Minutes of EC Meeting: August 18, 2009

Meeting Date: 
18 August 2009
Attendees: 
Bruce Davie (Chair), Henning Schulzrinne (Vice-Chair), Tilman Wolf (Treasurer), Mark Crovella (Past Chair), S. Keshav (CCR Editor-in-Chief), Jau de Oliveira (Conference Co-ordinator), Neil Spring (Information Services Director), Ramesh Govindan (Awards Chair)

1. Community feedback session

Considerable time was spent reviewing and fine-tuning the presentation
for the community feedback session. Emphasis on ways that members of
the community can get more involved in SIGCOMM was added. (See
presentation slides and notes posted on our website for more details.)

2. Shadow PC for SIGCOMM 2010

A request was made to the EC to consider whether there could be
another Shadow PC experiment for SIGCOMM 2010. We agreed that it
should be a decision left in the hands of the 2010 PC chairs.

3. SIGCOMM budget

Having run a surplus at most of the recent conferences, SIGCOMM is in
a position to actively support some more activities financially
(e.g. helping conferences reduce registration rates). Need to have
further discussion on this topic.

4. ACM-W. scholarship

Sigcomm agreed to sponsor the ACM-W scholarship program. Our
sponsorship entails supplementing the $500 award from ACM with a
travel grant, and finding a mentor for the recipient. For some reason,
we only learned at the start of this week that the first beneficiary
of this program would be attending the Barcelona conference. Mark and
Bruce agreed to try to find a senior, female member of the community
to act as mentor.

5. CCR page limit

CCR currently limits submissions to six pages, in part to discourage
re-submission of full-length papers that have been rejected
elsewhere. However, there could also be value in accepting occasional
longer papers. No firm conclusion was reached in this discussion,
which will be taken up by the CCR editorial board.

6. Bylaws

It has been noted that the bylaws are somewhat out of sync with
current EC practice -- notably, in that they specify the existence of
a Technical Advisory Committee that hasn't been in effect for some
years. The EC should look into the steps needed to update the Bylaws.

7. Website

There was a short discussion about how best to keep track of
institutional knowledge, much of which is currently distributed around
the website or in the heads of current or past EC members. We have the
capability to include a wiki in our website, and perhaps this should
be used as a way to gather some of this knowledge.

There is also a concern that information isn't as well-organized or
easy to find on the website as we'd like. This requires some dedicated
effort - EC members should circulate suggestions for how to improve
the organization of the information.