JOURNAL

OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 6, JUNE 2013

10

Analysis of Secure Multipath Routing Protocols in Wireless Mesh Networks

1

Mohammad Masdari, Maryam Tanabi2 Department of Computer Engineering, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran.

2Department of Computer Engineering, Science and research Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran.

Abstract, Wireless mesh networks as an effective technology have been applied in different industrial
areas such as building automation, transportation systems and security cameras. Like other computer networks security of this kind of network is very important and it should be taken into consideration. To achieve this aim, many security solutions have been presented to ensure the confidentiality, integrity and authentication of network traffic. In this paper, we present a new classification for secure multipath routing protocols in wireless mesh networks based on their security capabilities and summarize the current research directions in secure multipath routing protocols.
Keywords: Attacker, Multipath, Wireless Mesh Networks.

1.Introduction
Wireless mesh networks (WMN) as an improved technology have been managed by some constant routers or access points placed in sensitive points of network [1]. There have been presented two categories for WMNs named mesh routers and mesh clients. Being usually constant, mesh routers with power supply are responsible for routing in the network. On the other hand, being mobile or stationary with limited energy, clients are not only used as a source and destination for sending and transmitting data, but also they can play the role of a router in sending data [2]. WMNs have different industrial applications such as building automation, using in transportation systems, and security cameras. They can also be used in emergency cases, especially when communication is difficult in such cases as tunnels, well drilling sites where individuals are not permitted to enter [3]. Three main types of mesh networks that have been introduced are infrastructure mesh network, client mesh network and hybrid mesh network which are explained below: Infrastructure Mesh Network: Being made up with static mesh routers which have ad-hoc characteristics, they commonly play a role as a gateway towards wired network and provide complete WAN connectivity to the wireless mesh network. Client Mesh network :It is a pure mobile adhoc wireless network which has independent routers called mesh clients and are principally spread widely. Hybrid Mesh Network: This is the most comprehensive and interesting version of mesh network which is composed of the combination

of the existing infrastructure and client mesh network structure presented in Figure 1 [4]. As the wireless mesh network is a kind of selforganized and self-managed intelligent network, it does not need a backbone network. It can construct a dynamic and flexible network structure which has a lot of characteristics such as initial investments, a wide range of covering good anti-interference and expanding ability, flexible network structure, easy maintenance, high reliability and nice compatibility [5].

internet internet

Mesh Client Network

Mesh Client Network

Mesh Client Network

Figure 1: A Hybrid Mesh Network

Routing can be referred to as the process of determining the end-to-end path between a source node and a destination node [6]. But it should be noted that a majority of the routing protocols ignore the fact that a route initially discovered has become sub-optimal over time and its rediscovery is typically triggered by only route breaks and route timeouts. Therefore this approach can be detrimental to network performance [7]. More precisely, Routing wireless mesh networks must consider:

JOURNAL OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 6, JUNE 2013

11

Transmission errors: they occur because of the unreliability of the wireless medium may lead to transmission errors. Link and node failures: this may happen at any time due to different types of hazardous conditions in the environment. Incorrect routes: due to node/link failures or additions to the network or being based on an incorrect system state, routes may become obsolete. Congested nodes or links: due to the topology of the network and the nature of the routing protocols, certain nodes or links may become congested, which will lead to higher delay or packet loss [13]. Regarding wireless network routing, each node forwards a packet to a single next hop. Therefore, if the transmission to that next hop fails, the node needs to retransmit the packet even though other neighbors may have overheard it. In contrast, in any path routing, each node broadcasts a packet to multiple next hops simultaneously and if the transmission to one neighbor fails, an alternative neighbor who received the packet can forward it on [17]. Our contribution in this paper is to present a new classification for Secure Multipath Routing Protocol in WMNs as follow: Sections 2 which describes the properties of an ideal multipath routing protocol, section 3 which displays the secure multipath routing protocol and section 4 which presents conclusions. Throughput enhancement: Since in a mesh network, routing along a single path may not provide enough bandwidth for a connection, using simultaneously multiple paths to route data can be a good approach to satisfy the bandwidth requirement of some applications. By increasing the throughput, a smaller end-to-end delay is achieved and quality of service is improved. Load balancing: as traffic distribution is not equal in all links in the network, spreading the traffic along multiple routes can alleviate congestion in some links and bottlenecks. Error resilience: multipath protocols can be used to provide error resilience by distributing traffic (for instance, using data and error correction codes) over multiple paths. Security: with single path routing protocols, it is easy for an adversary to launch routing attacks, but multipath offers attack resilience [13].

B C E

s
R

D
K

Figure 2: Multipath routing wireless mesh network

Multipath routing is needed for secure communication when route recovery cannot be guaranteed to be done fast enough because of the high mobility of the system. With standby paths, traffic can be redirected whenever we have route failure, and reduce route recovery time. Multipath routing also offers other quality of service advantages (such as, load balancing, aggregation of network bandwidth, reducing traffic congestion etc) [15]. These sections classify the routing multipath into two categories: Secure routing multipath and insecure routing multipath that are displayed in Figure 3.

2. Properties of an Ideal Multipath Routing Protocol

Multipath routing is one of the distinguished features of wireless mesh networks in which a source device can establish a primary path as well as several backup paths toward a desired destination [10]. This routing allows the use of several good paths to reach destinations, not just the best path. This should be achieved without imposing excessive control overhead in maintaining such paths [13] which is shown in Figure 2. The main goal of multipath routing is to construct multiple paths to enhance fault tolerance and decrease routing overheads [14]. The availability of multiple paths between a source and a destination can be used to achieve the following benefits: Fault tolerance: introducing redundancy in the network or providing backup routes which will be used when there is a failure, are forms of introducing fault tolerance at the routing level in mesh networks. Thus, some techniques may be applied e.g. packet salvaging which consists of modifying the route of a packet if the actual route is broken.

3. Secure Multipath Routing Protocol

Wireless mesh networks are extremely vulnerable to attacks due to their dynamically changing topology, absence of conventional security infrastructures and open medium of communication, which unlike their wired counterparts cannot be secured [20].The goal of the security protocols should be to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, authenticity of network traffic and to preserve the availability of communications. Attacks intended to compromise

JOURNAL OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 6, JUNE 2013

12

routing integrity are a significant threat that can lead to a network wide loss of availability [22].
Reactive protocol Symmetric

AOMDV STRP LMAR MP-DSR SecMR MDSDV SEAD Reactive protocol TMDSR

Secure

Proactive protocol

ARAN

Multipath Routing Protocol in WMN

Asymmetric Proactive protocol Reactive protocol Insecure Proactive protocol Figure 3: classification of Secure and Insecure Multipath Routing Protocol

To solve this problem, routing protocols should be robust against both dynamically changing topology and malicious attacks [23]. Moreover, to provide secure communication in WMNs, two ways have been suggested: (1) Use the multiple paths between the two nodes. (2) Use the cryptographic methods to secure the communication in between two nodes. Consider the first approach in which all the multiple paths between two nodes need to be node-disjoint (a node cannot participate in more than one path between two end nodes). If there are k multiple paths available then the adversary requires compromising at least k nodes and more particularly at least one node in each path in order to control the communication. This approach is cost effective as it does not include any computation or transmission overhead and hardly inject delay in the network. But it does not ensure a certain level of security as there are not always multiple paths between two end nodes. The second approach may provide optimal security but with the price of too much computation and transmission cost as well as time delay. Multi-path routing protocols need to be properly enhanced with cryptographic means which will guarantee the integrity of a routing path and the authenticity of the participating nodes [24]. It has been indicated that a secure mechanism is able to provide secure communication effectively and reduce the damage of attacks through multiple paths (Xuyang et al,.[8]) On the basis of analyzing the characters and the potential risks of WMN, they propose a novel protective mechanism to guarantee

the secure communications based on the multipath routing protocol. The mechanism utilizes the communication encryption scheme to protect data packets and uses a heuristic risk avoidance scheme to avoid the malicious nodes during communications. In another study which is done by Hu et al, [10], the most existing multipath routing methods are proposed which tend to establish link-disjoint or node-disjoint paths with minimal path costs. As paths created by these methods are typically close to each other, they may cause serious inter-path interference when serving for concurrent data transmissions. It separates these paths with insulating regions so that these paths are not only disjoint but also separated far enough to avoid inter-path interferences. It was shown that the decoupled features of AODV-DM multipath routing and the path-aware SCTP schemes make them particularly suitable to concurrently transfer real time and multimedia data through multipath wireless links. The use of multipath routing as a means to satisfy multiple QoS requirements of mesh network applications simultaneously has been offered in a study by Shillingford et al. [11]. Toward this end, this paper introduces the Multi-QoS Load-Balanced (MQLB) packets across multiple paths based on application and network QoS expectations. In addition, they introduced a feedback-based load balancing protocol which has been shown to improve data transmission in terms of latency and percentage of late packets while preventing rapid depletion of energy-constrained nodes.

JOURNAL OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 6, JUNE 2013

13

A novel coding-aware multi-path routing protocol (CAMP) is proposed by some researchers (Han et al. [12]) which forwards packets over multiple paths dynamically based on path reliability and coding opportunity. CAMP employs a route discovery mechanism which returns to the source multiple paths along with ETX (Expected Transmission Count) of all links on each path. Using a novel forwarding mechanism, CAMP splits the traffic among multiple paths and instead of passively waiting for coding opportunity by switching its path, it maximize the switching gain. They demonstrated that CAMP can achieve much higher throughput than comparable schemes for delivering packets in wireless networks. dropping route discovery frequency. Therefore, it can be said that it is one of the potential protocols for maintaining security. It is worth noting that the total belief of the network on nodes can result in various routing attacks and make some problems. To eliminate this trouble, Shamir incorporated secret sharing to AOMDV to make it Secured AOMDV (hence forth called SAOMDV) in which each node ensures the security of its neighbors before forwarding route requests. The route request packets are not given to malevolent nodes. This evaluation clearly, guarantees that malevolent nodes will not take part in the data transfer from the source to the destination [36]. Figure 4 displays Ad-hoc on-demand Distance Vector Multi-path routing protocol.

3.1. Symmetric Cryptography Solutions

In symmetric encryption method both sender and receiver share the common key value for encryption and decryption. It requires that the sender find some secure ways to deliver the encryption/decryption key to the receiver. In fact, a large number of protocols provide various techniques and more secure but less performance [30]. Among a number of symmetrickey encryption algorithms that exist today, I focus on two popular encryption standards: The Data Encryption Standard (DES) and the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) [28].

3.1.1. Reactive Multipath Routing

AODV protocol as a Source-Initiated On-Demand or reactive routing protocol is demonstrated to be a proficient routing protocol for implementation in Ad hoc networks. When a source node needs to send a message to a definite destination node to which it does not have a suitable route, it begins a route discovery process. The source node transmits a Route Request (RREQ) message to its neighbor nodes which then promote the request to its neighbor nodes and so on with the anticipation of either the destination or an intermediary node with a route to the target in which its routing table is attained [4]. There are indeed a great number of similarities between AOMDV and AODV. As it is proved AOMDV is dependent on the distance vector theory and utilizes hop-by-hop routing technique and also it discovers routes on demand using a route discovery method. The most important variation is the amount of routes found in each route discovery. In AOMDV, RREQ transmission from the source to the target establishes multiple reverse paths both at intermediary nodes in addition to the destination. Multiple RREPs navigates this reverse route back to form multiple onward routes to the target at the source and intermediary nodes. Moreover, AOMDV makes intermediary nodes available with alternate routes since they are established to be helpful in

Figure 4: Ad-hoc On-demand Distance Vector Multi-path routing protocol

To provide resilience against such all attacks, a new Symmetric Token Routing Protocol (STRP) was proposed by J. Thangakumar et al [32]. It was tried to employ an authentication framework which eradicates a large class of outside attacks by ensuring that only authorized nodes can perform certain operations. Every node authorized to take part in the routing and data transmission is presented with a pair of public/private keys and a node certificate that connects public key of the node to its IP address. The token used to authenticate the nodes to be communicated in the network is periodically refreshed and disseminated by a special node, authorizer. Consequently, only the nodes that are currently participating in the routing or data forwarding operations will possess a valid tree token. Both route request and route reply are flooded by the protocol which guarantees that a path is established even if route activation messages are dropped to mitigate inside attacks that try to prevent a node from establishing a route to the destination by employing a timeout based mechanism. If an adversarial-free route subsists, the protocol ensures the reaction of a route. Recently some researchers tried to elaborate the effects of wormhole attacks and selfishness. They have indicated that how LMAR algorithm creates at least one alternative working path that is established

JOURNAL OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 6, JUNE 2013

14

by active cooperators from source to destination (F. Farhat, et al [25]). It was also pointed out that LMAR has been designed such that it could explore all available paths from source to destination in the graph of network topology to get a working route. Theoretically if the induced sub-graph of the network topology is connected by removing selfish and malicious nodes, LMAR can discover a locally efficient path from source to destination. The design of LMAR, which is based on on-demand distance vector and multipath routing, is proposed so that it can bypass the selfishness of lazy nodes well. The essential point is that LMAR and AODV protocol broadcast each RREQ once, and LMAR protocol only updates routing table by other incoming copies of RREQ not rebroadcast, so the flooding cost of LMAR protocol per connection is 2*(AODV Flooding) and when the number of end to end connections increase, the flooding cost of LMAR reaches that of AODV, because RREQ or RREP packet of each node could be flooded in network once. The main disadvantage of our protocol is that the end time of searching is unknown. In fact LMAR could not find and stop searching for any route between the source and the destination, if induced network graph is not connected [25]. Dynamic sourcing routing is a reactive protocol i.e. it does not use periodic advertisements and computes the routes when necessary and then maintains them. It is a routing technique in which the sender of a packet determines the complete sequence of nodes through which the packet has to pass, and then the sender explicitly lists this route in the packets header identifying each forwarding hop by the address of the next node to which to transmit the packet on its way to the destination host. These routes are stored in a route cache and the data packets carry the source route in the packet header [29]. It is suggested that the MP-DSR is a DSR-based protocol that addresses path reliability requirements. It determines the number of paths needed and the lowest path reliability requirement that each path must provide. The source sends RREQ messages, containing information regarding the requirements, to the destination node via its immediate neighbors. Here the RREQ message also contains the traversed path (as this is a source routing protocol), and the accumulated path reliability. Then, a set of disjoint paths are selected according to the reliability required. A RREP is sent to the source, via each selected path [19]. Figure 5 shows Multipath Dynamic Source Routing protocol.

Figure 5: Multipath Dynamic Source Routing protocol

Some protocols that have been paid attention include a novel on-demand multipath routing protocol called the Secure Multipath Routing protocol (SecMR). The protocol suggested by P.Kotzanikolaou et al [33] discovers the complete set of the existing non-cyclic, node-disjoint paths between a source and a target node, for a given maximum hop distance. The first phase of this protocol (the neighborhood authentication phase) involves the asynchronous mutual authentication of neighboring nodes. The second phase (the route discovery and maintenance phase) involves the establishment and maintenance of active routes. It can be said that it is a complete multipath one, in the sense that it discovers all existing node-disjoint paths up to a given maximum number of hops. its security is mainly based on neighborhood authentication of the nodes, as well as on security associations, while the use of public key cryptography is minimized. Using additional header messages, the SecMR protocol can be integrated on top of existing on-demand routing protocols such as DSR.

3.1.2. Proactive Multipath Routing

DSDV is a table-driven routing protocol requiring regular updating of its routing table. This may consume some network resources unnecessarily when the networks are stable [19]. Since MDSDV like DSDV maintains an up-to-date view of the network, it has the same advantages as DSDV in which every node has a readily available route to every destination node in the network. The current protocol employs a unique method of creating routing tables containing the optimal paths to every destination and maintains two tables; routing table and neighbors table. By using neighbors table, any node can determine if it is isolated or not [35]. One further research was made by Yih-Chun Hu, et al., who referred to the design and evaluation of SEAD, a secure ad hoc network routing protocol using distance vector routing. Some efficient one way hash functions were proposed while asymmetric cryptographic operations in the protocol were not used to support the use of nodes with limited CPU processing capability and to guard against Denial-of-

JOURNAL OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 6, JUNE 2013

15

Service (DoS) attacks in which an attacker attempts to cause other nodes to consume excess network bandwidth or processing time [34]. The SEAD routing protocol proposes two different methods to authenticate the source of each routing update. The first method requires clock
Routing schemes Routing approach Loop freedom

synchronization between the nodes that participate in the ad hoc network, and employs broadcast authentication mechanisms such as TESLA. The second method requires the existence of a shared secret between each pair of nodes.

Table 1: Comparison Symmetric Encryption Algorithms Multipath Routing Reactive and Proactive Protocol routing metric shortest path Identification

SecMR LMAR STRP AOMDV MP-DSR MDSDV SEAD

On-demand On-demand On-demand On-demand On-demand Table-driven Table-driven

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

No No Yes Distance Distance Distance Distance

Yes Yes No No No Yes No

This secret can be utilized in order to use a message authentication code (MAC) between the nodes that must authenticate a routing update message [27]. Symmetric Encryption Algorithms Multipath Routing Reactive and Proactive protocol have been compared in Table1.

3.2. Asymmetric Cryptography Solutions

After the identification of the problem was addressed, the next stage was to draw attention to methods to solve the problem of distribution. One of these methods is public key cryptography or asymmetric cryptographic method in which a pair of keys (The public key is for encryption of the data and corresponding private key is for decryption) is used. Having a pair of keys, if the user wants to send some information, it should read the public key and encrypt the information. One issue with public key cryptosystems is that users must be constantly vigilant to ensure that they are encrypting to the correct persons key [30]. It was sought to describe how multiple-paths routing can be simultaneously used to improve the network throughput and the routing security. In this research, Y.Wu et al [18], specifically study the non-packetdropping attacking and the packet-dropping attacking models by attackers. Formulating mathematically the problem as a max min optimization problem, they convert them to either an equivalent linear programming or quadratic programming problem. They theoretically prove that the effective network throughput achieved under the found routing strategy and attacking strategy is at least a constant factor of the optimum. They also indicate that the strategy pair

is stable for the attacker in the sense that, if the routing policy remains the same, the attacker cannot further reduce the achieved networking throughput. When the attacking strategy is fixed, it is NP-hard for the routing policy maker that finds the best routing strategy to maximize the achieved effective throughput; their routing strategy will find a routing whos effective throughout is at least a constant factor of the optimum.

3. 2.1. Reactive Multipath Routing

DSR is based on a pure reactive approach and operates using two simple and complementary mechanisms: route discovery and route maintenance. DSR routing model in which the dropping of the subsequent RREQ packet is done, may lead to the following problems: In the traditional DSR protocol when a node receives a RREQ packet, it checks whether it has previously processed it or not. If so, it drops the packet. A misbehaving node takes advantage of this and forwards the RREQ fast so that the RREQ from other nodes are dropped and the path discovered includes itself. RREQ packets from non congested paths arrive quickly compared to the paths with congested or highly mobile areas of the network. This results no path through congested or highly mobile area. But if such areas are recovered quickly, there will exist a shorter path including such area, and such shorter path may not be utilized.

JOURNAL OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 6, JUNE 2013

16

The other drawback is that all the one-hop neighbors of destination send RREQ propagate to destination and this may discard the RREQ packet from other paths of the destination node [31].

Table 2: Comparison Asymmetric Encryption Algorithms Multipath Routing Reactive protocol Routing schemes Routing approach Loop freedom Routing metric shortest path Identification

TMDSR ARAN

On-demand On-demand

Yes Yes

Yes None

Yes Optional

To address the above problems, Poonam et al [31] proposed the following modification to the traditional DSR and presented efficient trust based multi-path routing protocol (TMDSR) which discovers multiple paths between two nodes. It is essential for an ad hoc network to be able to tolerate attack-induced path failures and provide robust packet delivery. Selecting the route to use depends on the needs of the application. If the application requires robustness, it can send the same packet through multiple paths. If it requires load balancing among the nodes, it can choose different paths to send data packets. The technique discovers the shortest secure path from source to destination by embedding trust information in RREQ and RREP packets. The route discovery packets are unicasted from one hop neighbor of destination so that it introduces very less additional routing overhead in the network [31]. The Authenticated Routing for Ad hoc Networks (ARAN) protocol, proposed in, is a stand-alone solution for securing routing in ad hoc networking environments. It utilizes cryptographic certificates to achieve the security goals of authentication and nonrepudiation. ARAN, an on-demand secure ad hoc routing protocol, consists of three distinct operational stages, of which the first two are compulsory and the third is optional. The first stage is, in essence, a preliminary certification process that requires the existence of a trusted certification authority (CA). At this stage, each node, before attempting to connect to the ad hoc network, must contact the certification authority and request a certificate for its address and public key. The protocol assumes that each node knows a priori the public key of the certification authority. The second operational stage of the protocol is the route discovery process that provides end-to-end authentication which ensures that the intended destination was indeed reached. Here each node must maintain a routing table with entries that correspond to the source-destination pairs that are currently active. The third operational stage of the ARAN protocol is optional and ensures that the shortest paths are discovered. However, it seems that

this optimization comes at a high cost. After the source has a route to the destination, it broadcasts a signed shortest path confirmation (SPC) message to its neighbors, which includes the destination address, a nonce, a timestamp, and its certificate [27]. Asymmetric Encryption Algorithms Multipath Routing Reactive protocol have been compared in table2.

4. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we presented a new classification for Secure Multipath Routing Protocol in Wireless Mesh Networks. Then we analyzed the prominent features and properties of each multipath routing protocol. In this analysis we mainly focus on the security aspects of the each scheme and their resistance to the various security attacks. In future studies, we will try to design a secure and scalable multi-protocol for wireless mesh networks. References
[1] Thomas.Staub, Stefan.Ott, Torsten. Braun, Experimental Evaluation of Multi-Path Routing in a Wireless Mesh Network inside a Building, Electronic Communications of the EASST, Vol.17, 2009. [2] E. Alotaibi, B. Mukherjee ,A survey on routing algorithms for wireless Ad-Hoc and mesh networks, Vol. 56, 2012, P.P 940965. [3] M.Seyedzadegan, M. Othman, B.Mohd Ali, Sh. Subramaniam, Wireless Mesh Networks: WMN Overview WMN Architecture, vol.19, 2011. [4] L. Junhai, Ye Danxia, X. Liu, F. Mingyu, A Survey of Multicast Routing Protocols for Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks , IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, Vol. 11, 2009, PP. 78-91. [5] Hailong. Jia, Xiaojie. Wang, The Research on Multipath Routing Algorithm of Wireless Mesh Network, International Conference on Electronic & Mechanical Engineering and Information Technology, Vol.1, 2011, PP.271 274. [6] Sonia.Waharte, Raouf.Boutaba, Youssef. Iraqi, Brent. Ishibashi, Routing protocols in wireless mesh networks: challenges and design considerations, 2006, pp. 285303. [7] Krishna.Ramachandran, Irfan.Sheriff, Elizabeth. Belding, Kevin.Almeroth, Routing Stability in Static

JOURNAL OF INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 6, JUNE 2013

17

Wireless Mesh Networks, international conference on Passive and active network measurement, 2007,PP. 73-83. [8] Ding. Xuyang, Fan. Mingyu, Lu. Xiaojun, Zhu. Dayong, Wang. Jiahao, Multi-path based secure communication in wireless mesh networks, Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, Vol. 18, 2007, PP.818-824. [9] Muhammad. Shoaib. Siddiqui, Syed Obaid. Amin, Jin Ho. Kim, Choong Seon. Hong, MHRP: a secure multipath hybrid routing protocol for wireless mesh network, 2007, PP.1-7. [10] Xuhui. Hu, Myung J. Lee, An efficient multipath structure for concurrent data transport in wireless mesh networks, Computer Communications, Vol.30, 2007, PP.3358-3367. [11] Nadine. Shillingford, Christian. Poellabauer, MultiQoS Multipath Routing in Wireless Mesh Networks, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, 2010. [12] Song. Han, Zifei. Zhong Hongxing. Li, Guihai. Chen, Edward. Chan, Aloysius K. Mok, Coding-Aware Multi-path Routing in Multi-Hop Wireless Networks, 2008, PP.93-100. [13] Cristina Neves. Fonseca, Multipath Routing for Wireless Mesh Networks, 2010. [14] K. Valarmathi, N. Malmurugan, Reliable Multi-path routing for 802.16 wireless mesh networks, Indian Journal of Computer Science and Engineering (IJCSE) Vol. 2, 2012. [15] Mike.Burmester, Tri Van.Le, Secure Multipath Communication in Mobile Ad hoc Networks, Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing, 2004. [16] Mike.Burmester, Tri VanLe, Secure Multipath Communication in Mobile Ad hoc Networks, International Conference on ,Vol.2 , 2004, PP.405409. [17] Rafael. Laufer, Henri Dubois-.Ferri`ere, Leonard. Kleinrock, Multirate Anypath Routing in Wireless Mesh Networks, Conference on Computer Communications, 2009, PP. 37-45. [18] Yanwei. Wu, XiangYang.Li, WeiZhao.Wang, Stochastic Security in Wireless Mesh Networks via Saddle Routing Policy, International Conference on, 2007, PP.121 128. [19] Paramjeet Kaur. Bedi1, Yadu. Nagar, Amit , Rajni. Yadav , Study Of Routing Protocols: Single And Multipath For WMN, The International Journal of Computer Science & Applications, Vol. 1, 2012,PP.35-44. [20] Muhammad Shoaib. Siddiqui, Choong Seon. Hong, Security Issues in Wireless Mesh Networks, International Conference on Multimedia and Ubiquitous Engineering, 2007, PP.717 722. [21] Hassen. Redwan, Ki-Hyung. Kim, Survey of Security Requirements, Attacks and Network Integration in Wireless Mesh Networks, Japan-China Joint Workshop on Frontier of Computer Science and Technology, 2008, PP.3 - 9. [22] Stephen.Glass, Marius. Portmann, Vallipuram Muthukkumarasamy, Securing Route and Path Integrity in Multi-Hop Wireless Networks,2010 , PP. 25-43. [23] Ian F. Akyildiz, Xudong.Wang , Weilin.Wang, Wireless Mesh Network: A Survey, in Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, Vol.47, 2005, PP. 445 487 . [24] Muhammad Shoaib. siddiqui, Syed Obaid.amin, Jin Ho.kim, Choong Seon. hong, MHRP: a secure multipath hybrid routing protocol for wireless mesh network, Military Communications Conference, 2007, PP.1 7. [25] F. Farhat, M. R. Pakravan, M. Salmasizadeh, M. R. Aref, Locally Multipath Adaptive Routing Protocol Resilient to Selfishness and Wormholes, Vol. 6047, 2010, PP. 187-200. [26] T. Nirmal Raj, S. Saranya, S. Arul Murugan, G. Bhuvaneswari, Secured Multi Path Routing with Trust Establishment Using Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Vol. 3, 2012. [27] Patroklos.G. Argyroudis, DONAL. Omahony, Secure routing for mobile ad hoc networks, ieee communications surveys, Vol. 7, 2005, PP.2-21. [28] Supachote. Lertvorratham, Integrated secure multipath Mobile ad hoc network, 2010. [29] P.S. Patheja, Akhilesh.A. Waoo, Lokesh. Malviya, Multipath Dynanic Source Routing Protocol for AdHoc Network, International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering ,Vol. 2, 2012. [30] Amol. Bhosle, Yogadhar. Pandey, Applying Security to Data Using Symmetric Encryption in MANET, International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, Vol. 3, 2013. [31] Poonam, K. Garg, M. Misra, Trust Enhanced Secure Multi-Path DSR Routing, International Journal of Computer Applications, Vol.2, 2010, PP. 109-114. [32] J. Thangakumar, M. R. Masillamani, A SYMMETRIC token routing for secured communication of manet, 2011, PP. 1724. [33] Panayiotis Kotzanikolaou, Rosa Mavropodi, Christos Douligeris, Secure Multipath Routing for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, Wireless On-demand Network Systems and Services, 2005 ,PP.89 96. [34] S. P John, P. Samue , An On-Demand ByzantineResilient Secure Routing Protocol for Wireless Adhoc Networks, IJCSNS International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, VOL.10 ,2010 [35] P. J.B.King, A. A. Etorban, I.S. Ibrahim, A DSDVbased Multipath Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks, 2007, PP. 93-98. [36] S. Santhosh Baboo, C. Chandrasekar, An Efficient and Secured AOMDV Routing Protocol with Shamirs Secret Sharing Scheme, International Journal of Computer Applications, Vol. 33, 2011, PP.44-48