# MPH-M, AODV-M and DSR-M Performance Evaluation under Jamming Attacks
## 6 Results
### System Throughput  
Figure 14 shows the system throughput for a network with jamming-free conditions, traffic packets are sent by the nodes to the collector node under MPH protocol. There are two scenarios: In one of them, we have ideal links with zero packet loss, i.e., packet loss can only be caused by collisions. The other one considers the value of packet loss in the links different to zero. The simulation time is  
Figure 13: Difference between ideal detection and imprecise detection of a jammer node. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Node** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Near**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Node**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Middle**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Node**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Far**} \\ \hline  & **AODV** & **DSR** & **MPH** & & **AODV** & **DSR** & **MPH** & & **AODV** & **DSR** & **MPH** \\ \hline
0 & \(\checkmark\) & \(\checkmark\) & \(\checkmark\) & \(16\) & \(\checkmark\) & \(\checkmark\) & \(\checkmark\) & 40 & \(\checkmark\) & \(\checkmark\) & \(\checkmark\) \\
1 & \(\times\) & \(\times\) & \(\checkmark\) & \(17\) & \(\checkmark\) & \(\checkmark\) & \(\checkmark\) & 41 & \(\checkmark\) & \(\checkmark\) & \(\100 s. There are no considered copies packets (same packets of the original packet). We may observe that the maximum throughput is achieved when all nodes transmit at 10 packets/s; for transmission rates higher than this value the throughput is smaller because the collisions increase; for transmission rates lower than this value the throughput is lower because the amount of data is small. We can work in the interval before the peak. Table 4 shows the percentage of retransmission packets for the MPH protocol for each of the studied traffic rates. This table shows how the percentage of packets to be copied due to retransmissions increases, as the traffic rate of the nodes and collisions increase. Here simulations are performed in ideal conditions with respect to the links. However, packet collisions can occur. This is important because here we can observe the number of packets to be re-transmitted because no acknowledgment was received at the destination node. This metric complements Figure 14 under ideal conditions in order to clarify that ideal throughput also considers packet collisions. In Figure 15 we observe the system throughput curve in presence of jamming with ideal packet loss in the links under MPH-M protocol. The simulation conditions are the same as in Figure 14. However, this latter figure shows the throughput when the jammer node is near to the collector node, when it is in the middle of the topology and when it is far from the collector node. Besides, we observe the throughput with ideal conditions without jamming. We note that when the jammer node is close to the collector node, there is almost no packet reception due that a bottleneck is formed near the collector \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Packet Traffic Rate** & **\% of Retransmission Packets** \\ \hline
1 & 2.67 \\
5 & 2.43 \\
8 & 3.04 \\
10 & 3.10 \\
15 & 3.32 \\
20 & 3.15 \\
50 & 3.91 \\
80 & 5.07 \\
100 & 5.77 \\
120 & 10.87 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Retransmission Packets. Figure 14: System throughput. node. Also, the figure shows that a position that causes a lot of damage is when the jammer node is in the middle of the topology, because the number of affected nodes is high. Figure 16 presents the throughput for MPH under non-ideal conditions. Links have packet loss due to channel interference and communication problems. Here we see how is the change of the number of received packets by the collector node. When the conditions of links among nodes are ideal, as in Figure 15, there is a difference of about 10%, where the throughput under non-ideal conditions is getting worse and about 10% more packets that are lost than under ideal conditions. Figure 17 describes efficiency with different packet traffic rates with the jammer node in the middle of the topology, with and without the proposed mitigation mechanism.