar/Wed-02Nov05.html).
42. "An Overview of Mobile Ad Hoc Networks: Applications and Challenges" (http://cwi.unik.no/i
mages/Manet_Overview.pdf) (PDF).
43. Grossglauser, M; Tse, D (2001). Mobility increases the capacity of ad-hoc wireless
networks. Twentieth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications
Societies. Vol. 3. IEEE Proceedings. pp. 1360–1369.
44. Helen, D; Arivazhagan, D (2014). "Applications, advantages and challenges of ad hoc
networks". JAIR. 2 (8): 453–457.
45. Giordano, S (2002). "Mobile ad hoc networks". Handbook of wireless networks and mobile
45. Giordano, S (2002). "Mobile ad hoc networks". Handbook of wireless networks and mobile
computing. pp. 325–346.
46. Gonzalez, Marta C; Hidalgo, Cesar A; Barabasi, Albert-Laszlo (2008). "Understanding
individual human mobility patterns". Nature. 453 (7196): 779–782. arXiv:0806.1256 (https://
arxiv.org/abs/0806.1256). Bibcode:2008Natur.453..779G (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/
2008Natur.453..779G). doi:10.1038/nature06958 (https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fnature06958).
PMID 18528393 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18528393). S2CID 4419468 (https://api.s
emanticscholar.org/CorpusID:4419468).
47. Brockmann, Dirk; Hufnagel, Lars; Geisel, Theo (2006). "The scaling laws of human travel".
Nature. 439 (7075): 462–465. arXiv:cond-mat/0605511 (https://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0605
511). Bibcode:2006Natur.439..462B (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006Natur.439..462
B). doi:10.1038/nature04292 (https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fnature04292). PMID 16437114 (htt
ps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16437114). S2CID 4330122 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/
CorpusID:4330122).
48. Bettstetter, C; Resta, G; Santi, P (2003). "The node distribution of the random waypoint
mobility model for wireless ad hoc networks". IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing. 2
(3): 257–269. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.576.3842 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?d
oi=10.1.1.576.3842). doi:10.1109/tmc.2003.1233531 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2Ftmc.2003.1
233531).
49. Hyytia, E; Lassila, P; Virtamo, J (2006). "Spatial node distribution of the random waypoint
mobility model with applications". IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing. 5 (6): 680–694.
CiteSeerX 10.1.1.59.3414 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.59.34
14). doi:10.1109/tmc.2006.86 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2Ftmc.2006.86). S2CID 6352586 (htt
ps://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:6352586).
50. Figueiredo, A; Gleria, I; Matsushita, R (2003). "On the origins of truncated Lévy flights".
Physics Letters A. 315 (1): 51–60. Bibcode:2003PhLA..315...51F (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.
edu/abs/2003PhLA..315...51F). CiteSeerX 10.1.1.563.4078 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/vie
wdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.563.4078). doi:10.1016/s0375-9601(03)00976-9 (https://doi.org/
10.1016%2Fs0375-9601%2803%2900976-9).
51. "Making Sense on what's happening on Wi-Fi" (http://www.techradar.com/news/networking/
wi-fi/making-sense-of-what-s-happening-to-wi-fi-1322886).
52. Toh, C. K. (1997). Wireless ATM & Ad Hoc Networks (https://books.google.com/books?id=0
hMfAQAAIAAJ). Kluwer Academic Press. ISBN 9780792398226.
53. Panta, Rajesh Krishna; Bagchi, Saurabh; Midkiff, Samuel P. (February 2011). "Efficient
Incremental Code Update for Sensor Networks". ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks. 7
(4): 30:1–30:32. doi:10.1145/1921621.1921624 (https://doi.org/10.1145%2F1921621.19216
24). ISSN 1550-4859 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1550-4859). S2CID 8240984 (https://ap
i.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:8240984).
54. Royer, E.M.; Chai-Keong Toh (1999). "A review of current routing protocols for ad hoc
mobile wireless networks by EM Royer, CK Toh in IEEE Personal Communications, 1999".
IEEE Personal Communications. 6 (2): 46–55. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.11.8637 (https://citeseerx.i
st.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.11.8637). doi:10.1109/98.760423 (https://doi.org/1
0.1109%2F98.760423).
55. Perkins, C.; Royer, E.; Das, S. Ad hoc On-demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing (https://
datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3561). IETF. doi:10.17487/RFC3561 (https://doi.org/10.1748
7%2FRFC3561). RFC 3561 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3561).
56. Wattenhofer, Roger (2 August 2005). "Algorithms for ad hoc and sensor networks" (https://w
ww.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140366405001246). Computer
Communications. 28 (13): 1498–1504. doi:10.1016/j.comcom.2004.12.037 (https://doi.org/1
0.1016%2Fj.comcom.2004.12.037).
57. Wu, S.L.; Tseng, Y.C. (2007). Wireless Ad Hoc Networking. Auerbach Publications.
ISBN 9780849392542.
58. Guowang Miao; Guocong Song (2014). Energy and spectrum efficient wireless network
58. Guowang Miao; Guocong Song (2014). Energy and spectrum efficient wireless network
design. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1107039889.
59. Martinez; Toh; Cano; et al. (2009). "A survey and comparative study of simulators for
vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs)" (https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fwcm.859). Wireless
Communications Journal. 11 (7): 813–828. doi:10.1002/wcm.859 (https://doi.org/10.1002%2
Fwcm.859).
60. Ivanic, Natalie; Rivera, Brian; Adamson, Brian (2009). "Mobile Ad Hoc Network emulation
environment". Mobile Ad Hoc Network emulation environment - IEEE Conference
Publication. pp. 1–6. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.414.4950 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/sum
mary?doi=10.1.1.414.4950). doi:10.1109/MILCOM.2009.5379781 (https://doi.org/10.1109%
2FMILCOM.2009.5379781). ISBN 978-1-4244-5238-5. S2CID 14810551 (https://api.semant
icscholar.org/CorpusID:14810551).
61. M.D. Penrose (2016). "Connectivity of Soft Random Geometric Graphs". The Annals of
Applied Probability. 26 (2): 986–1028. arXiv:1311.3897 (https://arxiv.org/abs/1311.3897).
doi:10.1214/15-AAP1110 (https://doi.org/10.1214%2F15-AAP1110). S2CID 54549743 (https
://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:54549743).
62. A.P. Giles; O. Georgiou; C.P. Dettmann (2015). Betweenness Centrality in Dense Random
Geometric Networks. 2015 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC).
pp. 6450–6455. arXiv:1410.8521 (https://arxiv.org/abs/1410.8521).
doi:10.1109/ICC.2015.7249352 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2FICC.2015.7249352). ISBN 978-
1-4673-6432-4. S2CID 928409 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:928409).
63. M.D. Penrose (2003). "Random Geometric Graphs". Oxford University Press.
64. Stajano, Frank; Anderson, Ross (2000). "The Resurrecting Duckling: Security Issues for Ad-
hoc Wireless Networks". The Resurrecting Duckling: Security Issues for Ad-hoc Wireless
Networks by Stajano and Anderson, International Workshop on Security Protocols, 1999.
Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 1796. pp. 172–182. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.13.1450 (htt
ps://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.13.1450).
doi:10.1007/10720107_24 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2F10720107_24). ISBN 978-3-540-
67381-1.
65. Sencun Zhu; Shouhuai Xu; Sanjeev Setia; Sushil Jajodia (2003). 23rd International
Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops, 2003. Proceedings (http://www.
cs.utsa.edu/~shxu/mwn03.pdf) (PDF). pp. 749–755. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.11.4621 (https://cites
eerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.11.4621).
doi:10.1109/ICDCSW.2003.1203642 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2FICDCSW.2003.1203642).
ISBN 978-0-7695-1921-0. S2CID 7082229 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:70822
29).
66. Cho, Jin-Hee; Swami, Ananthram; Chen, Ing-Ray (2011). "A Survey on Trust Management
for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks - IEEE Journals & Magazine". IEEE Communications Surveys
& Tutorials. 13 (4): 562–583. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.409.2078 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewd
oc/summary?doi=10.1.1.409.2078). doi:10.1109/SURV.2011.092110.00088 (https://doi.org/1
0.1109%2FSURV.2011.092110.00088). S2CID 14849884 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/C
orpusID:14849884).

Further reading
Satyajeet, D.; Deshmukh, A. R.; Dorle, S. S. (January 2016). "Article: Heterogeneous
Approaches for Cluster based Routing Protocol in Vehicular Ad Hoc Network (VANET)" (http
s://doi.org/10.5120%2Fijca2016908080). International Journal of Computer Applications.
134 (12): 1–8. Bibcode:2016IJCA..134l...1S (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016IJCA..1
34l...1S). doi:10.5120/ijca2016908080 (https://doi.org/10.5120%2Fijca2016908080).
Royer, E.; Chai Keong Toh (April 1999). "A Review of Current Routing Protocols for Ad Hoc
 Mobile Wireless Networks". IEEE Personal Communications. 6 (2): 46–55.
CiteSeerX 10.1.1.11.8637 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.11.86
37). doi:10.1109/98.760423 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2F98.760423).
Mauve, M.; Widmer, J.; Hartenstein, H. (December 2001). "A Survey on Position-Based
Routing in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks". IEEE Network. 1 (6): 30–39.
CiteSeerX 10.1.1.25.2774 (https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.25.27
74). doi:10.1109/65.967595 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2F65.967595).
Djenouri, D.; Kheladi, L.; Badache, N. (October 2005). "A Survey of Security Issues in
Mobile Ad hoc and Sensor Networks". IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials. 7 (4):
2–28. doi:10.1109/COMST.2005.1593277 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2FCOMST.2005.159327
7). S2CID 11135536 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:11135536).
Cano, Jose; Cano, Juan-Carlos; Toh, Chai-Keong; Calafate, Carlos T.; Manzoni, Pietro
(2010). "EasyMANET: an extensible and configurable platform for service provisioning in
MANET environments". IEEE Communications Magazine. 48 (12): 159–167.
doi:10.1109/mcom.2010.5673087 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2Fmcom.2010.5673087).
S2CID 20381835 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:20381835).
Kahn, Robert E. (January 1977). "The Organization of Computer Resources into a Packet
Radio Network". IEEE Transactions on Communications. COM-25 (1): 169–178.
doi:10.1109/tcom.1977.1093714 (https://doi.org/10.1109%2Ftcom.1977.1093714).
Jubin, J.; Tornow, J. D. (January 1987). "The DARPA Packet Radio Network Protocols".
Proceedings of the IEEE. 75 (1): 21–32. Bibcode:1987IEEEP..75...21J (https://ui.adsabs.har
vard.edu/abs/1987IEEEP..75...21J). doi:10.1109/proc.1987.13702 (https://doi.org/10.1109%
2Fproc.1987.13702). S2CID 13345464 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:13345464
).
Schacham, N.; Westcott, J. (January 1987). "Future directions in packet radio architectures
and protocols". Proceedings of the IEEE. 75 (1): 83–99. Bibcode:1987IEEEP..75...83S (http
s://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1987IEEEP..75...83S). doi:10.1109/PROC.1987.13707 (https:
//doi.org/10.1109%2FPROC.1987.13707). S2CID 1779198 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/
CorpusID:1779198).

External links
IETF MANET group (https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/manet/about/)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wireless_ad_hoc_network&oldid=1093345181"

This page was last edited on 16 June 2022, at 01:13 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 3.0; additional terms may apply. By
using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.