Re: [Coin] Academic contributions in COIN

["Ciavaglia, Laurent (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

In NMRG, we're facing similar challenges wrt. involvement of academics.
Here are few of the things we have done / are trying to do:

- Co-locate interim meetings at universities/research centers (or local/regional hubs) with active teams in the domain and try to attract close-by teams to participate.
- Bring the RG where the research/academic community meets and provide tutorials, interim meetings there. This is useful also to bring the knowledge of what the RG is, how it works and sometimes the activity of the RG is more focused/advanced on some areas and helps to teach/increase the level of awareness of the community.
- Publish position paper(s) and survey paper(s) on the topic by active members of the RG. This is usually well handled by a mix of industry/academic teams and link the published papers as results/outcome of the RG. This is usually more straightforward and timely than going through the RFC publication cycle (even with efficient processing, by the time of RFC publication, the content may be obsolete / not so relevant anymore).
- Balance theoretical and practical aspects of the research.
- If relevant, create dedicated workshops (co-located with conference on the topic), special issues in journals/magazines.
- Liaise with research projects (EU has regular calls and projects). Such consortia are usually good sources of inputs/resources and are eager to contribute to (pre-)standardization activities.
- We have used virtual meetings as a means to ease participation and involvement. Remote participation at IETF meetings (active or passive) is also useful.

I think you are aware of it, but at most IETF meetings, academics and locals could get access to "discounted" rates.

I also welcome other proposals and feedback, because this is, I think, a common challenge for the IRTF RGs.

At another level, having another "official" and recognized output channel from the IRTF (i.e. not only RFCs) would be much useful. I remember there have been discussions on an IRTF Journal ("ANRJ" 😉). I would much support this project.

HTH, best regards, Laurent.

From: Coin <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Marie-Jose Montpetit
Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2019 20:32
To: Noa Zilberman <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Coin] Academic contributions in COIN

Some comments below.

Marie-José Montpetit, Ph.D.
Research Affiliate, MIT Media Laboratory
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>


On October 8, 2019 at 2:01:33 PM, Noa Zilberman ([e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>) wrote:
Hi,

I would suggest that we need to find ways to incentivize academics to engage with COIN.

Some ideas that I can think of are:
1. Clearly list challenges on the wiki. These may be accompanied by drafts, but not necessarily, and can be something that was discussed on the mailing list,
   a presentation from a meeting etc. Ideally those will be accompanied by one or two lines to describe the challenge (+pointers). This helps not only to identify gaps, but also if there's a graduate student looking for a project in in-network computing, there may be a "go to page" hosted by COINRG with potential research challenges, and potential collaborators.

This is at good idea for the Github - if we phase out the wiki - as it is easier to collaborate. I think challenges could be discussed on the mailing list then uploaded and I would love for people involved (the collaborators) to edit the challenge as things progress - or at least send us the updates As for the “go to page” it’s for me part of the description like you say “the posters”..

2. Invite postdocs and students to talk at the meetings. They are usually the first authors of papers so they know the tech side well, are more likely to have the time to travel, and are eager to discuss their research.

In my mind when we invite someone any member of the team can come :) Of course there are the issues of travel, registration etc. Sadly we do not have a budget.

3. Make data available (this was briefly mentioned in the meeting). These may be use cases, datasets, traces etc.  Research is better if it is driven by real world data (and more likely to get published).

Yes! Data from real world sets and librairies I would say. Or at least real-world use cases.

4. List collaboration opportunities, internships etc that fall within COINRG domain.

Of course!



mjm

Kind Regards,
Noa

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 4:55 PM Marie-Jose Montpetit <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Today at the Interim Noa Zilberman raised the issue on how to help academics contribute to COIN (thanks Noa!).

Obviously drafts are not the right vehicle for most academics and Colin Perkins added that we could have other mechanisms.

Some inputs:
- academic presentations at the meeting with appropriate papers stored in the Github and datatracker (we already have done some of this)
- if a topic could lead to a RFC support academic collaborators in writing a draft
- keeping a list of related conferences and try to have mini-PRG meetings there

But I am sure there is much more. So what are the list’s ideas?

The minutes of the meeting will be issued and I have a recording I will upload to the GitHub.

Thanks all!

mjm

Marie-José Montpetit, Ph.D.
Research Affiliate, MIT Media Laboratory
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
--
Coin mailing list
[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/coin