A Subjective Approach to Routing in P2P and Ad Hoc Networks

  • Andrew Twigg
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2692)


This paper presents a subjective approach to routing in peer-to-peer and ad hoc networks. The main difference between our approach and traditional routing models is the use of a trust model to mediate the risk inherent in routing decisions. Rather than blindly exchanging routing table entries, nodes ‘discount’ recommendations from other nodes using a distributed trust computation which allows them to avoid malicious, faulty and unreliable nodes and links in routing decisions. Adding the risk model allows energy-efficient routing decisions to be made in a wireless network, and we show how our model can be optimized for different network behaviours, including wireless networks. The model is described in the context of the DSR [1] routing algorithm, although it is equally-applicable to others, including peer-to-peer routing substrates.


Wireless Network Trust Model Dynamic Source Rout Inference Procedure Subjective Approach 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Johnson, D., Maltz, D., Broch, J.: DSR: A dynamic source routing protocol for multihop wireless ad hoc networks. In: David B. Johnson, David A. Maltz, and Josh Broch. DSR The Dynamic Source Routing Protocol for Multihop Wireless Ad Hoc Networks. In Ad Hoc Networking, edited by Charles E. Perkins, chapter 5, pages 139–172. Addison-Wesley, 2001. (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jøsang, A.: A logic for uncertain probabilities. Available at (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Keane, J.: Trust based dynamic source routing in mobile ad hoc networks. msc. thesis, trinity college dublin. (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Xiong, L., Liu, L.: Building trust in decentralized peer-to-peer electronic communities. In: Fifth International Conference on Electronic Commerce Research (ICECR-5), Canada. (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aberer, K., Despotovic, Z.: Managing trust in a peer-2-peer information system. In: CIKM. (2001) 310–317Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Awerbuch, B., Holmer, D., Nita-Rotaru, C., Rubens, H.: An on-demand secure routing protocol resilient to byzantine failures (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hu, Y., Perrig, A., Johnson, D.: Ariadne: A secure on-demand routing protocol for ad hoc networks (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hu, Y.C., Johnson, D.B., Perrig, A.: SEAD: Secure efficient distance vector routing in mobile wireless ad hoc networks. In: Fourth IEEE Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications (WMCSA’ 02). (2002) 3–13Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jøsang, A.: The right type of trust for distributed systems. In: C. Meadows, editor, Proc. of the 1996 New Security Paradigms Workshop. ACM, 1996. (1996)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schollmeier, R., Gruber, I., Finkenzeller, M.: Routing in mobile ad hoc and peer-to-peer networks. a comparison (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R., Winograd, T.: The pagerank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web. available as tech. Rep., computer science department, stanford university (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rowstron, A., Druschel, P.: Pastry: Scalable, distributed object location and routing for large-scale peer-to-peer systems. In: IFIP/ACM International Conference on Distributed Systems Platforms (Middleware). (2001) 329–350Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Carbone, M., Danvy, O., Damgaard, I., Krukow, K., Møller, A., Nielsen, J.B., Nielsen, M.: A model for trust (2002) EU Project SECURE IST-2001-32486, Deliverable 1.1.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew Twigg
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer LaboratoryCambridge UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations