NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency

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

2. 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 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

3. 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, includingdistributed sensor and munitions networks and flexible and rapidly deployed HQ wireless LANs.” NATO UNCLASSIFIED

4. 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 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

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

6. 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 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

7. 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 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

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

9. 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 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

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

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

12. 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 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

13. 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 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

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

15. 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 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

16. 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 NATO UNCLASSIFIED

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

18. The NC3A-4F Testbed • #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 Fedora Feasible 4F Flexible Fieldable NATO UNCLASSIFIED

19. Mesh-to-Chain M C Chain-to-Mesh Testbed Scenarios host8 Mesh Topology host6 host2 host3 Chain Topology host6 host8 host2 host3 Changing Topology State-Machine NATO UNCLASSIFIED

20. 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! NATO UNCLASSIFIED

21. Test with UDP data transfer and changing topology bytes • 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 Iperf UDP secs mesh chain mesh bytes Iperf UDP SSH TCP secs NATO UNCLASSIFIED

22. VoIP test with high-rate TCP and changing topology bytes Iperf 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 RTP VoIP secs bytes RTP VoIP mesh chain mesh SSH TCP secs NATO UNCLASSIFIED

23. 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. NATO UNCLASSIFIED

24. NC3A The Hague Visiting address: Oude Waalsdorperweg 612597 AK The HagueTelephone +31 (0)70 3743000Fax +31 (0)70 3743239 Postal address:NATO C3 AgencyP.O. Box 1742501 CD The HagueThe Netherlands Contact Information Dr.-Ing. Michael Winkler Telephone +31 (0)70 3743262Michael.Winkler@nc3a.nato.int Dr.-Ing. Marco Bartolozzi Telephone +31 (0)70 3743465Marco.Bartolozzi@nc3a.nato.int

25. NC3A Brussels Visiting address: Bâtiment ZAvenue du Bourget 140B-1110 BrusselsTelephone +32 (0)2 7074111Fax +32 (0)2 7078770 Postal address:NATO C3 AgencyBoulevard Leopold IIIB-1110 Brussels - Belgium NC3A The Hague Visiting address: Oude Waalsdorperweg 612597 AK The HagueTelephone +31 (0)70 3743000Fax +31 (0)70 3743239 Postal address:NATO C3 AgencyP.O. Box 1742501 CD The HagueThe Netherlands Contacting NC3A NATO UNCLASSIFIED