idnits 2.17.1 draft-baryun-manet-terminology-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == The "Author's Address" (or "Authors' Addresses") section title is misspelled. == The document seems to lack the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? (The document does seem to have the reference to RFC 2119 which the ID-Checklist requires). == Using lowercase 'not' together with uppercase 'MUST', 'SHALL', 'SHOULD', or 'RECOMMENDED' is not an accepted usage according to RFC 2119. Please use uppercase 'NOT' together with RFC 2119 keywords (if that is what you mean). Found 'MUST not' in this paragraph: All MANET nodes MUST implement IP and all MANET routers MUST run/implement at least one MANET routing protocol. The terminologies described in this document can be used for IPv4-MANET and IPv6-MANET. The IPv4 addresses MAY be used in IPv6 packets but IPv6 addresses MUST not be in IPv4 packets. == Unrecognized Status in 'Intended status: Information', assuming Proposed Standard (Expected one of 'Standards Track', 'Full Standard', 'Draft Standard', 'Proposed Standard', 'Best Current Practice', 'Informational', 'Experimental', 'Informational', 'Historic'.) -- The document date (July 2, 2012) is 4287 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Missing Reference: 'RFC4861' is mentioned on line 213, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC791' is mentioned on line 414, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC6275' is mentioned on line 419, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC6621' is mentioned on line 432, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'AODVv2' is mentioned on line 511, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'OLSRv2' is mentioned on line 511, but not defined == Unused Reference: 'RFC2473' is defined on line 527, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3561' is defined on line 534, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3626' is defined on line 538, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC4443' is defined on line 541, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC5095' is defined on line 545, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC6554' is defined on line 556, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC5498' is defined on line 563, but no explicit reference was found in the text ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2460 (Obsoleted by RFC 8200) ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 2501 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Experimental RFC: RFC 3561 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Experimental RFC: RFC 3626 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 4593 -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'HERBERG' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'ANJUM' Summary: 5 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 18 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 IETF MANET Working Group A. Baryun 3 Internet-Draft UoG 4 Expires: Jan 3, 2013 July 2, 2012 5 Intended status: Information 7 Terminology in Mobile Ad hoc Networks 8 draft-baryun-manet-terminology-00.txt 9 Abstract 11 This document defines Mobile Ad hoc NETwork (MANET) terminology for 12 discussing routing requirements, solutions, and protocols of 13 networking referred to as mobile, multihop, wireless networking. 15 Status of This Memo 16 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 17 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 19 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 20 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 21 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 22 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 24 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 25 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 26 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 27 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 29 This Internet-Draft will expire on January 3, 2013. 31 Copyright Notice 33 Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 34 document authors. All rights reserved. 36 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 37 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 38 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 39 publication of this document. Please review these documents 40 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with 41 respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this 42 document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in 43 Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without 44 warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. 46 This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF 47 Contributions published or made publicly available before November 48 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this 49 material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow 50 modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. 52 Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling 53 the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified 54 outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may 55 not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format 56 it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other 57 than English. 59 1. Introduction 61 This document presents definitions for many ad hoc networks terms to 62 be used during discussions of various algorithms for enabling ad hoc 63 networks of mobile computers, particularly over wireless media. 64 Having the Internet community agree on definitions, it will be 65 expected that protocol users and designers will be able to discuss 66 more clearly protocols' applicability, advantages and disadvantages. 67 Mobile Ad hoc NETworks (MANETs) are infrastructure-less networks that 68 may use with many technologies. The MANET characteristics, 69 applicability and use cases are described in [RFC2501]. 71 2. The Terminology 72 The purpose of this document is to define MANET terms and to 73 distinguish differences in definitions by routing protocols terms 74 used. Security routing terminology related to MANET will be defined 75 in a separate section. 77 2.1 Requirement Level Language 79 This document uses capitalized words defined in [RFC2119] to 80 signify requirements. In this document these words are printed in 81 small if not related to requirement level language. The document uses 82 some defined terms from other RFCs which will be noted with each used 83 term. 85 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 86 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL", in this 87 document are to be interpreted as described in the RFC 2119. 89 2.2 Abbreviations Used in This Document 91 AH Authentication Header 92 ATM Asynchronous Transfer Mode 93 DAD Duplicate Address Detection 94 DPD Duplicate Packet Detection 95 DoS Denial of Service 96 ESP Encapsulating Security Payload 97 IP IPv4 or IPv6 98 ICMP Internet Control Message Protocol 99 IIB Interface Information Base 100 ETX Estimated Expected number of Transmission 101 FIB Forwarding Information Base 102 LQI Link Quality Indicator 103 L2 Data Link Layer (i.e. 2nd layer in ISO model) 104 L3 Internet Layer (i.e. 3rd layer in ISO model) 105 LLN Low power and Lossy Network 106 MAC Medium Access Control 107 MIB Management Information Base 108 MTU Maximum Transmission Unit 109 NBMA Non-Broadcast Multi-Access link 110 NHDP Neighborhood Discovery Protocol 111 ND IP Neighbor Discovery 112 OSPF Open Shortest Path First 113 RIB Routing Information Base 114 SMF Simplified Multicast Forwarding 115 TCP Transmission Control Protocol 116 UDP User Datagram Protocol 118 2.3 Definitions for MANET Terms 120 2.3.1 Terms Definition of MANET Communication: 122 Communications' Technology or Facility: 123 The means employed by two or more devices/subsystems to transfer 124 and/or receive information between them in one way or two way 125 communication. MANET communications often uses the wireless 126 transmission medium(s) and MAY use some wired mediums (e.g. free 127 space, air, water, antenna, coaxial cables, etc.) 129 Communication Medium: 130 The transceiver system (e.g. such as L2 systems, IEEE802.11 systems, 131 satellite system, etc.) that the routing device uses to communicates 132 through the transmission medium(s), by providing connectionless 133 and/or connection services that MAY be established. The system 134 medium includes MAC layer and MAY include the physical Layer. 136 Communication Channel: 137 A subdivision of the physical communication medium (i.e. radio carrier 138 signal bandwidth, or the system bandwidth) allowing possibly shared 139 independent uses of the medium. Channels may be made available by 140 subdividing the medium into; distinct time slots, distinct spectral 141 bands, or coding sequence, etc. 143 MANET Protocol: 144 The communication system/subsystem that operates and maintains the 145 ad hoc communication technology or facility within MANET. MANET routing 146 Protocols often apply distributed algorithms/techniques to disseminate 147 or forward routing messages within a MANET routing domain. 149 Topology: 150 An abstract representation of a network (physical or logical), as a 151 graph (G) whose topology is defined by a set of routers/bridges (V) that 152 communicate through set of links (E), where the G =(V, E). 154 Physical-level Topology: 155 A topology of the communication medium networks consists of routing 156 devices and physical links. This topology information is updated by 157 devices' technology in the L2 information Base. 159 Network-level Topology: 160 A topology of the communication system networks consists of routers and 161 links. This topology information is updated by routers in its RIB. 163 Multihop MANET: 164 A MANET that its node(s) MAY need(s) more than one IP hop to reach the 165 destination. 167 Reactive Routing: 168 An on-demand based routing protocol that operates route discover and 169 maintenance the route(s), to reach the demanded destination(s). 171 Proactive Routing: 172 A topology RIB based routing protocol that operates routes and maintains 173 the network topology, to reach its known destination(s). Each router 174 maintains routes to all reachable destinations at all times, whether or 175 not there is currently any demand to deliver packets to those 176 destinations. 178 Upper Layer: 179 a protocol layer above IP layer (e.g. as TCP, UDP, OSPF). 181 MANET Domain: TBD 183 MANET Signaling: 184 Sending and exchanging some MANET messages/information. 186 2.3.2 Terms Definition of MANET Elements 188 Node: 189 A device/subsystem that MUST implement IP and SHOULD participate in 190 MANET signaling. It either runs a MANET routing protocol or participate 191 in MANET signaling. 193 Router: 194 A MANET node that MUST implement a MANET routing protocol and forwards 195 IP packets not explicitly addressed to itself. 197 Host: 198 A node that is not a router. All destinations in MANET that receive 199 delivered data are hosts. 201 Link: 202 A link between two node interfaces. This link may be Logical 203 (i.e. virtual) link or physical link. Logical links are between two 204 logical interfaces and physical links are between two physical 205 interfaces. Links are either unidirectional or bidirectional 206 (links may be on-link and off-link: see RFC4861). 208 Physical Link: 209 a communication facility or medium over which the nodes can 210 communicate at the link layer, i.e., the layer immediately below 211 IP. Physical interfaces are the nodes' attachment to physical links. 212 Physical Link types are point-to-point, NBMA, multicast capable, 213 and shared-media, etc (see link types in ND [RFC4861]). 215 Logical (virtual) Link: 216 a communication facility (at L3, or upper-layer) over which nodes can 217 communicate. This logical link is between two MANET interfaces exists 218 if either can be heard by the other. 220 Link MTU: 221 the maximum transmission unit (i.e. maximum unit size in octets), that 222 can be conveyed in one transmission unit over the link. 224 Node Interface: 225 A node's point of attachment to a link. Each node MUST have at least one 226 interface that SHOULD be assigned an IP address. If there is/are more 227 than one interface(s) per node then the additional interface(s) MAY be 228 assigned an IP address. If an interface is not assigned to an IP address 229 it MUST be identified by the MANET routing protocol. An interface MAY be 230 assigned one or more addresses. 232 MANET Interface: 233 A node interface that participate in; exchange MANET information used in 234 MANET routing or exchange information in MANET neighbor node discovery 235 (e.g as the term used in RFC6130). A MANET interface MUST be assigned to 236 least one routable address to communicate. One router interface MUST be 237 assigned to the router's main address. 239 2.3.3 Terms Definition of MANET Identifications: 241 An interface MAY be assigned one or more addresses. If the interface is 242 a logical interface it MAY be assigned to only logical addresses, but if 243 it is a physical interface MAY be assigned with physical address 244 (e.g. MAC address) and/or logical address(es) (e.g. IP addresses, 245 MANET addresses). 247 MANET Address 248 A MANET-subnet, node, or interface address. Node and interface addresses 249 are either IP addresses or RFC5444 addresses. All subnet addresses are 250 unicast IP addresses. 252 Address Block and TLV: as specified in RFC5444 254 Routable address: 255 A subnet address which can be a destination address. A router MUST be 256 able to distinguish a routable address from a non-routable address. 257 Broadcast, and multicast addresses, limited in scope to less than the 258 entire MANET, MUST NOT be considered as routable addresses. Anycast 259 addresses MAY be considered as routable addresses. 261 Main address: 262 A routable address (MANET address) that is assigned to one router's 263 MANET interface. 265 Originator address: 266 A node address of the node that originated a MANET message (this message 267 MUST include the originator address). It MAY be a routable or an 268 unroutable address. 270 subnet prefix 271 A bit string that consists of some number of initial bits of an IP 272 address. 274 Interface identifier 275 the remaining low-order bits in the node's IP address after the subnet 276 prefix. A number used to identify a node's interface on a link. 278 2.3.4 Terms Definition of MANET exchange information formats: 280 Packet: 281 A MANET packet of a header plus payload. These packets are either 282 IP packets or RFC5444 packets. RFC5444 packet MUST be encapsulated 283 in IP packet. Packets are generated by nodes to be sent to 284 destination(s) through MANET or through the Internet. RFC5444 packets 285 information MAY not be used only by MANET routers. 287 Message: 288 A header and payload which is either a MANET data message or routing 289 protocol message. Routing control messages are either MANET routing 290 protocol messages or/and RFC5444 messages. 292 Type Length Value coding (TLV): 293 A generic way to represent MANET information (as in [RFC5444] and 294 [RFC5497]). 296 Frame: 297 A L2 protocol TLV with a header and payload. In some technologies the L2 298 operates a MANET routing protocol as a local area networking system. 299 Frames MAY encapsulate MANET packets to be tunneled through a 300 telecommunication network. 302 Route Request Message (RREQ) 303 A message is used to discover a valid route to a particular 304 destination address, called the RREQ Target Node. When a router 305 processes a RREQ it learns routing information on how to Originator 306 Node. 308 Route Reply Message (RREP) 309 A message is used to disseminate routing information about 310 the RREP Target Node to the RREQ Originator Node and the intermediate 311 routers. 313 Route Error Message (RERR) 314 A message is used to disseminate the information that a route is 315 not available for one or more particular addresses. A RERR message is 316 used to indicate that a router does not have a forwarding route 317 to one or more particular addresses. 319 2.3.5 Terms Definition Related to MANET Protocol Operation: 321 Hop-by-hop Routing: (TBD) 322 A dynamic routing that routes to destination by routing table. 324 Source Routing: (TBD) 325 A dynamic routing that its route path is provided in the IP packet. 327 Route Discovery: TBD 329 Route Maintenance: TBD 331 Neighbor discovery: (TBD) 332 A node discovers neighbors only if the node receives from it's 333 neighbors. 335 Multipoint relay (MPR): (TBD) 336 A router X1 is an MPR for a router Y1, if router Y1 has indicated 337 its selection of router X1 as an MPR in a recent HELLO message. 338 Router X1 may be a flooding MPR for Y1 if it is indicated to 339 participate in the flooding process of messages received from 340 router Y1, or it may be a routing MPR for Y1, if it is indicated to 341 declare link-state information for the link from X1 to Y1. It may 342 also be both at the same time. 344 MPR selector: 345 A router, Y, is a flooding/routing MPR selector of router X if 346 router Y has selected router X as a flooding/routing MPR. 348 Router Parameters: 349 boolean or numerical values, specified for each router, and not 350 specific to an interface. A router MAY change router parameter 351 values at any time, subject to some MANET constraints. 353 MANET Routing Metric: 354 A MANET routing cost that is governed by specific rules and properties 355 defined by the MANET routing protocol which captures specific link or 356 node characteristics. Examples of basic metrics are hop-count, ETX, LQI, 357 etc. 359 Distance Vector Metric 360 A metric class related to rules of the MANET interface and MANET path 361 distance. The metric can be calculated by the distance vector routing 362 algorithm class used by the MANET routing protocol. A metric of the 363 distance a message or piece of information has traversed. The minimum 364 value of distance is the number of IP hops traversed. 366 Link State Metric 367 A metric type related to the MANET network-topology status and logical 368 links' states. This metric is calculated by the link state routing 369 algorithm class used by the MANET routing protocol. A metric type maybe 370 EXT, LQL, etc. 372 Link Metric: TBD 374 Neighbor Metric: TBD 376 Path accumulated: 377 The RREQ message accumulates intermediate routers that are in path to 378 destination(s). 380 Protocol Sequence Number: 381 A Sequence Number related to a MANET protocol that maintained by each 382 protocol subsystem process. This sequence number is used by other 383 subsystems to identify the temporal order of protocol information 384 generated. 386 Router Sequence Number: 387 A router sequence number is maintained by each router process. The 388 sequence number is used by other routers to identify the temporal 389 order of routing information generated and ensure loop-free routes. 391 MANET Information Base: 392 A collection of information (in Table or Cache structure) maintained 393 by MANET protocols and which is to be made available to MANET routing 394 protocols. An Information Base may be associated with a MANET router 395 or with MANET interface (e.g. route request table, IIB, RIB, FIB, MIB). 397 RIB Entry: 398 The RIB entry is a conceptual data structure. Implementations may use 399 any internal representation that conforms to the semantics of a route 400 as specified in the router specification. 402 3. IP Considerations and Terminology 404 All MANET nodes MUST implement IP and all MANET routers MUST 405 run/implement at least one MANET routing protocol. The 406 terminologies described in this document can be used for 407 IPv4-MANET and IPv6-MANET. The IPv4 addresses MAY be used in IPv6 408 packets but IPv6 addresses MUST not be in IPv4 packets. 410 IP address: 411 IPv4 addresses or IPv6 addresses. 413 IP Packet: 414 The packet header plus payload as specified in [RFC791] and [RFC2460] 415 for IPv4 and IPv6 respectively. It can encapsulate RFC5444 packets as 416 specified by RFC5498. 418 Mobile IP considerations: 419 Mobile IP terms are provided in [RFC6275], and this technology 420 assists nodes while connected through the Internet domain(s). MANET 421 is an infrastructure-less network that is able to communicate with 422 the Internet (i.e. an IP infrastructure network). 424 4. Security Consideration and Terminology 426 It is RECOMMENDED that MANET routing protocols consider security 427 issues because the MANET's transmission medium is wireless which make 428 it vulnerable to attacks [ANJUM][RFC4593]. In some situations the 429 routing information while traversing the MANET MAY be used by an 430 intruder node, to obtain MANET data traffic or/and attack the MANET 431 [HERBERG]. Forwarding protocols that use DPD techniques MAY be 432 vulnerable to DoS attacks such as [RFC6621]. MANETs MAY be secured 433 by using IPsec, AH, DAD, and ESP techniques, and other. However, 434 it is RECOMMENDED that MANET detects attackers and possible threats. 436 The following are some terminology related to MANET threats and 437 security. 439 Attacker: A node, present in the network and which intentionally seeks 440 to compromise information based in MANET router(s). The Attacker MAY be 441 a compromised MANET router if obtained MANET identity or routing 442 information. 444 Compromised MANET Router: An attacker router, present in MANET and 445 which generates syntactically correct routing control messages. Control 446 messages emitted by compromised router(s) may contain additional 447 information, or omit information, as compared to a control message 448 generated by a non-compromised router located in the same MANET 449 topological position. 451 Legitimate MANET Router: A MANET router, which is not a Compromised 452 MANET Router. 454 Jamming Attack: 455 The attacker transmits massive amounts of interfering radio traffic, 456 which will prevent legitimate traffic (e.g., routing and data traffic) 457 on all or part of the MANET. Indirect jamming attacks MAY occur by 458 influencing Legitimate MANET Router to transmit unnecessary information. 460 Eavesdropping: 461 Obtaining a copy by the attacker of the transmitted MANET routing 462 information or the transmitted data information from its neighbor's 463 transmitted radio packet. Attacker's processes MANY be used by attacker 464 to mislead routing. Eavesdropping does not pose a direct threat to the 465 MANET or to its routing. 467 Identity Spoofing: 468 Attacker sends routing messages, pretending to have the MANET identity 469 of another node. 471 Link Spoofing: 472 Compromised MANET router sends routing messages to neighbor node(s) 473 providing incorrect set of link information. 475 Replay Attack: 476 A Compromised router in one MANET region records control traffic 477 information and replays the recorded information in a different MANET 478 region (this type of attack is also called the Wormhole attack). 480 Broadcast Storm: 481 Compromised MANET router may attack the MANET by attempting to change 482 the MANET flooding algorithm(s) to increase routing overheads or/and to 483 increase the route discovery delay. Broadcast storm degrades the data 484 traffic delivery and MANET performance. 486 Falsification in MANET: 487 The compromised MANET router sends false routing information into MANET. 488 False routing information received in MANET, MAY create unrealistic 489 information bases. 491 ICMP Attacks: 492 The generation of ICMPv6 error messages may be used by compromised MANET 493 router to attempt DoS attacks by sending an error-causing source routing 494 header in back-to-back datagrams. As the ICMP messages are passed to the 495 upper-layer processes, it is possible to perform attacks on the upper 496 layer protocols (e.g., UDP, TCP). Protocols at the upper layers are 497 RECOMMENDED to perform some form of validation to ICMP messages (using 498 the information contained in the payload of the ICMP message) before 499 acting upon them. 501 Source Routing Attacks: TBD 503 5. IANA Considerations 505 This document has no request to IANA. 507 6. Acknowledgments 509 This work has used/modified terms of the following documents: RFC2462, 510 RFC2501, RFC3561, RFC3626, RFC3753, RFC4728, RFC4861, RFC5444, RFC6130, 511 RFC6621, [AODVv2], [OLSRv2], and [HERBERG], thanking all authors. The 512 author would like to thank who inspired to take over the work from 513 their discussions as; Charlie Perkins, Christopher Dearlover, and 514 Teco Bo. The author would like to gratefully acknowledge to the MANET 515 WG for all contributions. 517 7. References 519 7.1. Normative References 521 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 522 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 524 [RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 525 (IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998. 527 [RFC2473] Conta, A. and S. Deering, "Generic Packet Tunneling in 528 IPv6 Specification", RFC 2473, December 1998. 530 [RFC2501] Macker, J. and S. Corson, "Mobile Ad hoc Networking 531 (MANET): Routing Protocol Performance Issues and 532 Evaluation Considerations", RFC 2501, January 1999. 534 [RFC3561] Perkins, C., Belding-Royer, E., and Das S., "Ad hoc 535 On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing", RFC 3561, 536 July 2003. 538 [RFC3626] Clausen, T. and P. Jacquet, "The Optimized Link State 539 Routing Protocol", RFC 3626, October 2003. 541 [RFC4443] Conta, A., Deering, S., and M. Gupta, "Internet Control 542 Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol 543 Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", RFC 4443, March 2006. 545 [RFC5095] Abley, J., Savola, P., and G. Neville-Neil, "Deprecation 546 of Type 0 Routing Headers in IPv6", RFC 5095, December 547 2007. 549 [RFC5444] Clausen, T., Dean, J., Dearlove, C., and Adjih, C. 550 "Generalized MANET Packet/Message Format", RFC 5444, 551 February 2009. 553 [RFC5497] Clausen, T. and C. Dearlove, "Representing multi-value 554 time in MANETs", RFC 5497, March 2009. 556 [RFC6554] Hui, J., Vasseur, JP., Culler, D., and V. Manral, 557 "An IPv6 Routing Header for Source Routes with the 558 Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks 559 (RPL)", RFC 6554, March 2012. 560 [RFC4593] Barbir, A., Murphy, S., and Yang, Y., "Generic Threats to 561 Routing Protocols", Oct, 2006. 563 [RFC5498] Chakeres, I., "IANA Allocations for MANET Protocols", 564 RFC 5498, March 2009. 566 [HERBERG] Herberg, U., Yi, J., Clausen, T.,"Security Threats for 567 NHDP", Work in progress, March, 2012. 569 7.2.Informative References 571 [ANJUM] Anjum, F. and Mouchtaris, P. "Security for Wireless Ad Hoc 572 Networks", John Wiley and Sons, March 2007. 573 ISBN: 978-0-471-75688-0. 575 Author Address 577 Abdussalam Nuri Baryun 578 University of Glamorgan (UoG) 579 Treforest, CF37 1DL, UK 580 Email: abdussalambaryun@gmail.com