No More than 10% plagiarismPease go through the attached file, and read properly an do as per the marking criteria mentioned in the attached file.
Only have to work on Assignment1b 1400 word count
more than word count software work and screenshots are more important.
Thnaks
Microsoft Word - MN603-T3-2020-Assignment1_v2.0.docx MN603 Wireless Networks and Security Page#1 of 4 Prepared by: Dr Nazmus Shaker Nafi Moderated by: Dr Sanjeeb Shrestha November, 2020 Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines Trimester T3 2020 Unit Code MN603 Unit Title Wireless Networks and Security Assessment Type Individual Assignment 1 Assessment Title Analysis of routing protocols in terms of security, QoS, and energy efficiency Purpose of the assessment (with ULO Mapping) The purpose of the assignment is to analyse the routing protocols and evaluate them in terms of security, QoS, and energy efficiency. Students will be able to complete the following ULOs: a. Compare standards-based technologies used in various networks; b. Test and evaluate various wireless networks performance; Weight 10% (Part-A 3% and Part-B 7%) Total Marks 100 (Part-A 30 and Part- B 70) Word limit 2000 – 2500 words (Part-A 600 -750 words) (Part- B 1400-1750 words) Due Date Part –A Due Week 3 (4/12/2020 11:55PM), Week 7(8/1/2021 11:55PM) Submission Guidelines • All work must be submitted on Moodle by the due date. • The assignment must be in MS Word format, 1.5 spacing, 11-pt Calibri (Body) font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings. • Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using IEEE referencing style. Extension • If an extension of time to submit work is required, a Special Consideration Application must be submitted directly on AMS. You must submit this application three working days prior to the due date of the assignment. Further information is available at: http://www.mit.edu.au/about-mit/institute-publications/policies- procedures-and-guidelines/specialconsiderationdeferment Academic Misconduct • Academic Misconduct is a serious offence. Depending on the seriousness of the case, penalties can vary from a written warning or zero marks to exclusion from the course or rescinding the degree. Students should make themselves familiar with the full policy and procedure available at: http://www.mit.edu.au/about-mit/institute-publications/policies- procedures-and-guidelines/Plagiarism-Academic-Misconduct-Policy- Procedure. For further information, please refer to the Academic Integrity Section in your Unit Description. MN603 Wireless Networks and Security Page#2 of 4 Prepared by: Dr Nazmus Shaker Nafi Moderated by: Dr Sanjeeb Shrestha November, 2020 Assignment Description Part A Mobile Ad Hoc network (MANET) is a collection of mobile devices which form a communication network. There are multiple type of routing protocols designed for MANETs such as Ad Hoc On- Demand Distance Vector (AODV), Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector (DSDV), Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) and Ad Hoc On-Demand Multipath Distance (AOMDV). Students are required to submit a report including technical details on Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) and Ad Hoc On-Demand Multipath Distance (AOMDV) protocols. Report must include details on • Routing mechanism • Advantages and limitations of using these protocols in WSNs Part B Wireless networks performance varies from wired networks, the latter uses a guided medium and wireless networks use unguided medium for transmission. To design and simulate wireless networks the network simulator - 2 (NS - 2), an open source discreet event simulator could be used. The NS-2 simulator is a widely used simulation tool, which could generate trace files for analysis and comes with a network animator to visualize the network performance. This assessment requires students to compare and evaluate the performance of wireless routing protocol using the NS-2. The assessment requires students to design a wireless network topology in NS-2 and evaluate the generated trace files for a wireless routing protocol. The students are required to carry out a critical analysis of the results of the protocol, by plotting graphs and discussing the outcomes. The students are required to: Design a wireless network consisting of 15 nodes; the dimensions for the given topology are 250x250. The agent type should be UDP and the traffic CBR. The simulation should run for 300 seconds. Random deployment of nodes is required and the nodes are required to transmit packets over the network. The wireless node configuration should include the NS-2 energy model. Run the simulation on routing protocol DSR or AOMDV. Critically analyse the trace files in terms of packets sent, received and dropped. These parameters should be plotted on graphs and discussed in detail. Include screenshots of the NAM displaying the nodes deployed during the simulation and add screen shots of the simulation. Appendix I should include the tcl srcript used in each simulation. MN603 Wireless Networks and Security Page#3 of 4 Prepared by: Dr Nazmus Shaker Nafi Moderated by: Dr Sanjeeb Shrestha November, 2020 Marking criteria: Section to be included in the report Description of the section Marks Part A 30 Introduction Define the topic and outline of the report ( in 5-6 sentences) 5 Motivation You need to motivate the reader about the topic 5 Routing protocols analysis Technical discussion on routing mechanism 1. DSR 2. AOMDV 10+10=20 Part B 70 Feedback incorporation from Part A 10 Part B- Introduction Outline of the report ( in 3-4 sentences) 4 Report Layout Report layout, style and language 5 Network Design The network topology shown in the NAM 5 Simulation Simulation screen shots for routing protocol at 100s, 150s and 250s simulation time with description of the ongoing events. 12 Trace file analysis Provide a critical analysis of the two trace files in terms of packets sent, received, dropped 8 Results Plot the graphs for packets sent, received, dropped for the protocol. 8 Conclusion Write summary of the report 4 Reference style Follow IEEE reference style 4 Appendix 1 The tcl files for the routing protocol 10 MN603 Wireless Networks and Security Page#4 of 4 Prepared by: Dr Nazmus Shaker Nafi Moderated by: Dr Sanjeeb Shrestha November, 2020 Marking Rubric for Assignment #1: Total Marks 100 Grade Mark HD (80-100)% DI (70-79)% CR (60-69)% P (50-59)% Fail<50% excellent very good good satisfactory unsatisfactory introduction /5 all topics are pertinent and covered in depth. ability to think critically and source material is demonstrated topics are relevant and soundly analysed. generally relevant and analysed. some relevance and briefly presented. this is not relevant to the assignment topic. motivation /5 exceptional motivation very good motivation good motivation acceptable motivation poor motivation routing protocols analysis /20 finding is well explained with clear justification finding is well explained with moderate justification finding is explained with convincing justification finding is not clear and unjustified finding is not available incorporation of feedback from part a /10 all feedbacks are addressed with proper justification most of the feedbacks are addressed with justification feedbacks are addressed with convincing justification justifications are not clear feedback not addressed part b introduction /4 all topics are pertinent and covered in depth. ability to think critically and source material is demonstrated topics are relevant and soundly analysed. generally relevant and analysed. some relevance and briefly presented. this is not relevant to the assignment topic. report layout /5 exceptional report layout, style and language used very good report layout, style and language used good report layout, style and language used acceptable report layout, style and language used. poor report layout, style and language used. network design /5 demonstrated excellent ability to think critically and present an exceptional design considering all the requirements demonstrat ed good ability to think critically and present an exceptional design considering all the requirement demonstrate d good ability to think critically and present a good design considering all the requirements. demonstrated ability to think critically and present a design did not demonstrate ability to think critically and present a design. mn603 wireless networks and security page#5 of 4 prepared by: dr nazmus shaker nafi moderated by: dr sanjeeb shrestha november, 2020 s simulation /12 excellent screen shot of the uniformly deployed nodes very good screen shot of the uniformly deployed nodes good screen shot of the uniformly deployed nodes screen shot of the uniformly deployed nodes. failed to provide a screenshot of the uniformly deployed nodes trace file analysis /8 excellent analysis of the trace files. covered all aspects. very good analysis of the trace files good analysis of trace files some analysis provided of trace files lacking analysis of trace files results /8 excellent graphs well labelled and clear very good graphs well labelled and clear good graphs well labelled and clear graphs not well excellent="" very="" good="" good="" satisfactory="" unsatisfactory="" introduction="" 5="" all="" topics="" are="" pertinent="" and="" covered="" in="" depth.="" ability="" to="" think="" critically="" and="" source="" material="" is="" demonstrated="" topics="" are="" relevant="" and="" soundly="" analysed.="" generally="" relevant="" and="" analysed.="" some="" relevance="" and="" briefly="" presented.="" this="" is="" not="" relevant="" to="" the="" assignment="" topic.="" motivation="" 5="" exceptional="" motivation="" very="" good="" motivation="" good="" motivation="" acceptable="" motivation="" poor="" motivation="" routing="" protocols="" analysis="" 20="" finding="" is="" well="" explained="" with="" clear="" justification="" finding="" is="" well="" explained="" with="" moderate="" justification="" finding="" is="" explained="" with="" convincing="" justification="" finding="" is="" not="" clear="" and="" unjustified="" finding="" is="" not="" available="" incorporation="" of="" feedback="" from="" part="" a="" 10="" all="" feedbacks="" are="" addressed="" with="" proper="" justification="" most="" of="" the="" feedbacks="" are="" addressed="" with="" justification="" feedbacks="" are="" addressed="" with="" convincing="" justification="" justifications="" are="" not="" clear="" feedback="" not="" addressed="" part="" b="" introduction="" 4="" all="" topics="" are="" pertinent="" and="" covered="" in="" depth.="" ability="" to="" think="" critically="" and="" source="" material="" is="" demonstrated="" topics="" are="" relevant="" and="" soundly="" analysed.="" generally="" relevant="" and="" analysed.="" some="" relevance="" and="" briefly="" presented.="" this="" is="" not="" relevant="" to="" the="" assignment="" topic.="" report="" layout="" 5="" exceptional="" report="" layout,="" style="" and="" language="" used="" very="" good="" report="" layout,="" style="" and="" language="" used="" good="" report="" layout,="" style="" and="" language="" used="" acceptable="" report="" layout,="" style="" and="" language="" used.="" poor="" report="" layout,="" style="" and="" language="" used.="" network="" design="" 5="" demonstrated="" excellent="" ability="" to="" think="" critically="" and="" present="" an="" exceptional="" design="" considering="" all="" the="" requirements="" demonstrat="" ed="" good="" ability="" to="" think="" critically="" and="" present="" an="" exceptional="" design="" considering="" all="" the="" requirement="" demonstrate="" d="" good="" ability="" to="" think="" critically="" and="" present="" a="" good="" design="" considering="" all="" the="" requirements.="" demonstrated="" ability="" to="" think="" critically="" and="" present="" a="" design="" did="" not="" demonstrate="" ability="" to="" think="" critically="" and="" present="" a="" design.="" mn603="" wireless="" networks="" and="" security="" page#5="" of="" 4="" prepared="" by:="" dr="" nazmus="" shaker="" nafi="" moderated="" by:="" dr="" sanjeeb="" shrestha="" november,="" 2020="" s="" simulation="" 12="" excellent="" screen="" shot="" of="" the="" uniformly="" deployed="" nodes="" very="" good="" screen="" shot="" of="" the="" uniformly="" deployed="" nodes="" good="" screen="" shot="" of="" the="" uniformly="" deployed="" nodes="" screen="" shot="" of="" the="" uniformly="" deployed="" nodes.="" failed="" to="" provide="" a="" screenshot="" of="" the="" uniformly="" deployed="" nodes="" trace="" file="" analysis="" 8="" excellent="" analysis="" of="" the="" trace="" files.="" covered="" all="" aspects.="" very="" good="" analysis="" of="" the="" trace="" files="" good="" analysis="" of="" trace="" files="" some="" analysis="" provided="" of="" trace="" files="" lacking="" analysis="" of="" trace="" files="" results="" 8="" excellent="" graphs="" well="" labelled="" and="" clear="" very="" good="" graphs="" well="" labelled="" and="" clear="" good="" graphs="" well="" labelled="" and="" clear="" graphs="" not="">