The April 2017 Issue

This new issue of Computer Communication Review (CCR) contains again a mix of technical papers and editorials. In the first paper, Principles for Measurability in Protocol Design, Mark Allman and his colleagues argue about the importance of considering the requirements from measurements in the design of protocols. Protocols are designed to solve operational problems and the operators that deploy or support those protocols often use measurements to monitor or tune their utilisation. This paper proposes six principles that should be used by protocol designers when developing a new protocol or architecture. The vision differs from earlier work that has often relied on specialised out-of-band measurement protocols. Based on a few primitives, the authors propose a high-level design for an In-Protocol Internet Measurement Facility. The solution is discussed with several examples and use cases. The next step will be to completely specify, implement and deploy such a protocol.

Our second technical paper, A Techno-Economic Approach for Broadband Deployment in Underserved Areas, was selected as the best paper of the SIGCOM’16 GAIA workshop, but could not be included in the previous issue of CCR. In this paper, Ramakrishnan Durairajan and Paul Barford describe a framework that allows government or companies to identify the best locations to deploy network infrastructure based on factors that include cost and user demographics.

Our first editorial, Learning Networking by Reproducing Research Results, co-authored by Lisa Yan and Nick McKeown, describes how students at Stanford University have reproduced experimental research results from over 40 different networking papers during the last five years. Since 2012, students who follow this advanced graduate networking course select one scientific paper and try to reproduce one of the results of the paper in pairs. This project lasts three weeks. It appears to work really well and provides several benefits. Firstly, the students to gain a more in-depth knowledge on the chosen paper than by simply presenting the paper. Secondly, the students can interact with the researchers who wrote the paper if they have specific questions about one particular experiment. Thirdly, the students learn the importance of performing reproducible experiments before starting their own research. This looks like an excellent way to educate the next generation of networking researchers and I would strongly encourage you to consider this model if you teach an advanced graduate networking class or seminar.

In our second editorial, Summary of the Works-in-Progress Session at IMC16, Dave Choffnes reports on the work in progress session that was organised during IMC’16. This session was intended as a forum for the exchange of ideas within the IMC community. Dave first describes how the session was organised and then briefly summarises the tools and research that participants shared during this session.

Finally, in our third editorial, 2016 International Teletraffic Congress (ITC 28) Report, Tobias Hossfeld provides a detailed summary of the International Teletraffic Congress that was held in September 2016 in Wurzburg, Germany.

Olivier Bonaventure

CCR Editor

Leave a Reply