Building Scalable and Secure Multicast Delivery Infrastructure in a Local Area Network

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this paper, the authors propose a method to guarantee the safety in insecure environment by improving the PrEcast protocol proposed before article.

Without proper security control in IP multicast environment, malicious script distribution and illegal attacks such as denial-of-service attack and sniffing can occur in existing IP multicast environment. For this situation, they propose to build a certificate authority-free authentication system through pseudo-identity based encryption as the first method. The second proposed method is a core based tree architecture. This allows efficient route update transmission. In this way, impersonation attack, single point attack and replay attack can be prevented.

 

+)

It is positive that the depth of the paper is created by presenting specific methodology through Section 3 and 4. Another good point is their analysis on robustness of various security attack

-)

Section 2 need to be concise since there exist some repeated contents. If there is a framework for pseudo-identity based encryption in Section 3, it would be easier to understand. typo: key revovation -> key revocation

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The goal of this paper, as exposed by the authors, is to propose an efficient and scalable multicast architecture for distributing management and routing information. The proposed multicast architectureand must be validated using practical test, presenting also comparative studies considering existing methods. The authors must consider situations that include traffic congestion, constraints or different QoS scenarios.

Related work section (maybe it's better to write it separately) must contain actual works in the field, and should be improved with a comparative study between them. Include more figures (figure 1 and 2 can be improved), block diagrams or flowcharts in order to present the PrECast protocol, performance validation and the multicast architecture evaluation, considering also worst case encryption and failure scenarios. What are the testing results? 

Update the Reference section (excepting reference [1]), introducing new valuable articles recently published. Please replace the Wikipedia references. The issue with Wikipedia is that it is an open source where users can edit articles and add new ones that may not reflect the knowledge accurately. Even though I find that up to 80% of what is written is correct, you can not simply cite it as a reference in your paper due to lack of originality.

Overall, I think that the new material provided in this paper is not enough for publication in Electronics journal (additional experiments needed).

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper has been improved sufficiently in order to be accepted for publication.