,(((6\PSRVLXPRQ&RPSXWHUVDQG&RPPXQLFDWLRQV,6&&
DSOR: A Traffic-Differentiated Secure Opportunistic Routing with
Game Theoretic Approach in MANETs
Xiaoxiong Zhong1, 2, 3, Renhao Lu1, Li Li3, Xinghan Wang1, Yanbin Zheng1
1
Guangxi Key Laboratory of Trusted Software, Guilin University of Electronic Technology, Guilin, 541004, P. R. China
2
Peng Cheng Laboratory, Shenzhen 518000, P. R. China
3
Graduate School at Shenzhen, Tsinghua University, Shenzhen 518055, P. R. China
Corresponding author: Xiaoxiong Zhong, email: xixzhong@gmail.com
Abstract- Recently, the increase of different services makes the
design of routing protocols more difficult in mobile ad hoc
networks (MANETs), e.g., how to guarantee the QoS of different
types of traffics flows in MANETs with resource constrained and
malicious nodes. Opportunistic routing (OR) can make full use of
the broadcast characteristics of wireless channels to improve the
performance of MANETs. In this paper, we propose a traffic-
differentiated secure opportunistic routing from a game theoretic
perspective, DSOR. In the proposed scheme, we use a novel
method to calculate trust value, considering node’s forwarding
capability and the status of different types of flows. According to
the resource status of the network, we propose a service price and
resource price for the auction model, which is used to select
optimal candidate forwarding sets. At the same time, the optimal
bid price has been proved and a novel flow priority decision for
transmission is presented, which is based on waiting time and
requested time. The simulation results show that the network
lifetime, packet delivery rate and delay of the DSOR are better
than existing works.
Keywords - MANETs; secure opportunistic routing; trust;
traffic-differentiated
I. INTRODUCTION
With the development of communication technology, the
content is increasingly rich in mobile ad hoc networks
(MANETs). Diverse network contents also indicate the
existence of multiple service flows in the network, such as
video flow, voice flow, etc. Therefore, how to ensure that QoS
of different service flows in MANETs is a hot issue at present,
especially in the case of malicious nodes in MANETs. In this
case, a suitable routing scheme plays a crucial role in network
performance improvement.
Considering the broadcast characteristics of the wireless
network, Biswas et al. [1] firstly proposed the concept of
opportunistic routing (OR), in which, the node broadcasts the
packet to its neighbors, and then its neighbors will have the
chance to receive/hear it, hence, they can cooperate in packet
forwarding. Taking the advantage of the broadcast nature of
the wireless medium, OR can enhance the routing performance
in wireless networks.
In different types of flows environments, How et al. [2]
proposed a cross layer service differentiation OR for cognitive
radio networks, which uses minimum required data rate for
candidate selection. Qin et. al. [3] presented a novel
opportunistic routing scheme which considers admission
control of nodes for the different types of flows, which can
k,(((
Authorized licensed use limited to: Corporacion Universitaria de la Costa. Downloaded on July 18,2022 at 21:23:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
provide better QoS in OR in face of the uncertainty of
forwarding paths. However, the environment in the face of
malicious nodes is not very practical.
Recently, some studies have been presented for OR from a
security perspective. Zhang et al. [4] proposed a privacy
preserving and secure framework for OR in DTNs,
considering confidentiality, authentication and key
management. Lyu et al. [5] presented a secure and scalable
geographic OR for WSNs from a received signal strength
perspective, exploiting a location verification algorithm and
avoiding location spoofing attack scheme based on received
signal strength. As we know that the trust mechanism can be
used to solve the problem of malicious nodes in MANETs.
Consider the uncertainty of trust value caused by the problem
of link quality and malicious behaviors, Wang et al. [6]
proposed a trusted minimum cost opportunistic routing
(MCOR) for ad hoc networks which selects the highest
priority and trusted candidate set to forward data. Salehi et. al.
[7] proposed to combine trust mechanism with opportunity
routing, in which the trust value is taken into account in
making the selection of candidate node sets, effectively
reducing the influence of malicious nodes on network
performance. Considering the subjectivity of the trust
mechanism, in [8], they further introduced the concept of
recommendation trust is introduced, which can solve the
collusion attack well.
However, these works did not consider the diversity of
attacks and candidate selection under different types of flows.
In our recent work [9], we proposed a trust aware OR for
cognitive radio IoT under different types of flows environment.
It uses a heuristic algorithm for candidate selection which will
degrade routing performance due to the selection of improper
candidate.
In view of the above problems, we propose a game
theoretic based secure opportunity routing protocol for traffic-
differentiated MANETs denoted DSOR. The main
contributions of this paper are as follows:
1) We design a novel trust mechanism for different
types of flows, which exploits node’s forwarding
capability and the status of different types of flows.
It is more efficient to characterize multiple types of
flow-oriented trust mechanism.
2) We present an auction based OR protocol, which uses
energy and bandwidth for defining network resource
price, trust and ETX (expected transmission count)
 ,(((6\PSRVLXPRQ&RPSXWHUVDQG&RPPXQLFDWLRQV,6&&
for defining service price in auction model.
Moreover, we prove that the proposed auction model
has an optimal bid price. Then, the auction model
based candidate forwarding set selection of DSOR is
described.
3) We propose a flow priority decision scheme, which
can find the priority based on the waiting time and
requested time at node. Thereby, it can decide the
order of flow transmission at node, in which the
heavy load and emergent/reliable flow can be
effectively alleviated, increasing total system
capacity and reducing the execution time of the flow.
II. DSOR DESIGN FOR MANETS
In this section, we describe DSOR in detail, which
mainly includes the following parts, the calculation of the trust
value, routing metric based on the auction, and the dynamic
flows priority selection algorithm.
1. Trust calculation
Eliminating malicious nodes in the network is a
prerequisite for secure routing, so we first give the calculation
of trust values. In order to ensure the accuracy of trust
calculation under multi-type flows, combining our previous
work on trust mechanisms [9], the calculation of trust value
based on differentiated services is presented.
A) Direct trust value calculation
The number of traffic flows and the number of packets of
each traffic type are two important factors that affect the trust
value in a multi-service environment. Combining our previous
work [9], in this part, we calculate our trust value by the
number of current flow forwarding ratio and the number of
packets forwarding ratio of the current forwarding flow type.
Next, we use k to indicate the type of traffic in a network.
Suppose node i acts as a sending node and node j acts as a
neighbor node of node i. fnik, j indicates the number of packets
of the k-type traffic flow that is forwarded by j when it is the
next hop of node i. fn _ ri k, j represents the proportion of the
number of packets forwarded by fnik, j at node i, which can be
expressed :
fnik, j
fn _ ri k, j =
¦
n
fnik, h
h =1
where n represents the number of i’s one-hop neighbor nodes,
j and h are i’s one-hop neighbor.
In addition, we use fl _ ri k, j to represent the proportion of
the number of k-type flows sent by node i and through node j
to forward them, which can be expressed as follows:
flik, j
fl _ ri ,k j =
¦
n
h =1
flik, h
where flik, j represents the number of the k-type traffic flows
that is forwarded by i’s one-hop neighbor j .
Combining Equation 1 with Equation 2, we can calculate
the direct trust value.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Corporacion Universitaria de la Costa. Downloaded on July 18,2022 at 21:23:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Td ik, j = σ fn _ ri k, j + ω fl _ ri ,k j (3)
where it has σ + ω = 1 , and 0 < σ , ω ≤ 1 .
In addition, in order to determine trust value of some
nodes with small node forwarding opportunities and small
amount of forwarding data more accurately, DSOR introduces
the third factor: forwarding success ratio. Here we use flnik, j to
indicate the number of times the node j that is the optimal
candidate forwarding node for node i when forwarding the k-
type traffic flows. So, we can calculate our direct trust value as
shown in formula 4.
Td ik, j = max(σ fn _ r(ki , j ) + ω fl _ r(ki , j ) , fln(ki , j ) / fl(ki , j ) ) (4)
B) Indirect trust value calculation
For k-type flow, the greater the number of k-type traffic
flow sent or forwarded by a node, the more reliable the
recommended trust value for this node. In the proposed
scheme, we introduce a weighting factor, as shown in
Equation 5.
¦
s
g =1
fl hk, g
w k
= (5)
¦
h s
fl h , g
g =1
where s is the number of h’s one-hop neighbor nodes, g is h’s
¦ fl is the number of total flows
s
one-hop neighbor. g =1 h, g
forwarded by node h. ¦ fl is the number of k-type flows
s k
g =1 h, g
forwarded by node h.
Then, the indirect trust of node i to node j for k-type flows
can be expressed:
¦
n
Td ik, h * Td hk, j * whk
Tri ,k j = h =1 (6)
¦
n
h =1
Td ik, h * whk
Hence, the trust of node i to node j can be expressed as
follows:
Ti , j =  ¦ T d ik, j + β ¦ T ri ,k j (7)
k k
where 0 < α , β ≤ 1 and α + β = 1 .
2. Candidate selection based on auction model
In the proposed scheme, we use the price mechanism to
select the next hop candidate node. Considering the resource
status and the trust status of the nodes in the MANETs, and
(1)
taking the state of the links quality into account, we divide the
prices into two categories: resource prices and service prices.
According to the economy theory, the state of resources is
inversely proportional to price. Taking the node energy as an
example, when the remaining energy of the node is sufficient,
the price is low, and vice versa. In addition, considering the
node’s own capabilities, the node with the lower ETX value
has large service ability, and the large node charges a smaller
(2)
price for greater profit. The combination of the two type of
prices can ensure the balance of resource allocation in the
network and ensure the optimal state when the data are
transmitted.
When the node begins to forward data, the price is firstly
determined, and the price is divided into the resource price and
the service price. The resource price is composed of the energy
 ,(((6\PSRVLXPRQ&RPSXWHUVDQG&RPPXQLFDWLRQV,6&&

resource price and the bandwidth resource price, which mp

v Ej + v Bj
increases with the decrease of the remaining resources, and v Rj = m − k p +1
p
(10)
p
increases with the increase of the resources required for the m
1+ p
specific forwarding service. The service price is inversely m − k p +1
proportional to the quality of service, which indicates the where m p is the highest priority in the traffic flows, and
probability that a good node with good quality of service has a k p is the priority of the k-type traffic flow.
large benefit.
B) The service pricing
A) The resource pricing We called node can forward data as a service which
In MANETs, node’s resources are limited in most cases, means that nodes with higher trust values and smaller ETX
e.g., power and bandwidth. The energy of nodes in a mobile ad values have better service capabilities. In order to guarantee
hoc network is limited and irreversible. Therefore, effective the quality of message delivery and the higher probability of
energy resources management plays a crucial role in extending the node with strong service capability, we introduce the
network lifetime. On the other hand, bandwidth is a reversible concept of service price, which is inversely proportional to
resource but has a specific threshold. The node has a better service capacity. Equation 11 and Equation 12 respectively
trust value and a larger power residual value, and a smaller give the trust price and the link quality price of node j.
ETX value, will have more chance to select as a candidate. vTj = 1 − Ti , j (11)
Forwarding more data flows at a certain time will cause the where vTj is the trust price.
node bandwidth to reach the threshold, causing network
congestion, in which efficient bandwidth allocation schemes ETX
v ETXj =
jD (12)
can avoid network congestion. Therefore, the proper pricing E T X iD
modeling of energy resources and bandwidth resources is where ETX jD is the ETX value of node j to the destination
needed. We will describe more details as follows.
node, and ETX iD is the ETX value of node i to the destination
Energy resource price node.
Considering that the energy of different nodes in the So, the service price of node j is:
mobile ad hoc network may be different, while ensuring the kp
balance, the interests of different nodes also should be vTj + v ETXj
v Sj = mp (13)
considered. Therefore, in the modeling of energy price, we not k p

only consider the ratio of the amount of electricity required for 1+ p

flow transmission to the amount of remaining energy, but also
the ratio of the amount of energy used and the initial energy of
the node. So, the energy resource price is calculated as shown
in Equation 8.
EUj E Nj
v Ej = 1/2( + )
E Ij E Rj
where vEj is the energy price of the node j, EIj and EUj
represent the initial and used energy of node j. ENj is the
amount of power required by the current forwarding service,
and ERj is the remaining amount of energy.
Bandwidth resource price
When calculating the bandwidth resource price, we mainly
consider the remaining state of the bandwidth, that is, the ratio
of the current task bandwidth requirement bandwidth to the
remaining bandwidth. Then the bandwidth resource price is
calculated as shown in Equation 9.
vBj = log 2 (1 + BNj / BRj ) (9)
where BNj represents the current task bandwidth requirement
and BRj represents the current bandwidth remaining.
Suppose there are m classes traffic flows in the network,
we sort the stream according to its initial priority. In order to
guarantee the delay of higher priority flow, when calculating
the resource price, a greater weight is given to the bandwidth.
The resource price calculation when forwarding the k-type
traffic flows is shown in formula 10.
m
After get the resource price and service price, and in order
to ensure the flow with higher priority has a higher quality of
service, our proposed scheme design our cost function while
taking into account the priority of the current forwarding type
of traffic flows. The cost of node when forwarding the k-type
(8)
traffic flows, is shown is formula 14.
v j = vRj + vSj (14)
3. Analysis for the auction model
In this section, we give the bid price for the auction,
which is the routing metric of the proposed scheme. The
hypothetical conditions of our auction model are listed.
1) All bidding nodes have symmetric quotation
strategies, valuations are independent of each other,
and subject to uniform distribution [0, 2]
2) Adopting linear quotation strategy:
bi = li *vi + di (di , li ≥ 0) , bi is the bid price of node
i.
3) When the bid price is the same, compare the service
price of the node; if the service price is the same,
compare the trust value.
Theorem 1 In the proposed auction, the optimal bid price is
n −1 2
bi* = 1 vi + , where n1 is the number of candidate nodes
n1 n1
filtered by trust threshold Tth.
Proof: The best benefit can be achieved with this strategy for
every node. At this point, the system also reaches an optimal

Authorized licensed use limited to: Corporacion Universitaria de la Costa. Downloaded on July 18,2022 at 21:23:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 ,(((6\PSRVLXPRQ&RPSXWHUVDQG&RPPXQLFDWLRQV,6&&

state. In short, all nodes using this strategy can achieve their optimal solution can be addressed by Theorem 1. Each trusted
maximum expected return. node bids according to the optimal solution for maximizing its
U i = max ª¬( bi − vi ) × Pro {bi < b j } ( j = 1, …, n1 )˗j ≠ i º¼ own profit. According to the level of the bidding price of the
(15) node, we can get the optimal set. The candidate selection
{
+ ( bi − vi ) × Pro bi ( ∃b j < bi ) } algorithm for any node c (except for destination node) is listed
in Algorithm 1, where N i is the set of i’s next hop nodes,
where U i is the expected return of the node. Equation 15
NTi is the set of i’s next hop trusted nodes, CFSi is the
indicates that for any node that using as its bid price can
reach its maximum expected return. forwarding candidate set of node i , and mapPi is a collection
ª º of key-value pairs of node j, denoted ( j , v j ) .
« n
»
U i = max «( bi − vi ) × ∏Pro {bi < b j } »
« j =1
» Algorithm 1: Candidate selection algorithm based on auction
¬ j≠i ¼
1: input: ETX iD , Tth , E Nj , BNj , k
ª º (16)
« n 2
1 » 2: Auctioneer: broadcast RTS to N i
= max «( bi − vi ) × ∏ ³ dx »
« j =1 bi − di 2 » 3: for all nodes j ∈ N i for k-type flow do
¬ j ≠ i li ¼
n 4: if Ti , j ≥ Tth then
× [( n − 1) × (bi − vi )] × ∏[2l j − ( bi − d j )]}
1
= max{
( n − 1) × 2 × ∏ j =1l j
n −1 n
j =1 5: NTi ← j
j ≠i j≠i
6: end if
Since bi is the minimum value of the quote, 2l j − ( bi − d j ) , 7: end for
8: Bidder : for all nodes j ∈ NTi for k-type flow do
and ( n − 1) × (bi − vi ) , according to the principle of summing
9: if ETX jD ≤ ETX iD & & E Nj ≤ ERj & & BNj ≤ BRj then
the maximum value, we can deduce the expression 17.
10: calculate its cost according to (8) - (14)
2l j − ( bi − d j ) = ( n − 1) × ( bi − vi ) (17) 11: calculate its bidding price according to (22)
12: sending v j to node i
If the U i has a maximum value, then the best bidding
13: end if
strategy is 14: end for
2 × l j + d j (n − 1) × vi 15: Auctioneer: for received v j do
bi = + (18)
n n 16: mapPj ← ( j , v j )
Since we have 17: end for
bi = li * vi + d i (19) 18: sort mapPj according v j
Hence, we can obtain 19: for all nodes j ∈ NTi do
­ n −1 CFSi ← CFSi * j th node key j
°°li = n
20:
(20) 21: end for
®
° d = 2l j + d j 22: output: CFSi
°̄ i n
5. Flow priority policy
Because of the symmetry of the quotation strategy, we
Firstly, we assign different types of flows with initial
have d i = d j , that is priority according to the delay requirements. At the same
­ n −1 time, in order to ensure the QoS of low priority traffic flows,
°° li = n we propose the concept of sending right. Taking three types of
® (21)
flows as an example, the initial priority is 3, 2, and 1, and the
°d = 2
°̄ i n sending right is set to 3, 2, and 1. It will calculate flow priority
Adding it into formula (18), we have when a node has multiple flows at the same time. There are
n −1 2
multiple cases here. Firstly, there is a flow being forwarded by
bi* = vi + (22) the node. The FIFO policy would be selected. After the flow is
n n
finished, the new flow can continue to be sent, that is, the
4. Candidate selection algorithm priority is the highest. A node with a high sending right of the
Before determining the set of candidate nodes, we should unsent flow in the node buffer can be directly sent. The
filter the malicious nodes. For filtering the malicious nodes, remaining traffic flows are calculated according to the formula
we set the trust threshold Tth . The node is considered as a 23. As the waiting time increases, the sending right of the
trusted node, whose trust value is larger than Tth . Moreover, lowest traffic flow reaches 3, and the access of the new flow is
stopped until the lowest priority flow starts to be sent, and the
in order to guarantee the QoS for different types of flows, our new flow is accessed.
proposed scheme design the cost based on differentiation
W aiting time
strategy. Auction based candidate selection algorithm, as Sending right = + Pr iority (23)
Re quensted time
shown in Algorithm 1, has been presented, in which the

Authorized licensed use limited to: Corporacion Universitaria de la Costa. Downloaded on July 18,2022 at 21:23:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 ,(((6\PSRVLXPRQ&RPSXWHUVDQG&RPPXQLFDWLRQV,6&&

III PERFORMANCE EVALUATION malicious nodes. In addition, our proposed scheme is better
than MCOR due to exploit a novel trust scheme for different
In this section, we evaluate the performance of DSOR
types of flows.
protocol by simulation under different percentage of
misbehaving nodes using the Opportunistic Network
Environment simulator ONE simulator [10]. In this simulation,
we compare the following two protocols MCOR [6] and ExOR
[1] in terms of end to end delay, packet delivery rate and
network lifetime. The simulation consists of 100 nodes that are
randomly distributed in an area of 1000 by 1000 meters. The
main parameters are shown in Table1. In addition, we have
defined three types of traffic flows: class 1, class 2 and class 3.
The related setting parameters are shown in Table 2.
A) Simulation setting
Table 1. The main parameters setting.
Parameter value
Movement module Random way point
Simulation time 43200s Fig. 1. End to end delay v.s. percentage of misbehaving nodes.
Number of nodes 50~100
Size of packet 1500bytes
Simulation area 1000m*1000m
Initial trust value 0.8
Trust threshold 0.6
σ 0.5
ω 0.5
α 0.5
β 0.5
Trust Update interval 20s
Initial Energy value 300eu
Energy consumption receiving per 0.12e-5eu
bytes
Energy consumption forwarding per 0.242-5eu
bytes
Bandwidth 2Mbs Fig. 2. End to end delay v.s. percentage of misbehaving nodes.
(3 types of flows in three OR protocols)
Table 2. The parameters for 3 classes of flows. Packet delivery rate: In this part, we study the impact of
Class Priority CWmin CWmax Delay bound malicious nodes on packet delivery rate. As shown in Fig. 3,
Class1 3 3 7 100ms with the number of malicious nodes increasing, the total
Class2 2 7 15 200ms packet delivery rate decreases. As can been see from Fig. 4,
Class3 1 15 1023 300ms
the packet delivery rate of each type of flow is decreasing,
B) Attack model with the increasing number of malicious nodes. Besides, the
In the simulation, two types of attacks are considered: type of flow with higher priority has a better packet delivery
Black hole attack, and specific flow-based attack. Black hole rate. Without taking any measure to deal with misbehaving
attack model is Denial of Service attack model (DoS). Black nodes, ExOR shows the worst performance. Due to the novel
hole attacks increase packet loss rate, increase retransmission trust mechanism based on differentiation strategy, each type of
times, and reduce network lifetime. The second attack model flow using our proposed scheme has a higher packet delivery
is to discard the packets of a specific type of traffic flow. As rate than using MCOR, under the same conditions.
we know that the forwarding behavior of nodes to other flows
is likely to obtain a high trust value. This kind of malicious
node is difficult to identify.
C) Simulation results and analysis
End to end Delay: We study the influence of the
percentage of malicious nodes on end-to-end delay in both Fig.
1 and Fig. 2. As observed, with the number of malicious nodes
increasing, the average end-to-end delay increases. Similarly,
the average end to end delay of each type of flows also
increases with the increasing number of malicious nodes. It is
obvious that the delay of flow with higher priority is smaller
than that with lower priority. Besides, ExOR has a worse
performance than the other two routing schemes. The reason is Fig. 3. Packet delivery rate v.s. percentage of misbehaving nodes.
that ExOR did not take any security measures against the

Authorized licensed use limited to: Corporacion Universitaria de la Costa. Downloaded on July 18,2022 at 21:23:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 ,(((6\PSRVLXPRQ&RPSXWHUVDQG&RPPXQLFDWLRQV,6&&
Fig. 4. Packet delivery rate v.s. percentage of misbehaving nodes (3 types of
flows in three OR protocols).
Fig. 5. Network life v.s. percentage of misbehaving nodes.
Network lifetime: In Fig. 5, we study the impact of
malicious nodes on network lifetime. As the number of
malicious nodes increases, network lifetime decreases. The
reason is that the malicious nodes cause many retransmissions,
wasting more energy. Besides, because of our novel trust
method, our proposed scheme is better than the other two
routing scheme. Fig. 6 shows the influence of the number of
nodes on network lifetime. As can be seen from Fig. 6, our
proposed scheme shows better performance than ExOR and
MCOR. The reason is that our candidate selection algorithm
based on auction mechanism, selecting optimal candidate for
forwarding.
Fig. 6. Network life v.s. number of nodes.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Corporacion Universitaria de la Costa. Downloaded on July 18,2022 at 21:23:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

IV CONCLUSION
In this paper, we provide a traffic-differentiated secure
opportunistic routing, in MANETs with resource constrained
and malicious nodes, DSOR. In DSOR, a novel trust
calculation scheme is proposed, which jointly considering
node’s forwarding capability and the status of different types
of flows. We propose a multiple-type of flows oriented
forwarding candidate selection from a game theoretic
perspective, and a novel flow priority decision scheme for
transmission. Finally, the extensive simulation results exhibit
that the proposed secure OR performs better than ExOR and
MCOR.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 61802221, 61802220,
61602125) and the Natural Science Foundation of Guangxi
Province under grants 2016GXNSFBA380010,
2016GXNSFBA380153 and 2017GXNSFAA198192,
Innovation Project of GUET Graduate Education under grant
2017YJCX57, and the Innovation Project of Guangxi
Graduate Education under grant YCSW2019141. We would
like to acknowledge the reviewers whose comments and
suggestions significantly improved this paper.
REFERENCES
[1] S. Biswas and R. Morris, “ExOR: Opportunistic multi-hop routing for
wireless networks,” in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM 2005, 35: 133-144.
[2] K. How, M. Ma, Yang Qin, “Routing and QoS provisioning in cognitive
radio networks,” Computer Networks 55(1): 330-342, 2011.
[3] Y. Qin, L. Li, X. Zhong, et al., “Opportunistic routing with admission
control in wireless ad hoc networks,”Computer Communications 55:32-
40, 2015.
[4] L. Zhang, J. Song, J. Pan, “A privacy-preserving and secure framework
for opportunistic routing in DTNs,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular
Technology 65(9):7684-7697, 2016.
[5] C. Lyu, D. Gu, X. Zhang, et. al., “SGOR: Secure and scalable
geographic opportunistic routing with received signal strength in
WSNs,” Computer Communications 59:37-51, 2015.
[6] B. Wang, C. Huang, L. Li, et al., “Trust-based minimum cost
opportunistic routing for ad hoc networks,”Journal of Systems and
Software 84(12):2107-2122, 2011.
[7] M. Salehi, A. Boukerche, A. Darehshoorzadeh, et al., “Towards a novel
trust-based opportunistic routing protocol for wireless networks,”
Wireless Networks 22(3):927-943, 2016.
[8] M. Salehi, A. Boukerche, “A novel packet salvaging model to improve
the security of opportunistic routing protocols,” Computer Networks
122: 163-178, 2017.
[9] X. Zhong, R. Lu, L. Li, et. al., “ETOR: Energy and trust aware
opportunistic routing in cognitive radio social internet of things,” in Proc.
of IEEE GLOBECOM 2017:1-6.
[10] A. Keranen, “The opportunistic network environment simulator,” Dept.
Commun. Netw., Helsinki Univ. Technol., Espoo, Finland, Special
Assignment Rep., May 2008.