If you have the time please read this dissertation -> http://www.shigs.co.uk/diss/Dissertation.pdf
Contents |
[edit] Thank you everybody!
[edit] Add your notes
-
Add your supervisor to your acknowledgments (brown nosing)I saw him literally 0 times. -
"This is in contrast the the TCP/IP" <-- should be "to the" (Page 2) -
"stoachstic" -> "stochastic"? (Page 2) -
effect/affect in lots of places, "affect" in these sorts of sentences means to change something (e.g. "The algorithm affects the speed..."), "effect" means to make it happen (e.g. "We twiddled the knob to effect an increase in volume".) -
You drop in to first person speech occasionally, e.g. "I am talking of the TCP/IP" (Page 1). - Lots of possibly unnecessary capitalisation (why is Ad hoc always capitalised?), but especially "Two vector lists" (Page 3).
-
"every visited nod" <-- Should be node (Page 3) -
"will choose randomly a neighbouring node to send the forward packet otherwise it will" <-- "send the forward packet to," (note the comma, otherwise the sentence is a bit unwieldy) (Page 3) -
I believe your diagram of an ant is anatomically incorrect... (the body has three main segments, plus antennae) (Page 4)har har -
"curved line a representation" <-- "curved line being a representation" (Page 6) -
"the exponential transformed" <-- "the exponentially transformed"? (Page 6) -
"networknig" <-- networking (page 6) -
"or have a need to broadcast of drop this packet themselves" <-- "or drop"? (Page 7)I dropped this line it was dumb. -
"small chance of being broadcast is to explore new paths." <-- remove is (Page 7) -
"All entries of in this pheromone diffusion message" <-- remove of (Page 7) -
"as Real Pheromone" <-- "as a Real Pheromone" or "as Real Pheromones" (Page 7) -
"or node has other" <-- "or a node has other" (Page 8) -
"a list of lost destinations and new estimated delay and number of hops to the destinations" <-- "a list of lost destinations, new estimated delays and the number of hops to the destinations" (Page 8) -
"just like set-up ants used to find the original path." <-- "just like set-up ants are used to find the original path." (Page 8) -
"a brief introduction which have directly or indirectly" <-- "a brief introduction to research which has directly or indirectly" (Page 9) -
"I have to be honest and say I do " <-- Dropped in to first person (Page 9)I've dropped this one as its a bit too flippant, but i've kept the first person where i think its essential the dude marking it sees what i did. Its part of the marking scheme. -
"problem as far as I know" <-- First person (Page 11) -
"can not" <-- "cannot" (Page 13) -
"Another example of an active attacks which is hard to spot is the Blackhole attack and Collaborative Blackhole attacks." <-- "Another example of (-an) active attacks which are hard to spot are the Blackhole (-attack) and Collaborative Blackhole attacks." (Page 13) -
"routing protocol should not concern itself," <-- "concern itself with," (Page 13) -
"open to coming and goings" <-- "open to the comings and goings" (Page 13) -
Figures 3.1 and 3.2 both have "I = Impossible" in their key, but this is never used on the diagram (Page 14)cba to change this, i hope it shows ALL ATTACKS ARE POSSIBLE OHH SHIT. -
"next hope to a destination." <-- "next hop" (Page 15) -
"can be protected not explored here" <-- "can be protected which are not explored here" (Page 15) -
Throughout page 18 (and the rest of the diss, :downs:) and in Figure 4.1 "nodes TPM", "nodes public key pair", "Masters public key pair", "masters public key" <-- "node's"/"master's" -
"check the public matches" <-- "check the public key matches" (Page 18) -
"it has just processes" <-- "it has just processed" (Page 18) -
"Hell Messages" <-- "Hello Messages" (Page 20) -
"int he network" <-- "in the network" (Page 20) -
"propagate Virtual Pheromone" <-- "propagate Virtual Pheromones" (Page 20) -
"another nodes certificate" <-- "another node's certificate" (Page 20) -
"units TPM" <-- "unit's" TPM" + "malicious nodes public key", "a nodes TPM.", "the Masters base", "second nodes choice" (Page 21)Will come back and fix all of these, ive done it everywhere -
"Suggested Other Improvements" <-- "Other Suggested Improvements" might read better (Page 21) -
"A second draft of the solution addresses packet Integrity and authentication of all other routing messages. It also added" <-- Change of tense "addresses"/"added" -> "adds" or "addressed" (Page 22) -
"Data send request to new unknown location pick a location or broadcast forward ant" <-- Punctuation would make this clearer (Figure 4.7, Page 23) -
"hello challenges some how" <-- "somehow" (Figure 4.7, Page 23) -
Text in most figures is rather small -
"link failre" <-- "link failure" (Figure 4.8, Page 24) -
"easily becoming far" <-- "easily become far" (Page 24) -
"because of the properties;" <-- "because of the following properties;" (Page 24) -
"So why is this scheme secure?" <-- Perhaps remove that? (Page 25) -
"Simple image" <-- "Simple diagram" might be better (Page 26, Figure 4.12's caption) -
"if final destination" <-- "if the final destination" (Page 26) -
"Symmetric cipher suit" <-- "Symmetric cipher suite" (Page 26) -
"see what suits are available" <-- "see what suites are available" (Page 26) -
"the masters deployment procedure" <-- "the master's deployment procedure + "masters key" * 2 (Page 26 + 27) -
"to down down on overhead." <-- "to cut down on overhead." (Page 27) -
"new routing scheme is" <-- "new routing schemes is" (Page 29) -
"IEEE 802.11 specification" <-- "the IEEE 802.11 specification" (Page 30) -
"and run till the end." <-- "and run untill the end." (Page 30) -
"the masters modulus N" <-- "the master's modulus N" (Page 31) - "under a GNU licence" <-- maybe you should mention which license? (Page 31)
-
"a key I hard coded" <-- First person (Page 32) -
"Now I will describe the implementation phase, I will detail" <-- First person (Page 32) -
Some more drops in to first person throughout pages 32 and 33 -
"This seems to be a quick of the simulator." <-- "a quirk of the simulator" (Page 33) -
You're not actually incrementing MAX_SEND_ATTEMPS or MAX_SOLUTION_ATTEMPS, since these are defined constants, you're incrementing some variable related to them (e.g. send_attempts or solution_attempts). Also ATTEMPS should be ATTEMPTS (Page 33) -
"a nodes challenge" <-- "a node's challenge" (Page 34) -
"This was a node can be blacklisted from every sending routing" <-- "This way a node can be blacklisted from ever sending routing" (Page 34) -
"cipherSuitFromHello[4];" <-- "cipherSuiteFromHello[4];" (Page 35)haha! as this is in the code i cba. -
"all conclusions bases on" <-- "all conclusions based on" (Page 37) -
"the most severed from" <-- "the mose severe from" (Page 39) -
"a sever impact" <-- "a severe impact" (Page 41) -
"Total Backw ard Ants Received" <-- Space shouldn't be between "Backw" and "ard" (Table 7.7, Page 42) -
"However on the hole" <-- "However on the whole" (Page 43) -
"I was happy with the results so far" <-- First person (Page 43) -
"hand-held like" <-- "hand-held devices like" (Page 43) -
"Apple iphone" <-- "Apple iPhone" (Page 43) -
"is an extremely portable design" <-- "in an extremely portable design" (Page 43) -
"the the performance" <-- "the performance" (Page 43) -
"I now know now that" <-- "I now know that" (Page 45) -
"and a huge waste of time." <-- Perhaps you should drop that? (Page 45) -
in 2.2.1 you write 'this is explained well in "blah blah". I think 'this is explained well by Ducatelle[4], who says "blah blah" or something like that would be SHARPER -
Errant capitals: -
Pg. 1, 'That is, providing Integrity, ... Privacy and Trust ... in today's Internet ... Self Configuring, Mesh {all of these} -
Pg 2. the items in the list starting Packet Injection Attacks -
Onwards: Keep AntHocNet, AntNet capitalised,Ants capitalised if you like -
Pg 6 onwards: stuff like Local Link Queue, Pheromone Table, I wouldn't capitalist - <strike>or even capitalise
-
ditto: keep titles in title case, but also emphasise them -
Pg. 9 Don't capitalise list starting Reliability -
Pg. 11 capitalising Trusted Computing et al. is probably wrong - if you've not seen people capitalise it in the literature, don't do it yourself is a good rule, I guess. I for one can't remember if I have or not. -
Corollary to above, if it's an expanded form of something normally used in an acronym like Global Positioning System, the usual rule is to spell it out capitalised the first time, then for the rest of the work, just use the acronym. - Pg. 13
Denial of Service, for example, should be Denial of Service (DoS) the first time you mention it, then henceforth DoS - Pg 13.
List containing "Firewalls, Operating Systems" etc. - just use the above guidelines sensibly - don't decapitalise BIOS *OBVIOUSLY*, but "virus scanners" can change. -
Pg. 18 Piggy-Backed and Hello Message - latter throughout -
Perversely, in the same page you *don't* capitalise the subsection heading "Hello messages" when you should -
Same for Hello Entry, Hello Protocol etc. here, *probably* - I don't know what the literature uses -
Looking through, actually, a lot of your section/subsection titles aren't in title case - run through and check them all -
Pg. 28 - you write constant bit rate (CBR) - I'm not sure whether to fault this, because Constant Bit Rate looks dumb, even if it obeys the rule above. Leave it as it is, is my guess. -
Pg. 50 - right at the end, Applications should be lower case -
Niggling LaTeX thing - Pg. 53, you're using tiddy superscript tildes rather than an approximately symbol - I wouldn't know what the right symbol is without looking it up, tho' it seems a waste to let this slip by if you're being a smartarse by using LaTeX.
[edit] Other stuff
[edit] Per page
- p.15 —
1990's → 1990s - p.15 —
pace between MANET and the opening parenthesis. - p.16 —
possessive pronouns do not take apostrophe, who's → whose - p.16 —
"in other words" sounds too colloquial to me. - p.16 —
posses → possess - p.16 —
stoachstic → stochastic - p.16 —
Results will look... → The results will look... (or the analysis will look?) - p.17 —
...store Two vector lists... → ...store two vector lists... (?) - p.17 —
nod → node - p.18 —
pheremone → pheromone - p.20 —
re-normalized → re-normalised (you're using Commonwealth standard spelling in the rest of the diss.) - p.21 —
Put reference [5] after the quote. - p.21 —
...one ant for every n packets... -- n should be italicised. (use $n$) - p.23 —
"I have to be honest and say I do not understand how this achieves security." ← Passivise this. → "It is not clear as to how this technique achieves security" or some rubbish like that. - p.23 —
for URLs use \url{}, and better to put them in footnotes along with date accessed.wow i have a footnote! - p.25 —
pseudo-code layout is horrible, re-do it with the algorithm package.You're horrible! but that algorithm box looks nice now :D - p.27 —
put a ref after Mernerides<\strike> - p.27 — <strike>"if later to deployment of the node" (can't make sense of this) i cant find it either.
- p.27 —
space between "should" and first parenthesis. - p.29 —
we'll → we will<\strike> - p.29 — <strike>"A wise man once said..." might be better as "It has been said"<\strike> Just because that wise man now works for microsoft!
- p.29 — <strike>and Unicast Warnings → Unicast Warnings (each bullet in this case is a sentence)
- p.29 —
"possibly many ways" → "many possible ways" (?)<\strike> - p.29 — <strike>"Some scheme so that" → "A scheme such that" (or consider re-wording) yeah that sentence was rubs
- p.30 —
"security could be achieved if, and only if nodes will accept...", "will accepted" → "were to accept" | "accepted" (?) - p.35 —
Masters base of ... → Master's base of ... - p.35 —
completeness/paranoia → completeness and paranoia | completeness or paranoia.
[edit] General
-
The usage of "ad hoc" varies between "Ad hoc", "Ad Hoc", "ad-hoc" and "ad hoc", I would recommend using only one, that being "ad hoc" with normal capitalisation. -
Diagrams need re-doing as EPS/PDF. Use inkscape export to EPS then epstopdf (or just print to PDF) and embed the PDF. Do not use colours. - Go through and check capitalisation carefully, it seems you are using capitalisation for emphasis or to first introduce terminology. Might not \emph{} be more appropriate for this? Headings should use title case. (e.g. p.35 "4.1.3 Some more Possible Attacks" → "4.1.3 Some more possible attacks")
-
Look at how bulletted lists are done. In some you have, * Foo Bar. Foo bar is ... and in others you use '-' in place of '.' -- better to be consistent. -
Avoid using questions...