Subject: SIGCOMM and IETF work RE: v6 adoption

From: Aaron Yi DING <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 23:43:45 +0300

On 23/07/14 22:27, Mark Allman wrote:

A shameless flog as it seems like it could be of interest to some
folks...

Surely relevant!  It benefits both sides to follow up the latest progress,
either via conferences or IETF pipeline.

As part of the work for IETF diversity group, our joint paper between
Cambridge and Helsinki got the best paper award from ACM - "Best of CCR",
and to be presented in ACM SIGCOMM, August 2014:
http://conferences.sigcomm.org/sigcomm/2014/program.php

It could be relevant to IETFers, perhaps (including PDF, feedback from ACM
Computing Review and chief editor):
http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/yding/acm2014.html

Cheers,
Aaron

 We have been assessing v6 adoption from a bunch of angles lately.  We
have written up a paper on the results of our analysis that will be
presented next month at SIGCOMM.  It is:

    Jakub Czyz, Mark Allman, Jing Zhang, Scott Iekel-Johnson,
    Eric Osterweil, Michael Bailey.  <i>Measuring IPv6 Adoption</i>,
    ACM SIGCOMM, August 2014.  To appear.
    http://www.icir.org/mallman/pubs/CAZ+14/

Comments certainly welcome.

allman

-----------
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~ad707/

---

From: Mark Allman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 08:43:26 -0400

> Surely relevant!  It benefits both sides to follow up the latest
> progress, either via conferences or IETF pipeline.

Yup.

> http://conferences.sigcomm.org/sigcomm/2014/program.php

I noticed that the other day, actually.  I popped the paper up in my PDF
reader and plan to read it.

I certainly agree there should be more exchange between the research and
IETF communities.  That said, I feel like I can only say that so loudly
given that I used to play in both sandboxes, but have largely backed
away from the IETF myself and so its a little hard to say "hey, everyone
should play there!".

Many thanks!

allman