Sequence Numbers Do Not Guarantee Loop Freedom; AODV Can Yield Routing Loops

December 30, 2015 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› International Conference on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Wireless and Mobile Systems

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Rob van Glabbeek, Peter HΓΆfner, Wee Lum Tan, Marius Portmann arXiv ID 1512.08891 Category cs.NI: Networking & Internet Cross-listed cs.LO Citations 41 Venue International Conference on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Wireless and Mobile Systems Last Checked 6 months ago
Abstract
In the area of mobile ad-hoc networks and wireless mesh networks, sequence numbers are often used in routing protocols to avoid routing loops. It is commonly stated in protocol specifications that sequence numbers are sufficient to guarantee loop freedom if they are monotonically increased over time. A classical example for the use of sequence numbers is the popular Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing protocol. The loop freedom of AODV is not only a common belief, it has been claimed in the abstract of its RFC and at least two proofs have been proposed. AODV-based protocols such as AODVv2 (DYMO) and HWMP also claim loop freedom due to the same use of sequence numbers. In this paper we show that AODV is not a priori loop free; by this we counter the proposed proofs in the literature. In fact, loop freedom hinges on non-evident assumptions to be made when resolving ambiguities occurring in the RFC. Thus, monotonically increasing sequence numbers, by themselves, do not guarantee loop freedom.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Networking & Internet

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted