Thursday, August 20, 2015

Community Feedback Session

Announcements


SIGCOMM goes through a 3-year cycle of preference: North America, Europe, and "Wild Card"
    - 2016: Salvador, Brazil
    - 2017: North America
       - 2-page site proposals due September 15
       - Will consider applications from everywhere, but preference given to North America.

There's a general downward trend in membership, however it's still the 7th largest SIG, of 37.

SIG is consistently profitable. Fund position is very strong.

Things that happen with that money:
   1. Financially sponsor conferences (CoNEXT, IMC, HotNets, ANCS, Sensys, e-Energy, ICN, SOSR). They cover the bill if there's a loss and make money if there's a profit. All SIG-sponsored conferences will have lower registration fees for the next several years.

   2. Give awards
        - SIG wide: SIGCOMM award, Test of Time, Rising Star, Doctoral Dissertation
        - SIGCOMM conference: Best paper, Best student paper, best paper in experience track

        - Other Award Winners in the SIG community:
                - Kimberly Claffy and Vern Paxson won the IEEE Internet Award
                - Albert Greenberg won IEEE Koji Kobayashi Computers and Communications Award
                - Sylvia Ratnasamy won Grace Hopper award

   3. Give travel grants
          - 275k per year
               - 60k for SIGCOMM, 30k for CoNEXT, 15k for IMC and 10k for everyone else
          - 40k for Geodiversity awards to support attendance at SIGCOMM
          - 15k for PC member travel from under-represented regions

   4. CCR:
           4 issues in 2014
           Received 136 papers, technical papers (33)
           2 Best of CCR papers at SIGCOMM

          New Student mentoring column edited by Prof. Aditya Akell
          New Industrial board column will be edited by Dr. Renata Teixeira

          Will be entirely online by 2016 (Want feedback on this decision- not final yet)

   5. Communication:
           Monthly newsletter
           Minutes of monthly EC meetings
           Selected highlights in Annual reports

   6. Making life better for members: Travel grants, reduced registration, Pay for excess page charges
       for best paper, Shadow TPC for CoNEXT, summer school support, support for national
       networking summits, encouraging industry-academia interaction

   7. Summer Schools:
          - Cyber-Security Summer School: Summer School on Information Security
          - TMA Summer School: Can read more online. Sponsored by NSA. Free for PhD Students


Activities of Industrial Liaison Board

   1. Industrial demo session at SIGCOMM: 11 demos this year

   2. Industry days:
       Collocation of SOSR and ONS
       Workshop on Research and Applications of Inter Measurements between IMC and IETF
       Planning of wireless day (Organizers: Sachin Katti and Ranveer Chandra)

   3. Experience Track at SIGCOMM



New Initiatives from Community Feedback:
 - Childcare at SIGCOMM
 - Ethics workshop/panel
 - Mentoring program
 - Technical background sessions
 - Video-recording of all SIG-sponsored conferences
 - Support for national networking workshops
 - Reducing volunteer burnout- MeetGreen


Get involved in SIGCOMM
  - More than an annual conference!
  - Contribute to CCR
     - Editorials
     - Offer to review submissions
  - Share resources on education.sigcomm.org, get involved in curriculum development
  - Propose workshops at conferences
  - Propose summer schools


Questions to think about for feedback:

How accessible is our software?

   - Many 'no reply from authors'. Some people say 'can't be released'. Little software released meaning papers are hard to reproduce.

Short presentations and posters?
  - 17 min presentation + 5 Q/A + 2 hr poster
  - Allows better feedback to authors
  - SOSP does this already

Reflections on this year:
  - Experience Track
  - Facebook dinner. Conflicted with student dinner.

Announcement from Bruce: Thank you to everyone on the awards committee!


Question and Answer Session:

(Disclaimer: Things were captured as faithfully as I can- Each number corresponds to a topic that was talked about. Feel free to send me corrections!)

1.

Comment about all electronic CCR.
   1- The time has come.
   2- One of the issues that has held us back: branding. Making sure that when someone looks at a paper that it's from SIGCOMM. You have to know that something is heavily edited and so on.


2.

Not many people were invited to the student dinner. Very small number of senior members were invited.

Facebook dinner started at 8 or 9- after the dinner itself.

Previous issues where the SIG steps on itself, so presumptious to ask other people not to step on us.

3.
Experience track: Fantastic to invite that sort of material. Kind of concerned about separating that. There should be no separation between the experience track and the regular paper. (With regards to best paper awards and the like as well).

Response to the experience track comment from PC Chairs: Viewed criteria between Experience track and original track as completely different, so it was unfair to ask someone to compare between them because it's like apples and oranges.

4.

The SIG has made the awards committee public for the awards, but the SIGCOMM award committee isn't public. Why this disparity? This year, the name will be confidential, but in future years, it might not be.

5.

Write down evaluation criteria for what has to be in a SIGCOMM paper. Do you need an industry partner?

Answer from PC chairs: No, the criteria are online. There are links to guides to getting your paper into SIGCOMM.

6.
How meaningful it is to have a best paper out of 4? (For experience papers track) Maybe SIGCOMM's quality has been diluted?

Response: You can have 1 or 0 papers as best paper.

7.

SIGCOMM experience track won't make their software available to the
community. Tricky to make software available to the community. Troublesome to
see the amount of people that don't make their software publicly. Something
that the IMC has embraced in making datasets available to the community.

8.

Lots of work to make software publicly releasable. Maybe SIG can hire an engineer that will help with this effort?

9.

We are making progress on making software available- 5 or 6 papers this year have links in the paper body.

10.

Can academics also write experience track papers or must you be from industry? I hope that academics and so on will submit as well.

11.

Whoever claims that data should be made public, should also make the software available...

SIGPLAN has a special mark saying that the software available.

12.

Didn't like the experience track papers. Here's one of the reasons: All but one of the papers were a measurement paper. Another paper was an experience paper, but not many takeaways. Likes the experience track, but wants it to be more about experience not about data.

Response: Experience is about data, AKAMAI paper was awesome.

13.

Person 1: Ethics track is really good. Chart a direction using the ethics track, and it's nice that SIG resources were spent making the ethics workshop. Thanks to the PC chairs, the process was pretty good.

Person 2: Put a process into place to deal with the ethics violations? Hope that we don't lose the institutional memory.

Person 3: Hopefully, we'll see more proposals and so on about how to deal with ethical issues.

14.

Person 1: Maybe increase the conference to 4 days? There's not enough time to socialize and so on without missing papers.

Person 2: Not good to move discussion to poster session since it's not as public. (Referring to proposal from slides above)

Person 3: Reducing the number of papers. Many more breaks and so on. Less than 40 papers?

Person 4: No, the diversity of the field is increasing.

Person 5: Number of SIGCOMM quality papers may be higher than what we accept. Maybe have a way to accept more than the conference?

Vote for the VLDB model: strong show of support

Person 6: Kill CoNEXT if we move to the VLDB conference model since there's not very much of a discussion.

Person 7: Maybe make the SIGCOMM a multi-track conference for part of the time?

Last point: There seems to be an appetite for changing the conventions.