# MPH-M, AODV-M and DSR-M Performance Evaluation under Jamming Attacks
## 6 Results
### System Throughput
We note that the  
Figure 16: System throughput with jamming, the jammer node is located near, in the middle and far from the collector node. Links have packet loss. Figure 15: System throughput with ideal conditions and under attack with the jammer node is located near, in the middle and far from the collector node. MPH-M protocol is 17% more efficient without the mitigation scheme, and 8% more efficient with the mitigation scheme to support traffic packets with respect to AODV-M and DSR-M protocols. Figure 18 shows energy with different packet traffic rates with the jammer node in the middle of the topology, with and without the proposed mitigation mechanism. We note that the MPH protocol has 39% less energy consumption without the mitigation scheme, and MPH-M uses 64% less energy with the mitigation scheme with respect to AODV-M and DSR-M.  
Figure 17: Throughput for different data rate for AODV, DSR, MPH, AODV-M, DSR-M and MPH-M under jamming. Figure 18: Energy consumption for different data rate for AODV, DSR, MPH, AODV-M, DSR-M and MPH-M under jamming. Table 5 describes values of the main performance metrics per node under an uniform random traffic rate generation. Traffic rate on the nodes is between 1 and 10 packets per second. The topology has non-uniform random distribution. Under this scenario, regarding the retransmissions, MPH-M improves in 11% than MPH, and under mitigation scheme is better in 12% against AODV-M and DSR-M. With regard to the CSMA retries, MPH-M exhibits an average reduction of 6% against MPH and against AODV-M and DSR-M of 11%. Concerning overhead, MPH-M has 29% less than MPH and 44% compared to AODV-M and DSR-M; this metric shows the proactive nature in the MPH protocol. Regarding delay end-to-end, MPH-M is faster 18% than MPH and 50% than AODV-M and DSR-M. Finally, on energy, MPH-M has energy savings of 4% compared with MPH and 37% against AODV-M and DSR-M. The Table 6 shows values of performance metrics in the network. The tests were made with non-ideal links and traffic rate of 10 packets per second per node under the grid topology. Metrics are average values of re-transmissions and CSMA retries. The Delay end-to-end is calculated as the average per route. Overhead is a metric that influences the amount of network collisions and the channel occupancy. It depends on the number of routing packets that the routing protocol needs to connect to nodes and to route packet traffic. Thus, it is calculated taking into account the number of control packets that are needed to route a traffic packet. Ideally, a routing protocol should need the least amount of control packets. Metric such as Energy is given by the energy per node in the network. We can observe that MPH and MPH-M are more efficient, for all metrics, than AODV and AODV-M, and DSR and DSR-M and MPH. For example, in Figure 18 we can observe that the total energy for MPH is 192.57 J and 312.13 J and 294.98 J for AODV and DSR respectively. Also, with respect to the energy per node, MPH has around 3.93 J, AODV has 6.37 J, and DSR has 6.02 J. Regarding the mitigation mechanism, in Figure 18 we can observe that the total energy for MPH is 102.8 J and 220.32 J and 214.97 J for AODV-M and DSR-M respectively. Also, with respect to the energy per node, \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Without Mitigation Mechanism**} \\ \hline  & **Re-Transmissions** & **CSMA Retries** & **Overhead (\%)** & **Delay End-to-End (s)** & **Energy (J)** \\ \hline AODV & 2.41 & 3.44 & 63.5 & 1.385746 & 6.37 \\ DSR & 2.32 & 3.33 & 59.2 & 1.247636 & 6.02 \\ MPH & 1.93 & 2.75 & 41.7 & 0.816416 & 3.93 \\ \hline  & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**With Mitigation Mechanism**} \\ \hline
** AODV-M** & 1.92 & 2.33 & 48.7 & 1.088996 & 6.12 \\
**DSR-M** & 1.90 & 2.03 & 45.2 & 1.047822 & 5.81 \\
**MPH-M** & 1.11 & 1.91 & 27.3 & 0.516552 & 2.57 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Performance metrics per node under 10 packets/s traffic generation.