1. NATO UNCLASSIFIED NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency Ad-hoc Networking: Infrastructure-free Communications for Military Operations Michael Winkler, Marco Bartolozzi

2. NATO UNCLASSIFIED2 Outline of Presentation  Motivation for Ad-hoc Networking (M. Winkler)  Main Concepts  Military Requirements  Security Issues  Simulation versus Emulation (M. Bartolozzi)  The NC3A Prototype Network  Set-up  Measurements & Results

3. NATO UNCLASSIFIED3 Motivation for Ad-hoc Networking  NATO Network Enabled Capability Feasibility Study: “To guarantee the necessary service availability, connectivity and agility, the networking and information infrastructure (NII) should exploit the functionality of mobile ad-hoc networks (MANET).”  NATO C3 Technical Architecture: “Ad-hoc networking is of increasing interest for a diverse set of applications on the battlefield, including distributed sensor and munitions networks and flexible and rapidly deployed HQ wireless LANs.”

4. NATO UNCLASSIFIED4 Main Ideas of Ad-hoc Networking (1)  Multi-hopping  Communication nodes are relaying traffic for each other  Normally based on wireless transmissions  Special-purpose routing, possibly geocast routing  Extension of coverage due to additional nodes

5. NATO UNCLASSIFIED5 Main Ideas of Ad-hoc Networking (2)  Distributed network operations  No centralized instance  Network self-organization  Self-healing properties

6. NATO UNCLASSIFIED6 Main Ideas of Ad-hoc Networking (3)  Infrastructure-free information exchange  Communication is possible where communication devices exist  No need to install any infrastructure  Thus achieving overall  High flexibility  High adaptability  Support for static as well as mobile users

7. NATO UNCLASSIFIED7 Specific Military Requirements  Rapid deployment capability  Absence of a single point of failure  Self-healing properties  Encryption capability for classified data transfer  Node authentication  Secure routing  Ideally predictable Quality of Service

8. NATO UNCLASSIFIED8 Types of Ad-hoc Networks  Mesh Networks  With many interconnection points with fixed infrastructure  Here hybrid architecture using WiMAX & WLAN

9. NATO UNCLASSIFIED9 Types of Ad-hoc Networks ... besides Mesh Networks:  Sensor Networks  Connecting many sensors  Power conservation critical  Very limited computing power and memory size  Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANETs)  Wireless  Supporting mobile users  Stand-alone or as extension of fixed infrastructure

10. NATO UNCLASSIFIED10 NGO: Non-governmental organization MANET: Mobile Ad-hoc Network MANET for Civil Military Cooperation  Example: Disaster recovery  Supporting NGOs  Extending the coverage Reach-back to strategic network

11. NATO UNCLASSIFIED11 MANET for Civil Military Cooperation  Example: Disaster recovery  Supporting NGOs  Extending the coverage  Need for security measures Reach-back to strategic network malicious user NGO: Non-governmental organization MANET: Mobile Ad-hoc Network

12. NATO UNCLASSIFIED12 Security Issues  Confidentiality and integrity of data can be ensured by the use of IP encryption devices  Protection of the network availability also important  Possible attacks:  Jamming  Routing disruption, e.g. by flooding with routing messages  Traffic forwarding attacks, e.g. by setting-up black hole

13. NATO UNCLASSIFIED13 Securing Routing Protocols  Main approach: Add digital signature field to the routed packets  Proposals for secure routing algorithms exist, e.g. secure OLSR and secure AODV  However  Key distribution and key updates demanding  Increased management traffic  Problematic to include unknown nodes  Need for further evaluation and practical experience

14. NATO UNCLASSIFIED14 Directions for Further Research  Pervasive resilience & security  Efficient routing algorithms  Multi-casting and geo-casting  Real-time services & end-to-end QoS  Enhanced scalability

15. NATO UNCLASSIFIED15 Ad-hoc Networking Experimentation  Experimentation on ad-hoc networking has been so far driven by the need to:  Evaluate and compare different ad-hoc routing protocols  Validate specific operational scenarios  Encourage progress on the technology itself  It is generally made using two different approaches:  Simulation  Emulation

16. NATO UNCLASSIFIED16 Simulation versus Emulation  Simulation starts from software  It is based on software routines and algorithms that replace and resemble the behaviour of the original hardware system  It aims at:  Achieving a very high degree of repeatability  Reducing experimentation costs  Emulation starts from hardware  It is fully or partially made by the same hardware used in a field deployment  It aims at obtaining a good compromise between repeatability and accuracy

17. NATO UNCLASSIFIED17 Ad-hoc Experimentation Systems  Simulators: NS-2 NS-2 Qualnet Qualnet Glomosim Glomosim  Emulated systems Sarnoff Sarnoff Ewant Ewant Orbit Orbit APE APE CMU CMU A R A = Accuracy (degree of resemblance to real-world experiments) R = Repeatability (capability to effectively repeat tests under the same initial conditions) complex simple SARNOFF ORBIT APECMU EWANT real world experiments NS-2 QUALNET GLOMOSIM Emulations Simulations

18. NATO UNCLASSIFIED18 #4 DELL NOTEBOOKS LINUX FEDORA CORE 5 Kernel 2.6.16-1.2096_FC5 Senao WLAN PCMCIA cards NL-5354CB+ (802.11g) Madwifi-ng v. 0.9.4.5 Atheros driver for FC5 Static IP addressing OLSR v. 0.4.10 routing protocol from olsr.org Applications: ping, iperf, ethereal, X-Lite softphone The NC3A-4F Testbed Fieldable 4F Flexible Fedora Feasible

19. NATO UNCLASSIFIED19 Testbed Scenarios host6 host8 host2 host3 host2host3 host6host8 MC Mesh-to-Chain Chain-to-Mesh Mesh Topology Chain Topology Changing Topology State-Machine

20. NATO UNCLASSIFIED20 Throughput and RTT  Mesh topology (1 hop)  UDP throughput: 8 Mb/s  TCP throughput: 11 Mb/s  Round Trip Time: 0,67 ms  Chain topology (3 hops)  UDP throughput: 2,5 Mb/s  TCP throughput: 650 Kb/s  Round Trip Time: 5,5 ms From mesh to chain (1 to 3 hops), RTT increases 10 times, UDP throughput reduces by 70%, TCP throughput reduces by 90%; → SCALABILITY is a crucial issue for ad-hoc networking!

21. NATO UNCLASSIFIED21 Test with UDP data transfer and changing topology  UDP data transfer at 300 Kb/s using Iperf  Topology is changed from mesh to chain using a MAC filtering script launched from one of the hosts  The script uses SSH to access other hosts and load / unload access lists based on MAC addresses meshchainmesh Iperf UDP SSH TCP Iperf UDP bytes secs bytes secs

22. NATO UNCLASSIFIED22 VoIP test with high-rate TCP and changing topology RTP VoIP Iperf TCP meshchainmesh RTP VoIP SSH TCP  VoIP phone call established using X- Lite Softphone (SIP protocol)  TCP data transfer at 11 Mb/s using Iperf  Voice quality as perceived by the callees was very good. Communication on both directions was never interrupted bytes secs bytes secs

23. NATO UNCLASSIFIED23 Testbed Conclusions  The NC3A-4F testbed aimed at proving the functionality of the ad-hoc networking technology, using commercial-of-the-shelf hardware and software.  UDP and TCP data transfer and Voice over IP communication have been tested over the NC3A-4F testbed, with satisfactory results overall.  The tests showed that an increasing number of intermediate hops brings significant reduction in terms of overall bandwidth, affecting particularly intensive-rate applications.  Low/medium-rate applications such as Voice over IP showed not to be significantly affected by multi-hopping.  Scalability of the ad-hoc networking solution remains a crucial issue that needs further investigation, in order to provide a consistent feedback on how and with which constraints ad-hoc networking can be successfully deployed in the theatre.

24. Contact Information Dr.-Ing. Marco Bartolozzi Dr.-Ing. Michael Winkler Telephone +31 (0)70 3743262 Michael.Winkler@nc3a.nato.int NC3A The Hague Visiting address: Oude Waalsdorperweg 61 2597 AK The Hague Telephone +31 (0)70 3743000 Fax +31 (0)70 3743239 Postal address: NATO C3 Agency P.O. Box 174 2501 CD The Hague The Netherlands Telephone +31 (0)70 3743465 Marco.Bartolozzi@nc3a.nato.int

25. NATO UNCLASSIFIED25 Contacting NC3A NC3A Brussels Visiting address: Bâtiment Z Avenue du Bourget 140 B-1110 Brussels Telephone +32 (0)2 7074111 Fax +32 (0)2 7078770 Postal address: NATO C3 Agency Boulevard Leopold III B-1110 Brussels - Belgium NC3A The Hague Visiting address: Oude Waalsdorperweg 61 2597 AK The Hague Telephone +31 (0)70 3743000 Fax +31 (0)70 3743239 Postal address: NATO C3 Agency P.O. Box 174 2501 CD The Hague The Netherlands