Re: [Coin] Academic contributions in COIN

BTW yesterday we did mention drafts were not mandatory. Send us your papers!

And this discussion goes beyond COIN. What specifically can we do?

Marie-José Montpetit, Ph.D.
Research Affiliate, MIT Media Laboratory
mariejose@mjmontpetit.com
mariejo@mit.edu

On October 9, 2019 at 9:50:25 AM, Rute Sofia (sofia@fortiss.org) wrote:

> Hi Aaron,
>
>
>
> right. This is a good paper and  5.2 summarises the main issues both for
> the IETF and IRTF J (before Marie-Jose again tries to explain the
> differences between the IRTF and IETF :)
>
>
>
> The fact is that there is the need to do more long-run work to change the
> acceptance of standards in the academic/scientific committee. I have had
> colleagues in juris of PhDs which surprisingly think drafts are not
> relevant. In terms of academic CV, I had actually such comments also about
> both IETF and IRTF contributions to standards J
>
>
>
> Yes, we all have to contribute so on my side, all MSc and PhD students are
> involved to at least monitor working groups. Some of them end-up in
> contributing. As the paper provided by Aaron shows, this is time consuming,
> and unfortunately there is no funding to support a direct involvement from
> the students. Not even mine, for the last decade.
>
>
>
> Remote participation is therefore a good measure; however,  without broad
> dissemination, the acceptance may be reduced.
>
>
>
> I second all of the proposals by Laurent…they are effective measures.
>
> Rute
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Coin <coin-bounces@irtf.org> *On Behalf Of *Aaron Ding
> *Sent:* 09 October 2019 15:34
> *To:* Rute Sofia <sofia@fortiss.org>
> *Cc:* coinrg-chairs@irtf.org; jon.crowcroft@cl.cam.ac.uk; coin@irtf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Coin] Academic contributions in COIN
>
>
>
> Hi Rute,
>
>
>
> assumingly, some points below have been made for both communities,
> especially for the European academic side:
>
>
> http://www.sigcomm.org/sites/default/files/ccr/papers/2014/January/2567561-2567572.pdf
>
>
>
> The funding part has always been a concern, not just for academia..
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Aaron
>
> --
>
> Assistant Professor, TU Delft
>
> Head of Cyber-Physical Intelligence (CPI) Lab
>
> http://homepage.tudelft.nl/8e79t/
>
>
>
> *From: *Coin <coin-bounces@irtf.org> on behalf of Rute Sofia <
> sofia@fortiss.org>
> *Date: *Wednesday, 9 October 2019 at 15:12
> *To: *Marie-Jose Montpetit <marie@mjmontpetit.com>, Noa Zilberman <
> noa.zilberman@cl.cam.ac.uk>
> *Cc: *"coinrg-chairs@irtf.org" <coinrg-chairs@irtf.org>, "coin@irtf.org" <
> coin@irtf.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [Coin] Academic contributions in COIN
>
>
>
> Dear Marie-Jose Montpetit,
>
>
>
> there is a reason for that. Standards are not usually, at least in Europe,
> considered valid success indicators from an academic/scientific
> perspective. Classes on research methodologies do not usually approach
> standardisation, even if oriented towards research. That is why a lot of
> students (IMO, from my own academic experience in several countries) don’t
> follow the IRTF/IETF.
>
>
>
> Additionally, participation in the IRTF/IETF requires travelling, which is
> costly. Academic institutions and projects do not (usually ) foresee this.
> In fact, in European projects the standardisation is actually left to the
> industry partners. No funding, no reason to participate J
>
>
>
> This is slowly changing.
>
>
>
> Tutorials, and organization of workshops co-located to scientific events,
> is a fast way to attract students. After all, most conferences today have a
> PhD forum…I agree also with the other measures being proposed…
>
>
>
> BR
>
> Rute
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Marie-Jose Montpetit <marie@mjmontpetit.com>
> *Sent:* 09 October 2019 13:10
> *To:* Rute Sofia <sofia@fortiss.org>; Noa Zilberman <
> noa.zilberman@cl.cam.ac.uk>
> *Cc:* coinrg-chairs@irtf.org; coin@irtf.org
> *Subject:* RE: [Coin] Academic contributions in COIN
>
>
>
> I also did both and still do. But if professors are not interested
> students will not either. So we have to work all angles.
>
>
>
> Marie-José Montpetit, Ph.D.
>
> Research Affiliate, MIT Media Laboratory
>
> mariejose@mjmontpetit.com
>
> mariejo@mit.edu
>
>
>
> On October 9, 2019 at 7:02:00 AM, Rute Sofia (sofia@fortiss.org) wrote:
>
> Well,
>
>
>
> it is for students. I am in both worlds (academia and research towards
> industry) so… J
>
> Rute
>
>
>
> *From:* Marie-Jose Montpetit <marie@mjmontpetit.com>
> *Sent:* 09 October 2019 12:42
> *To:* Rute Sofia <sofia@fortiss.org>; Noa Zilberman <
> noa.zilberman@cl.cam.ac.uk>
> *Cc:* coinrg-chairs@irtf.org; coin@irtf.org
> *Subject:* RE: [Coin] Academic contributions in COIN
>
>
>
> But that is the point: IRTF is NOT standardisation.
>
>
>
> But OK for tutorials it seems its needed :)
>
>
>
> mjm
>
>
>
> Marie-José Montpetit, Ph.D.
>
> Research Affiliate, MIT Media Laboratory
>
> mariejose@mjmontpetit.com
>
> mariejo@mit.edu
>
>
>
> On October 9, 2019 at 4:38:21 AM, Rute Sofia (sofia@fortiss.org) wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I would also suggest considering organizing tutorials and workshops
> co-located with relevant scientific events. IMO most students are not
> directed to standardisation. Therefore, most of them usually do not work
> towards the IETF/IRTF.
>
>
>
> So to attract academia, one of the best intruments are scientific events.
>
>
>
> BR
>
> Rute Sofia
>
>
>
> *From:* Coin <coin-bounces@irtf.org> *On Behalf Of *Noa Zilberman
> *Sent:* 08 October 2019 20:01
> *To:* Marie-Jose Montpetit <marie@mjmontpetit.com>
> *Cc:* coinrg-chairs@irtf.org; coin@irtf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Coin] Academic contributions in COIN
>
>
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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).
>
> 4. List collaboration opportunities, internships etc that fall within
> COINRG domain.
>
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Noa
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 4:55 PM Marie-Jose Montpetit <marie@mjmontpetit.com>
> 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
>
> mariejose@mjmontpetit.com
>
> mariejo@mit.edu
>
> --
> Coin mailing list
> Coin@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/coin
>
> --
> Coin mailing list
> Coin@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/coin
>