Route Reliability Evaluation in Cooperative Networks

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Route selection in cooperative networks is unreliable due to the presence of malicious nodes, as source nodes rely solely on their local trust databases and experiences, which can lead to poor route choices.

Innovation Solution

The method involves the destination node evaluating reliability indicator parameters for routes and sending these parameters back to the source node, allowing the source node to assess route reliability more accurately, potentially bypassing malicious nodes by combining local and destination-provided information.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If source nodes rely solely on local trust databases and experiences for route selection, then the source node can independently evaluate routes, but the route selection reliability deteriorates due to limited information and presence of malicious nodes

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveindependent route evaluation capabilityVSAvoidroute selection reliability

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The destination node acts as an intermediary that provides reliability indicator parameters to the source node. This mediator supplies additional trusted information about intermediate nodes on the route, enabling the source node to make more reliable route selections while maintaining independent evaluation capability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The destination node sends feedback in the form of reliability indicator parameters to the source node about the nodes along the route. This feedback mechanism allows the source node to continuously improve its route selection reliability based on observed network conditions and node behaviors.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If the destination node evaluates and provides reliability indicator parameters, then route selection reliability improves, but the message exchange complexity and processing overhead increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveroute selection reliabilityVSAvoidmessage exchange complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The reliability indicator parameters are merged into the existing route request and route reply message exchanges. Instead of creating separate communication protocols, the patent combines the reliability information with standard routing messages, thereby improving reliability without significantly increasing message exchange complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #5Merging (Combining)

3Loss of energy

If source nodes use only local trust database information, then the system requires minimal information exchange, but the measurement precision of route reliability deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveinformation exchange overheadVSAvoidroute reliability assessment precision

Core Design Contradiction:

Loss of energyVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The destination node provides partial information (reliability indicator parameters for specific intermediate nodes) rather than complete information about all nodes. This partial action approach improves measurement precision of route reliability while keeping information exchange overhead manageable by providing only the most relevant reliability indicators.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP2070276B1Method for evaluating the reliability of a route in a cooperative network

Publication Date: 2020.03.18 ORANGE SA

Figure 1~6
Figure 2~4
Figure 3~5

AI summary

Method for evaluating the reliability of a route in a cooperative network. The invention relates to a method for evaluating the reliability of a route in a cooperative network for transmitting data packets between a source node and a destination node of the network. It comprises, on receipt by the destination node of a message indicating a route between the two nodes:- a step of associating with the indicated route at least one reliability indicator parameter evaluated by the destination node and, - a step of despatching to the source node a response comprising the parameter associated with the indicated route.