# An Efficient Framework for Securing the Smart City Communication Networks
## 4 Simulation Network and Setup
### Simulation Evaluation  
In this set of simulations, we evaluate the throughput packets per seconds, delay, load, and traffic received. As outlined previously, a smart meter is a two-way data transmission device. As a result, a smart meter generates packets and assigns a destination address to each one, which is subsequently sent over an Ethernet switch and then a router to the control center server. Figures 7-12 show the point-to-point throughput packets per second, delay, load, and traffic received between a smart meter and the control center; from the smart meter to the Ethernet switch, the Ethernet switch to the router, and the router to the control center server, respectively. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Parameter** & **Value** \\ \hline Initialization time of the first phase & 0 s \\ \hline Request count & 1 (constant) \\ \hline Request packet size & 3 Kbytes (constant) \\ \hline Processing time & 0.5 s \\ \hline Number of replies & 1 (constant) \\ \hline Request packet size of the response & 5 kbytes (constant) \\ \hline Initialization time of the second phase & 0.2 s \\ \hline Request count of the second phase & 0 (constant) \\ \hline Initialization time of encryption task & 0.2 s \\ \hline Request count of encryption task & 1000 (constant) \\ \hline Inter-request time & 1.2 s (exponential) \\ \hline Request packet size of encryption task & 1–10 kbytes (uniform_int) \\ \hline Simulation time for each run & 3600 s \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Simulation parameters. Figure 8: Queuing delay (s) from a smart meter to the switch for different tasks. Figure 7: Throughput (packets/s) from a smart meter to the switch for different tasks. Figure 9: Load (packets/s) in a smart meter for different tasks. Figure 11: Traffic received (packets/s) in a smart meter for different tasks. Figure 12: Traffic received (packets/s) in the control center for different tasks. Figure 10: Load (packets/s) in the control center for different tasks. Figure 7 plots the point-to-point throughput packets per second from a smart meter to an Ethernet switch. It is important to understand the difference between the two line graphs: the red line depicts secure two-way communication from a smart meter to a switch via authentication and key exchange schemes, whereas the green line depicts normal traffic without authentication and key exchange sessions as insecure two-way communication traffic. The temporal average has been used to evaluate point-to-point throughput packets per second between a smart meter and a switch in this diagram. Both line graphs began abruptly from zero to twenty mins with different amounts of packets per second; the green line for insecure traffic nearly reached seven packets per second, whereas the red line for securing traffic nearly doubled the green line, with fifteen packets per second as the point to point throughput. During the 30-min experiment, the red line had the maximum point-to-point throughput packets per second, around seventeen, while the green line had declined somewhat, to four packets per second. Following this, the red and green lines dropped drastically until they reached ten and two packets/second, respectively, at the end of our simulation time (60 mins). Overall, secure transmission employing authentication and session keys outperformed insecure traffic from a smart meter to an Ethernet switch in terms of packets per second. Figure 8 shows that the best effort between secure and insecure two-way communication was started with a significant point of queuing delay by 0.77 s and 0.69 s, respectively. Both graphs illustrate that the number of seconds has fluctuated significantly after five mins of simulation time. After 10 mins, the seconds of queuing delay in trusted communication are expected to decrease continuously, whereas the seconds of queuing delay in un-trusted communication are expected to grow significantly. Both graphs converge significantly between 15 and 19 mins of simulation time.