Welcome to the April issue of Computer Communications Review, our community’s quarterly newsletter. Or maybe workshop?
Many may not realize it but CCR is actually operating like a workshop with quarterly deadlines. Every quarter we receive 40-60 submissions that are being reviewed by a collective of more than 100 reviewers, and handled by our 12 member editorial board, to which I would like to welcome Alberto Dainotti, from CAIDA. Out of all submissions, some technical papers are published in the running issue, while others are being given feedback for further improvement and get re-evaluated for a later issue. I cannot thank enough the hard working editorial board that, quarter on quarter, handle their allocated papers, targeting to provide the best possible feedback.
The editorial papers are not being peer reviewed, but solely reviewed by me. Editorial papers fall into two categories: i) position papers, or ii) workshop reports. My task is to ensure that the positions are clearly expressed and possibly identify cases where positions are being presented through technical arguments, in which case I may engage someone from the editorial board or redirect the paper to the technical track. Fundamentally, CCR is a vehicle to bring our community together and expose interesting, novel ideas as early as possible. And I believe we do achieve this.
This issue is an example of the above process. We received 36 papers – 32 technical submissions, and 4 editorials. We accepted all editorials, and 2 of the technical papers, while 10 papers have been recommended for resubmission, with clear recommendations on the changes required. A lot of authors agree that their papers have improved in clarity and technical accuracy through the process of revise-and-resubmit.
I hope you enjoy the two technical papers, on rate adaptation in 802.11n, and multipath routing on wireless sensor networks. Three of the editorials cover workshops and community meetings: 1) the 1st named data networking community meeting, 2) the Dagstuhl seminar on distributed cloud computing, and 3) the 1st data transparency lab workshop. Meeting reports are a wonderful way of tracking the state of the art in specific areas, and learning from the findings of the organizers.
The last editorial is one of my favorite editorials so far. The authors provide a unique historical perspective on how IP address allocation has evolved since the inception of the Internet, and implications that our community has to deal with. A very interesting exposition of IP address scarcity but also a very valuable perspective on how the Internet as a whole has evolved.
This issue is also bringing a novelty. We are establishing a new column, edited by Dr. Renata Teixeira from INRIA. The column is aiming to bring successful examples of technology transfer from our community to the networking industry. The inaugural example is provided by Dr. Paul Francis, discussing Network Address Translation (NAT). Funny how NAT was first proposed in CCR, and that the non-workshop editorial of this issue also deals with IP scarcity. It is interesting to read Paul’s exposition of the events, along with his own reflections on whether what was transferred was what he actually proposed :-).
With all this, I hope you enjoy the content of this issue, as well as our second column on graduate advice. Finally, I am expecting you all at the best of CCR session of ACM Sigcomm in London – the Sigcomm session where we celebrate the best technical and the best editorial published by CCR during the past year. Dina Papagiannaki CCR Editor