From pascal.frossard at epfl.ch Fri Mar 10 08:35:17 2006 From: pascal.frossard at epfl.ch (Pascal Frossard) Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 17:35:17 +0100 Subject: [sigcomm] CFP - IEEE JSAC, Special issue on cross-layer optimized wireless multimedia communications References: Message-ID: <002c01c64460$9dbd5ce0$ad54b280@lts4pc1> Please apologize for any duplicates. ------------------------------------------ CALL FOR PAPERS IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications CROSS-LAYER OPTIMIZED WIRELESS MULTIMEDIA COMMUNICATIONS Submission deadline: May 15, 2006 Recent advances in wireless and mobile communications provide ample opportunities for introducing new services. Supporting multimedia applications and services over wireless networks is challenging due to constraints and heterogeneities such as limited battery power, limited bandwidth, random time-varying fading effect, different protocols and standards, stringent quality of service (QoS) requirements. Cross-layer design methodologies hold great promise for addressing these challenges and providing reliable and high-quality end-to-end performance in wireless multimedia communications. This issue solicits the state-of-the-art approaches and technical solutions in the area of cross-layer optimized wireless multimedia communications and networking. The issue will provide a compelling forum for researchers and practitioners to present their results. Original contributions, previously unpublished and not currently under review by another journal, are solicited in relevant areas including (but not limited to) the following: - Architectures for wireless multimedia communications - Multimedia delivery over various types of wireless networks (3G, 4G, ad hoc networks, WLAN, WMAN, or hybrid networks) - End-to-end QoS support for wireless networks - Multimedia delivery to energy-constrained embedded devices - Caching and content management in WLANs and WMANs - Interaction among medium access control (MAC), radio link control (RLC), and routing protocols for media delivery over multi-hop wireless networks - Wireless video sensor networks - Multimedia delivery for broadband vehicular networks - Secure multimedia communications - System prototypes and experiences with broadband wireless multimedia delivery Please note that submitted papers must explicitly address cross-layer design issues. Prospective authors should follow the IEEE J-SAC manuscript format described in the Information for Authors, at http://www.argreenhouse.com/society/J-SAC/Guidelines/info.html. Authors MUST submit their manuscripts through the Microsoft Conference Management Toolkit (CMT) at https://msrcmt.research.microsoft.com/COWMC2006/CallForPapers.aspx, together with a short abstract (approximately 150 words) in the CMT website form. In addition, the mandatory cover page is not included in the page count. The cover page should include paper title, abstract, list of keywords indicating the paper's topic area, authors' full names, affiliations with complete addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses. Please note potential authors should create their own accounts through the CMT peer review website before submitting manuscript(s). CMT will accept manuscripts in PDF format only. There will be one round of reviewers and acceptance will be limited to those papers requiring only moderate revisions. The following timetable will apply: Manuscript submission: MAY 15, 2006 Acceptance notification: November 1, 2006 Final manuscript due: December 1, 2006 Publication: 2nd Quarter 2007 Guest Editors: Chang Wen Chen Dept Elect & Comp Engr Florida Inst of Technology Melbourne, FL 32901 cchen at fit.edu Pascal Frossard Ecole Polytechnique F?d?rale de Lausanne (EPFL) Lausanne - 1015, Switzerland pascal.frossard at epfl.ch Cormac Sreenan Dept of Comp Science Univ College Cork Cork, Ireland cjs at cs.ucc.ie K. P. Subbalakshmi Dept of Elect & Comp Engr Stevens Inst of Technology Hoboken, NJ 07733 ksubbala at stevens.edu Dapeng Oliver Wu Dept of Elect & Comp Engr Univ of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 wu at ece.ufl.edu Qian Zhang Dept of Comp Science Hong Kong Univ of Science & Tech Hong Kong qianzh at cs.ust.hk From jyeo at cs.dartmouth.edu Tue Mar 14 14:11:46 2006 From: jyeo at cs.dartmouth.edu (Jihwang Yeo) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 17:11:46 -0500 Subject: [sigcomm] announcement: CRAWDAD wireless network data archive Message-ID: CRAWDAD, a Community Resource for Archiving Wireless Data at Dartmouth, is a new NSF-funded project to build a wireless network data archive for the research community. We host wireless data, and provide tools and documents to make it easy to collect and use wireless network data. We are pleased to announce that we recently made major updates to the CRAWDAD web site (http://crawdad.cs.dartmouth.edu). We have added metadata pages to provide a structured description of each data set, so that you can easily understand and use CRAWDAD data and tools. This metadata is also available as an XML download in case you want to automatically process it yourself. The features of the new web site include: - several new tools and data sets, including data from Bluetooth networks, MANETs, and DTNs (disruption tolerant network); - a structured metadata description of each data set and tool; - basic and advanced searches on CRAWDAD data, tools, authors, and papers. Please visit the web page (http://crawdad.cs.dartmouth.edu/) for details. You can access our data and tool collection, view their metadata and relevant published papers, and subscribe to a mailing list. Regards, The CRAWDAD team. From sen at research.att.com Thu Mar 16 08:10:17 2006 From: sen at research.att.com (sen@research.att.com) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 11:10:17 -0500 Subject: [sigcomm] Call for Papers: Second SIGCOMM 2006 Workshop on Mining Network Data (MineNet-06) Message-ID: <387B5A9BF31B5D43A2B18DD9F326B8E10251869F@NJFPSRVEXG2KCL.research.att.com> Subject: Call for Papers: ? Second SIGCOMM 2006 Workshop on Mining Network Data (MineNet-06) Our apologies if you receive multiple copies of this message. ######################################################################## # # # # # ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? CALL FOR PAPERS # # # # ? ? ? ?Second SIGCOMM 2006 Workshop on Mining Network Data # # (MineNet-06) # # ? ? ?(to be held with ACM SIGCOMM 2006, Sept 11-15, Pisa, Italy) # # # # ? ? ? ? http://www.acm.org/sigs/sigcomm/sigcomm2006/minenet # # # ######################################################################## Today's IP networks are extensively instrumented for collecting a wealth of different types of data including traffic (e.g., packet or flow level traces), control (e.g., router forwarding tables, BGP and OSPF updates) and management (e.g., fault, SNMP traps) data. The different measurements often exhibit complex interrelationships and their underlying structure can provide a wealth of information for improving our understanding of network problems and facilitate network management and operations. Suitable methodologies, tools and techniques are needed to process and analyze the vast amount of primarily unstructured measured data and extract structures, relationships, and "higher level knowledge" embedded in it, and use this information to aid network management and operations. An important question is how advances in fields such as data mining, machine learning, and statistics can be brought to bear on this important problem of information mining for network management. Recent research efforts e.g., in anomaly detection, characterization and control are showing the potential of such an inter-disciplinary approach. The goal of this workshop is to explore new directions in network data mining and root cause analysis techniques and tools for network monitoring, management, and remediation. The workshop will provide a venue for researchers and practitioners from the networking protocols/systems, data mining, machine learning, and statistics communities, to get together and collaboratively approach this problem from their respective vantage points. The workshop solicits original/position/work-in-progress papers on the application of data mining, machine learning and statistical techniques to solve network management and operation problems such as network reliability and performance, security, traffic engineering and control. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following: ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? * Collection, storage & access infrastructure: platform instrumentation (e.g. multi- modal, multi-resolution sensors), collection techniques (e.g. event sampling, filtering, aggregation, etc.), storage and access (e.g. retention policy, indexing techniques etc.). ? ? ? ? * Network data analytics techniques & tools: network stream mining, network graph mining, micro-clustering, temporal and statistical correlation, causality tracking, machine learning. ? ? ? * Applications to network operations & management: network problem determination, network reliability and performance, root-cause analysis, security, emerging phenomenon detection (e.g. DDoS, virus/worm, spam etc.), traffic classification. Of particular interest are (i) new solution techniques as well as applications of existing techniques from data mining, machine learning and statistics to IP network problems, (ii) experiences with the use of such techniques for IP networks, and (iii) open networking problems and challenges that would benefit from the use of such techniques. Particularly welcomed are papers that bring out interesting and novel ideas at an early stage in their development. Selected papers will be forward-looking, with impact and implications for both operational networks and ongoing or future research. Submission Instructions Papers should be at most 6 pages long, in standard ACM format (single-spaced, double column, at least 10pt font), and in either postscript or pdf format only. Author names, affiliations, contact information, paper title and paper abstract. ?should also be entered in ascii format at the submission website. ?Submit papers via the MineNet-06 submission site: (Link TBA). Papers will be reviewed single blind. ?Accepted papers will appear in the workshop proceedings. Authors of accepted papers are expected to present their work at the workshop. Important Dates Paper Registration Deadline: April 21, 2006, 11.59 PM PST (Pacific Standard Time) Paper Submission Deadline: April 25, 2006, 11.59 PM PST (Pacific Standard Time) Notification Deadline: May 29, 2006 Camera Ready Deadline: June 16, 2006 Workshop Date: ?September 15, 2006 Workshop Co-Chairs Subhabrata Sen, AT&T Labs-Research (sen at research.att.com) Sambit Sahu, IBM Research (sambits at us.ibm.com) Program Committee Graham Cormode, Lucent Bell Labs Mark Crovella, Boston University Michalis Faloutsos, U.C. Riverside Anja Feldmann, T.U. Munchen Minos Garofalakis, Intel Research Berkeley Patrick Haffner, AT&T Research Hani Jamjoom, IBM Research Chuanyi Ji, Georgia Institute of Technology Muthu Muthukrishnan, Rutgers Konstantina Papagiannaki, Intel Research Cambridge Matthew Roughan, Univ. of ?Adelaide, Australia ?Kave Salamatian, LIP6, France Dawn Song, Carnegie Mellon Univ. Oliver Spatscheck, AT&T Research Patrick Thiran, EPFL Switzerland ZhiLi Zhang, University of Minnesota From feamster at cc.gatech.edu Mon Mar 20 08:12:28 2006 From: feamster at cc.gatech.edu (Nick Feamster) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 11:12:28 -0500 Subject: [sigcomm] sig/eurosig/asiasig? Message-ID: <20060320161227.GI19685@cc.gatech.edu> At the risk of opening a can of worms, I will break the silence on this list: What do folks think about the conference model of Crypto/Asiacrypt/Eurocrypt that cryptographers have? More conferences==more accepted papers + more accessibility for folks in other countries + not being out-of-luck if you can't make (or submit to) the singular event of the year. The model also presents the option of traveling overseas (or not), it might ameliorate scheduling conundrums (see below), and it offers the opportunity for different Sigcomm conferences to develop slightly different value structures, accommodating varied interests (e.g., one of these might try to form closer ties with industry/practice). One apparent downside I could see to this model is that the community might not all convene in one place and might become more fragmented. We could look to the crypto community for some data. My hypothesis is that such a model would not fragment the community any more than, say, holding a single Sigcomm in the first month of the fall term in Europe (discouraging potential U.S. participants) or mid-August in the U.S. (discouraging potential European participants). -Nick From touch at ISI.EDU Mon Mar 20 12:18:01 2006 From: touch at ISI.EDU (Joe Touch) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 12:18:01 -0800 Subject: [sigcomm] sig/eurosig/asiasig? In-Reply-To: <20060320161227.GI19685@cc.gatech.edu> References: <20060320161227.GI19685@cc.gatech.edu> Message-ID: <441F0DF9.1040404@isi.edu> Nick Feamster wrote: > At the risk of opening a can of worms, I will break the silence on this list: > > What do folks think about the conference model of Crypto/Asiacrypt/Eurocrypt > that cryptographers have? Hi, Nick, I wouldn't say a can of worms, but we did make some recent changes along these lines. The remainder of my comments are intended as input to this discussion... We recently adopted the Sigcomm/Euro-Sigcomm/Other-Sigcomm plan, which was announced in Philadelphia last August. Sigcomm 2007 in Kyoto will be our first foray into Asia, FYI. ... > My hypothesis is that such a model > would not fragment the community any more than, say, holding a single Sigcomm > in the first month of the fall term in Europe (discouraging potential U.S. > participants) or mid-August in the U.S. (discouraging potential European > participants). The intent of the timing is to adapt to the expectations of the region to encourage local attendance. If we were to move to mid-August in the EU, shops/attractions would be closed and EU attendance would drop, and the same is true for mid-Sept in the US. There seems to be no good time that's good for everyone, which is not surprising for a global community. However, adapting against the locale works against attendance twice (distance for the distant; timing for the locals). I hope that helps explain at least how I think of things... Joe (conf coordinator) From feamster at cc.gatech.edu Mon Mar 20 12:41:56 2006 From: feamster at cc.gatech.edu (Nick Feamster) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:41:56 -0500 Subject: [sigcomm] sig/eurosig/asiasig? In-Reply-To: <441F0DF9.1040404@isi.edu> References: <20060320161227.GI19685@cc.gatech.edu> <441F0DF9.1040404@isi.edu> Message-ID: <20060320204156.GB22730@cc.gatech.edu> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 12:18:01PM -0800, Joe Touch wrote: > Sigcomm 2007 in Kyoto will be our first foray into Asia, FYI. I should clarify: I'm aware of the rotation and the scheduling constraints, which is why I'm advocating multiple conferences (the crypto conference model), rather than a rotation through regions. I am suggesting that all three (or at least two of the three) could happen yearly. -Nick From touch at ISI.EDU Mon Mar 20 12:49:06 2006 From: touch at ISI.EDU (Joe Touch) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 12:49:06 -0800 Subject: [sigcomm] sig/eurosig/asiasig? In-Reply-To: <20060320204156.GB22730@cc.gatech.edu> References: <20060320161227.GI19685@cc.gatech.edu> <441F0DF9.1040404@isi.edu> <20060320204156.GB22730@cc.gatech.edu> Message-ID: <441F1542.9090703@isi.edu> Nick Feamster wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 12:18:01PM -0800, Joe Touch wrote: >> Sigcomm 2007 in Kyoto will be our first foray into Asia, FYI. > > I should clarify: > > I'm aware of the rotation and the scheduling constraints, which is why I'm > advocating multiple conferences (the crypto conference model), rather than a > rotation through regions. I am suggesting that all three (or at least two of > the three) could happen yearly. Sorry; didn't get that from the first post ;-) One concern with multiple conferences - as with multiple tracks - is dilution of the international community that having a single, single-track meeting offers. Few of us could attend all three; while having multiple meetings avoids the 1-year delay for new work, it presents a challenge to avoid fracturing the community that we've worked hard to establish. Note, however, that we have helpd Sigcomm Asia and Sigcomm Latin America - which were workshops, so not intended to compete with the Sigcomm conference, but were intended to help foster communities local to a region. I.e., the idea is already being used, but more to complement than to compete with having a main international conference. Joe From feamster at cc.gatech.edu Mon Mar 20 12:50:52 2006 From: feamster at cc.gatech.edu (Nick Feamster) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:50:52 -0500 Subject: [sigcomm] sig/eurosig/asiasig? In-Reply-To: <441F1542.9090703@isi.edu> References: <20060320161227.GI19685@cc.gatech.edu> <441F0DF9.1040404@isi.edu> <20060320204156.GB22730@cc.gatech.edu> <441F1542.9090703@isi.edu> Message-ID: <20060320205052.GE22730@cc.gatech.edu> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 12:49:06PM -0800, Joe Touch wrote: > One concern with multiple conferences - as with multiple tracks - is > dilution of the international community that having a single, > single-track meeting offers. > > Few of us could attend all three; while having multiple meetings avoids > the 1-year delay for new work, it presents a challenge to avoid > fracturing the community that we've worked hard to establish. My original post offers a counter-argument. thanks, Nick From mort at ieee.org Tue Mar 21 01:00:40 2006 From: mort at ieee.org (mort) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 09:00:40 +0000 Subject: [sigcomm] sig/eurosig/asiasig? In-Reply-To: <20060320161227.GI19685@cc.gatech.edu> References: <20060320161227.GI19685@cc.gatech.edu> Message-ID: <8d1cde2c0603210100s20bd6077y@mail.gmail.com> it might also be interesting to ask the SIGOPS community for their experiences opening up the systems community in Europe (http://www.eurosys.org/). (although perhaps waiting until after the first EuroSys conf might be better than asking before :) cheers, r. On 20/03/06, Nick Feamster wrote: > At the risk of opening a can of worms, I will break the silence on this list: > > What do folks think about the conference model of Crypto/Asiacrypt/Eurocrypt > that cryptographers have? > > More conferences==more accepted papers + more accessibility for folks in other > countries + not being out-of-luck if you can't make (or submit to) the > singular event of the year. The model also presents the option of traveling > overseas (or not), it might ameliorate scheduling conundrums (see below), and > it offers the opportunity for different Sigcomm conferences to develop slightly > different value structures, accommodating varied interests (e.g., one of these > might try to form closer ties with industry/practice). > > One apparent downside I could see to this model is that the community might > not all convene in one place and might become more fragmented. We could look > to the crypto community for some data. My hypothesis is that such a model > would not fragment the community any more than, say, holding a single Sigcomm > in the first month of the fall term in Europe (discouraging potential U.S. > participants) or mid-August in the U.S. (discouraging potential European > participants). > > -Nick > _______________________________________________ > sigcomm mailing list > sigcomm at postel.org > http://www.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/sigcomm > From mort at ieee.org Tue Mar 21 01:03:16 2006 From: mort at ieee.org (mort) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 09:03:16 +0000 Subject: [sigcomm] sig/eurosig/asiasig? In-Reply-To: <20060320161227.GI19685@cc.gatech.edu> References: <20060320161227.GI19685@cc.gatech.edu> Message-ID: <8d1cde2c0603210103n41bbe924v@mail.gmail.com> it might also be interesting to ask the SIGOPS community for their experiences opening up the systems community in Europe (http://www.eurosys.org/). (although perhaps waiting until after the first EuroSys conf might be better than asking before :) cheers, r. On 20/03/06, Nick Feamster wrote: > At the risk of opening a can of worms, I will break the silence on this list: > > What do folks think about the conference model of Crypto/Asiacrypt/Eurocrypt > that cryptographers have? > > More conferences==more accepted papers + more accessibility for folks in other > countries + not being out-of-luck if you can't make (or submit to) the > singular event of the year. The model also presents the option of traveling > overseas (or not), it might ameliorate scheduling conundrums (see below), and > it offers the opportunity for different Sigcomm conferences to develop slightly > different value structures, accommodating varied interests (e.g., one of these > might try to form closer ties with industry/practice). > > One apparent downside I could see to this model is that the community might > not all convene in one place and might become more fragmented. We could look > to the crypto community for some data. My hypothesis is that such a model > would not fragment the community any more than, say, holding a single Sigcomm > in the first month of the fall term in Europe (discouraging potential U.S. > participants) or mid-August in the U.S. (discouraging potential European > participants). > > -Nick > _______________________________________________ > sigcomm mailing list > sigcomm at postel.org > http://www.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/sigcomm > From craig at aland.bbn.com Tue Mar 21 12:19:25 2006 From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:19:25 -0500 Subject: [sigcomm] sig/eurosig/asiasig? Message-ID: <20060321201925.3DC6867@aland.bbn.com> I have a slightly different view on these issues. SIGCOMM has chosen to remain a single track conference and be held once a year because, based on polls, that's what the SIG membership wants. Yes there are plenty of arguments about how other approaches might be better -- but this is what folks have said they wanted when offered alternatives. For similar reasons, it is why we continue to publish the conference proceedings in paper (at substantial expense) vs. simply handing out DVDs. Polls repeatedly show that people want the paper proceeding -- that they find the paper copy encourages them to read the papers and they value it. So, if one wants to create a world where there are say, two SIGCOMM conferences a year, the challenge is to create a proposal that is coherent and clear enough that we can poll the membership and see if it appeals. Such a proposal would also need to address the issues that creating two a year conferences would create. Craig From kunyang at essex.ac.uk Wed Mar 22 05:58:40 2006 From: kunyang at essex.ac.uk (Kun Yang) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 13:58:40 -0000 Subject: [sigcomm] CfP - 3rd Int. Conf. on Mobile Computing and UbiquitousNetworking (ICMU2006) at London, UK Message-ID: <008301c64db8$b9782da0$3440f59b@essex.ac.uk> (Apologies if you receive multiple copies of this message) The deadline is only one month away. ======================================================================== C A L L F O R P A P E R S ======================================================================== The Third International Conference on Mobile Computing and Ubiquitous Networking (ICMU2006) October 11-13, 2006 BCS London Office, London, UK http://www.icmu.org/icmu2006/ Sponsored by: IPSJ SIG-MBL (Information Processing Society of Japan, Special Interest Group of Mobile Computing and Ubiquitous Networking) Technically co-sponsored by: BCS (British Computer Society), IEE (Institution of Electrical Engineers), and IEEE ITS Society, Technical Committee on Mobile Commuications & Applications (Pending) Supported by: ICF (International Communications Foundation) SCOPE: Mobile computing aims at ubiquitous user access to computer application. To make it possible, networking technology which enables Internet access anytime and everywhere, i.e. ubiquitous networking is necessary. It is obvious that with the accelerating trends towards mobile networks, ad-hoc networks, and wireless networks, mobile computing and ubiquitous networking will play an important role in future network. This conference is aimed at providing researchers and practitioners in this hot research area a forum for discussion and collaboration. Authors are invited to submit papers addressing, but not limited to, the following topics: - Network management for ubiquitous networking - Data management for mobile computing - Mobile device management - Performance evaluation for mobile computing and ubiquitous networking systems - Broadcast communications - Network architectures, protocols, or service models for ubiquitous networking - Security in mobile computing and ubiquitous networking - Mobile OS - Wireless and mobile communications - 4G wireless communications - Mobile Internetworking - Ad-hoc networks - Network mobility - Mesh networks - Sensor networks - Location-based services SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS: Papers are solicited as full papers of no more than 8 pages, each of which will be subject to a full review process. Submission should already follow the author guidelines as specified in the web site below. An electronic, PDF-based submission of papers is mandatory. Please check the web site of the conference http://www.icmu.org/icmu2006/ for further submission instructions. After the conference, a selected number of papers will be published as special issues in IPSJ journal and IPSJ Digital Courier. Please check the web site of IPSJ http://www.ipsj.or.jp/08editt/dc/index.html for the details of IPSJ Digital Coulier. IMPORTANT DATES: ########################################################## # Deadline for submissions: April 22, 2006 # # Notification of acceptance: July 8, 2006 # # Camera ready due: July 31, 2006 # ########################################################## ORGANIZING COMMITTEE: General Chair: Chai-Keong Toh (University of London, UK) Technical Program Committee Co-Chairs: Susumu Ishihara (Shizuoka University, Japan) Eiji Kamioka (National Institute of Informatics, Japan) Publication Co-Chairs: Gen Kitagata (Tohoku University, Japan) Yang Yang (University College London, UK) Publicity Co-Chairs: Teruaki Kitasuka (Kyushu University, Japan) Kun Yang (University of Essex, UK) Local Arrangement Chair: David Martland (Kingston University London, UK) Treasurers: David Martland (Kingston University London, UK) Tomohiko Yagyu (NEC, Japan) Registration Co-Chairs: Jindong Hou (France Telecom, UK) Homare Murakami (NICT, Japan) ICMU STEERING COMMITTEE: Tadanori Mizuno (Shizuoka University, Japan) Osamu Takahashi (Future University-Hakodate, Japan) Takashi Watanabe (Shizuoka University, Japan) Miki Yamamoto (Kansai University, Japan) TECHNICAL PROGRAM COMMITTEE: Mohammed Atiquzzaman (University of Oklahoma, USA) Xiuzhen Cheng (George Washington University, USA) We Duke Cho (Ajou University, Korea) John Gardiner (Bradford University, UK) Teruo Higashino (Osaka University, Japan) Choong Seon Hong (Kyung Hee University, Korea) Russell Hsing (Telcordia Technologies, USA) Chung Ming Huang (National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan) Joseph Hui (Arizona State University, USA) Masugi Inoue (NICT, Japan) Masahiro Ishiyama (Toshiba Corporation, Japan) Holger Karl (University of Paderborn, Germany) Hughes Kester (Qinetiq Ltd, UK) Dongkyun Kim (Kyungpook National University, Korea) Peter Langendoerfer (IHP Microelectronics, Germany) Madjid Merabti (Liverpool John Moores University, UK) Isabelle Moreau (Mitsubishi Electric ITE, France) Hiroyuki Morikawa (University of Tokyo, Japan) Yasuto Nakanishi (Keio University, Japan) Ken Ohta (NTT DoCoMo, Japan) Ryouji Ono (Mitsubishi Electric, Japan) Mohamed Ould-Khaoua (University of Glasgow, UK) Antonio Pescape (University of Napoli, Italy) Petar Popovski (Aalborg University, Denmark) Jeremy Randles (British Telecom, UK) Ichiro Satoh (National Institute of Informatics, Japan) Winston Seah (Institute for Infocomm Research, Singapore) Hiroshi Shigeno (Keio University, Japan) Biplab Sikdar (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, USA) David Simplot-Ryl (University of Lille 1, France) Tatsuya Suda (University of California Irvine, USA) Shinta Sugimoto (Nippon Ericsson, Japan) Keisuke Suwa (Musashi Institute of Technology, Japan) Kevin W. Tsai (University of California, Irvine, USA) Xin Wang (Fudan University, China) Neil Williams (ERA Technology Ltd, UK) Nik Van den Wingaert (University of Antwerp, Belgium) Hirozumi Yamaguchi (Osaka University, Japan) Kun Yang (Essex University, UK) Yang Yang (University College London, UK) Masashi Yano (Hitachi Ltd, Japan) Hidetoshi Yokota (KDDI R&D Laboratories, Japan) Ekio Yoneki (Cambridge University, UK) Qing-An Zeng (University of Cincinnati, USA) From minshall at acm.org Wed Mar 22 07:15:06 2006 From: minshall at acm.org (Greg Minshall) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 07:15:06 -0800 Subject: [sigcomm] sig/eurosig/asiasig? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:19:25 EST." <20060321201925.3DC6867@aland.bbn.com> Message-ID: <20060322151506.B19911431C4@open-131-161-253-87.cliq.com> Craig, you are pretty far ahead of me. i took Nick's interesting suggestion as the beginning of a discussion on this list. i figured that at the end, if a group of people were convinced this was a good idea, then would be the time to formulate a way of polling the membership at large. my take is that this is worth discussing. maybe have each of the three happen every 18 months, roughly spring and (early) fall, so there would be two events, roughly 6 months apart, each year. i'm not sure Eurosys is a good model, as my understanding when i was at SOSP is that it isn't really intended to be a "EuroSOSP". but, maybe i just didn't catch that. but, i'd be interested in hearing about the crypto community's experiences with *Crypto, how long they've been doing each, etc. (an alternative i see is that NSDI "grows up" into a very strong conference, held each year in the US, and that this "allows" SIGCOMM to have a 3 year rotation: North America, Asia, Europe [note that i'm on the NSDI steering committee].) cheers, Greg From jrex at CS.Princeton.EDU Wed Mar 22 12:01:37 2006 From: jrex at CS.Princeton.EDU (Jennifer Rexford) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 15:01:37 -0500 Subject: [sigcomm] sig/eurosig/asiasig? In-Reply-To: <20060322151506.B19911431C4@open-131-161-253-87.cliq.com> References: <20060322151506.B19911431C4@open-131-161-253-87.cliq.com> Message-ID: <4421AD21.7010006@cs.princeton.edu> Good point about NSDI. Another related conference is the (relatively) new CoNext conference http://adetti.iscte.pt/events/CONEXT06/ http://dmi.ensica.fr/conext/ that is "in cooperation with SIGCOMM" (just as NSDI is). Arguably CoNext is broader than the annual SIGCOMM conference, and NSDI is arguably a bit narrower (in having a systems focus), but having events with different flavors might very well make sense. One reluctance I have about having three nearly-the-same events a year is that it probably doesn't make sense to have multiple co-located workshops (which have been co-located with the SIGCOMM conference starting in 2003) three times a year, so we might very well want just one full-week-long event and have it rotate geographies, along with some near-comparable events that follow the more traditional 2.5-3 day model. -- Jen > Craig, > > you are pretty far ahead of me. i took Nick's interesting suggestion as the > beginning of a discussion on this list. i figured that at the end, if a group > of people were convinced this was a good idea, then would be the time to > formulate a way of polling the membership at large. > > my take is that this is worth discussing. maybe have each of the three happen > every 18 months, roughly spring and (early) fall, so there would be two > events, roughly 6 months apart, each year. > > i'm not sure Eurosys is a good model, as my understanding when i was at SOSP > is that it isn't really intended to be a "EuroSOSP". but, maybe i just didn't > catch that. > > but, i'd be interested in hearing about the crypto community's experiences > with *Crypto, how long they've been doing each, etc. > > (an alternative i see is that NSDI "grows up" into a very strong conference, > held each year in the US, and that this "allows" SIGCOMM to have a 3 year > rotation: North America, Asia, Europe [note that i'm on the NSDI steering > committee].) > > cheers, Greg > > _______________________________________________ > sigcomm mailing list > sigcomm at postel.org > http://www.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/sigcomm From feamster at cc.gatech.edu Wed Mar 22 13:03:17 2006 From: feamster at cc.gatech.edu (Nick Feamster) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:03:17 -0500 Subject: [sigcomm] sig/eurosig/asiasig? In-Reply-To: <4421AD21.7010006@cs.princeton.edu> References: <20060322151506.B19911431C4@open-131-161-253-87.cliq.com> <4421AD21.7010006@cs.princeton.edu> Message-ID: <20060322210317.GA23680@cc.gatech.edu> Hi Jen, On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 03:01:37PM -0500, Jennifer Rexford wrote: > Good point about NSDI. Another related conference is the (relatively) > new CoNext conference > > http://adetti.iscte.pt/events/CONEXT06/ > http://dmi.ensica.fr/conext/ > > that is "in cooperation with SIGCOMM" (just as NSDI is). Arguably > CoNext is broader than the annual SIGCOMM conference, and NSDI is > arguably a bit narrower (in having a systems focus), but having events > with different flavors might very well make sense. The CoNext and Sigcomm submission dates and conferences are already nicely temporally spaced. Here's a strawman: - Sigcomm, hosted (primarily) in North American cities; based on what we think of as the Sigcomm conference and with similar submission/conference dates as Sigcomm. Rotate locations if necessary (e.g., to Asia and other "outreach" locations), but primarily host in North America. - EuroSig, hosted in Europe, based on CoNext, and with similar submission dates as CoNext. "Upgrade" to a marquee Sigcomm conference. This visibility could arguably help CoNext get a larger pool of submissions; it also is a way of achieving something akin to the *Crypt model by devoting energy to improving existing conferences, rather than creating new ones. As far as different "flavors", awhile back Scott Shenker had mentioned on this list the need for more industry involvement (e.g., from vendors, operators, etc.). Having multiple conferences a year might allow one of these conferences to cater a bit more to this crowd, as well. > One reluctance I have about having three nearly-the-same events a year > is that it probably doesn't make sense to have multiple co-located > workshops (which have been co-located with the SIGCOMM conference > starting in 2003) three times a year, so we might very well want just > one full-week-long event and have it rotate geographies, along with some > near-comparable events that follow the more traditional 2.5-3 day model. Another possibility is to have a smaller number of workshops at each conference. This could alleviate the frustration that interesting workshops overlap, space out submission deadlines for workshops, etc. If folks have friends in the crypto community, perhaps we could do some informal data gathering (how well does this work, etc.)? I'm happy to do a little bit of research, too (assuming some folks think this is a good idea), but other data points would be useful. It could be a topic of discussion at the Sigcomm business meeting, at any rate (again, presuming the idea is not jettisoned before then). -Nick From nahum at watson.ibm.com Wed Mar 22 13:33:06 2006 From: nahum at watson.ibm.com (nahum@watson.ibm.com) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 16:33:06 -0500 Subject: [sigcomm] sig/eurosig/asiasig? In-Reply-To: <20060322210317.GA23680@cc.gatech.edu> References: <20060322151506.B19911431C4@open-131-161-253-87.cliq.com> <4421AD21.7010006@cs.princeton.edu> <20060322210317.GA23680@cc.gatech.edu> Message-ID: <20060322213306.GF32413@barcelona.watson.ibm.com> On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 04:03:17PM -0500, Nick Feamster wrote: > If folks have friends in the crypto community, perhaps we could do some > informal data gathering (how well does this work, etc.)? I'm happy to do a > little bit of research, too (assuming some folks think this is a good idea), > but other data points would be useful. It could be a topic of discussion at > the Sigcomm business meeting, at any rate (again, presuming the idea is not > jettisoned before then). My wife is in the crypto community. Based on my recollections of what she's said, originally Eurocrypt was not seen as a peer conference to Crypto, but it is now. Asiacrypt has not yet reached that level, but has improved significantly recently that it is seen as a reasonable conference. So I think the lesson is that it takes time, effort, and commitment to get these new conferences to a level where they are seen as equivalent to the original. As for Eurosys, if you look at the program, many if not most of the authors are from the US, so it's not clear to me how successful it is for what it's trying to do. But it is only the first year. -Erich -- Erich M. Nahum IBM T.J. Watson Research Center Research Staff Member P.O. Box 704 nahum at watson.ibm.com Yorktown Heights NY 10598