Abstract
Objective: Collaboration of most promising upcoming technologies like big data and Internet of Things (IoT) plays a significant role in the sustainable development of the smart world. One of the important applications is the amalgamation of such technology in the e-healthcare sector, where private information is being transferred from one end device to other equipment. Sensors and different other instruments engaged in the e-healthcare sector, for transferring important vital information of the patients, are categorized as Wireless Mesh Networks (WMN). An attacker can introduce many malicious activities via different types of attacks; ultimately, such activities can produce an outturn in Denial of Service (DoS) of important routines which need to be completed in stipulated time. Therefore, it is important to showcase the effect of various attacks affecting the routing methodology of the protocols of such networks.
Methods: In this research study, the most suitable routing protocol to handle DDoS attacks is simulated and estimated for the Quality of Service (QoS) in smart network infrastructure in terms of energy consumption and jitter in changing nodes scenario, which aids in providing implications to enhance existing protocols and alleviate the consequence of DDoS instigated by such attacks.
Results: The performance of AODV (Adhoc on Demand Vector), SAODV (Secured Adhoc On Demand) and HWMP (Hybrid Wireless Mesh Protocol) is compared and tabularized, which are the most popularly utilized protocols in the healthcare environment.
Conclusion: The simulation results show that the HWMP outperformed well than the other two routing protocols in terms of evaluation metrics, namely energy consumption and jitter, which could be considered much less vulnerable against DDoS attacks prevailing in the sustainable healthcare sector.
Keywords: Big data, IoT- MANET, AODV, SAODV, HWMP, energy consumption and jitter in ad hoc networks for e-healthcare.
Graphical Abstract
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2878681]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2018.2812301]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MCI.2019.2954643]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2016.2550530]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2015.2437951]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/dim-2018-0014]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.23919/ICITST.2017.8356392]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/computation7020024]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/NOMS.2016.7502971]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesit.2017.02.002]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN.2017.7966066]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/AINA.2017.74]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.23919/ICITST.2017.8356392]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/PERVASIVE.2015.7087174]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CICT.2016.53]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2016.10.014]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CICT.2016.53]