Dear all,
here comes a very helpful message from our president (Klaus Brunnstein);
see below.
In principle we could say now: "Roma locuta, causa finita".
Nevertheless, we will discuss about that in Bangkok.
By the way: Klaus told me that the official IFIP publisher (new Springer)
allows the authors to use their material for other purposes. It is
possible for example to put the paper on the own homepage; such activities
are of course needed for the authors in order to promote their career plans.
Best regards
Otto
cc.: Klaus Brunnstein
--------------------
Dear Prof. Spaniol, thank you very much for sending the draft agreement
of WG 6.6 and WG 6.10 concerning planned events. In both cases, I refer to
the publication contract according to which IFIP publications for events
after January 1, 2005 must be published with Springer Science and
Business Media (SSBM). Even in exceptional cases where such a publication
is not
possible, the copyright cannot be outsourced to another sponsor, but the
copyright MUST remain with IFIP.
Concerning WG 6.6 event on "Integrated Management", this belongs to a
series which TC-6 established several years ago. Both brand name and copyright
belong to TC-6. While some parts of the very detailed draft contract may be
acceptable, the exclusion of IFIPs copyright is NOT.
Concerning WG 6.10 event on "Optical Networks", this belongs to a series
which TC-6 established 10 years ago. Both brand name and copyright
belong to TC-6. Outsourcing of this event under the conditions as
described by
WG 6.10 chair is NOT ACCEPTABLE.
Final remark: while IEEE CS is a member of IFIP, it behaves in these 2 cases
as IFIP competitor. Interestingly, IEEE CS was - despite Proper
information - not interested to submit a bid for IFIP publications.
Any attempt from IEEE CS to outsource sucessful TC events and publications
is NOT ACCEPTABLE, even at the price that some members of a Working Group
may leave (or threaten to do so) - although we would really regret such steps.
Best wishes: Klaus Brunnstein (November 12, 2004)
Dear all,
As these publication/copyright issues are central
to our discussion, let me just draw your
attention to the "Open access initiative" against
the lobbys of publishers.
For those who don't know, this initiative is
based on the observation that scientists do
everything for free (paper writing, formatting,
reviewing) while the publishers do very little
for a lot of money. Then scientists have to pay
huge amounts of money to get access to public
scientific knowledge of theirs.
This publication business model is more and more questioned by the scientists.
See http://www.zim.mpg.de/openaccess-berlin/berlindeclaration.html
Many big institutions (e.g. Cornell university
and many others) have not renewed their
membership to big digital libraries like
Elsevier, or have reduced them drastically. This
may be a concern for Springer too, or even IEEE
and ACM at some point (though these are much
cheaper, especially ACM).
The document below shows that in other fields
(natural science, medicine), this philosophy is
gaining strength, as some government-funded
research now start to require that papers be
available for free to the scientific community.
In our field, how would this impact the transfer
of copyrights to IFIP (which actually means
being bound to New Springer)? Many authors have
already complained about this copyrights
transfer, as they want to put a copy of their
papers on their personal web page (and
consequently on citeseer too...).
Best regards,
Guy
>-------------
>Dear Open Access Supporter,
>
>On September 3, 2004 the NIH posted for comment an "Enhanced Public
>Access Policy." This policy would require the
>recipients of NIH research grants to provide to
>the National Library of Medicine a digital copy
>of the final accepted manuscript (or the
>published version itself) of every published
>report resulting from NIH-funded research, so
>that the research results can be made freely
>available to scientists and the public through
>PubMed Central within six months of publication.
>
>We are writing now to urge you to submit a
>comment in support of this proposal right away.
>The deadline for comments is just a few days
>away - November 16th.
>
>The text of the proposal is available at:
>http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-04-064.html
>
>You can post comments here:
>http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/public_access/add.htm
>
>A powerful lobby of publishers and scientific societies is trying to
>block this plan. They claim that this is an unwarranted government
>intrusion on their business practices. In fact,
>the NIH policy has no authority over publishers
>- its rules apply only to the scientists who
>voluntarily accept grants from the NIH. The
>publishers remain free to operate their
>businesses as they always have and to compete in
>the free market to provide the best service and
>value to their authors and readers. But the
>publishers are wrong in arguing that they are
>entitled to monopoly control over access to the
>results of research that American taxpayers have
>paid for. On the contrary, the taxpayers who
>fund the research, and the scientists who carry
>it out, have every right to ask the grant
>recipients to provide open access to the
>published results.
>And they have every right to expect that the
>benefits of the research will be amplified by
>making it freely and widely available for others
>to use and to build on.
>
>Let the NIH know that you support this policy proposal. Even better
>would be to tell the NIH that you would prefer
>an even stronger policy that requires full and
>immediate open access to all papers resulting
>from NIH-funded research. It is important that
>the NIH and other policymakers understand that
>this is not (as some publishers would have them
>believe) a radical proposal destined to destroy
>scientific publishing, but a thoughtful
>compromise that balances the desire for better
>access with the commercial interests of
>scientific publishers.
>
>More information about the policy is available at
>http://www.nih.gov/about/publicaccess/index.htm
>http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/
>
>
>Notable statements of support for the plan include:
>
>An open letter to the US Congress signed by 25 Nobel Laureates:
>http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/bof.html
>
>The Council of the National Academy of Sciences:
>http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/s09162004?OpenDocument
>
>Please let us know if you have any questions.
>
>Harold Varmus
>Patrick Brown
>Michael Eisen
--
________________________________________________________________________
Prof. Guy Leduc Phone : +32 4 366 26 98
Université de Liège Secr : +32 4 366 26 91
Réseaux Informatiques Fax : +32 4 366 29 89
Research Unit in Networking (RUN) Email: Guy.Leduc(a)ulg.ac.be
EECS Department, Institut Montefiore, B 28, B-4000 LIEGE 1, BELGIUM
http://www.run.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/People/GuyLeduc/
Dear all,
I share the view of Arun that WG chairs should have enough weight in decisions concerning the conferences of their WG. Otherwise they cannot take real responsibility for the WG's success and activities. Especially when the WG chair has a long experience as a chair in IFIP.
On the other hand the concerns Otto has regarding IFIP and IEEE are certainly relevant and it must be problem in other TCs. IFIP should address it when working on the directions and policies for the future. TC6 can bring very valuable views and experiences to IFIP in this issue. I hope the discussion on the next TC6 meeting can support our TC6 chairman in delivering TC6's input to higher levels of IFIP.
Have a successful meeting in Bangkok!
Sarolta
Dear all,
some of you asked about possible hotels and meeting location.
A map of the area is enclosed.
From downtown area (Silom Road) where my hotel is situated
you can reach the place as follows (information by Chutiporn Anutariya
<chutiporn(a)shinawatra.ac.th> who can be contacted for further details):
---
From Silom, you can either take a SkyTrain or a subway to a
station close to the conference venue:
SkyTrain:
- Take a skytrain from Sala Daeng Station to Mo Chit Station.
Then, take a taxi.
Subway:
- Take a subway from Silom Station to Phahon Yothin Station
and exit at gate 1. From there, it is possible to walk
but I'd suggest you to take a taxi (at least on the first day).
I think in total, it could take around 40 minutes for either way.
Taking a taxi directly from Silom may take longer time (up to an hour or
more) as the traffic in Bangkok is always bad especially on week days.
----
Hotels:
Please check the INTELLCOMM pages <http://intellcomm2004.ait.ac.th/>.
Three hotels are recommended:
- Sogitel Central Plaza
- Rama Gardens Hotel
- Chaophya Park Hotel
(they are relatively near to the meeting and to the conference location
but rather far from the real city centre where I prefer to stay).
Best regards
Otto
Dear Harry (R) and all others,
>Otto, thanks for the agenda ---- even if it makes me sad that I will not
>be there.
Thanks a lot for your message. It was indeed intended to tell the missing
delegates
what they will be missing - in order that they attend the next meetings.
You know about the meeting 205/1 in Waterloo (Canada) early May 2005.
And meeting 2005/2 will be held (if the delegates follow the proposal)
just after I3E (which is going to be held in Poznan 26-28 Oct. 2004)
but the meeting will be held in Wroclaw juster after I3E. Thus participants
can either directly go to Wroclaw or come by train from Poznan: two hours
time.
>
>One additional topic for discussion is from the note that Harry Perros sent
>on 10 October about joint IFIP/IEEE events. Harry wrote:
>
>"In my 6.10 report, as you will find out, I am
>requesting that the 6.10 conference ONDM become a joint IFIP/IEEE
>conference. You will find my reasoning and justifications in my report.
>If ONDM becomes a IFIP/IEEE joint conference, FIP stands to loose income
>from the publication of the ONDM proceedings, but on the other hand they
>stand to gain money from a larger group of participants. (I am not sure
>if this
>will result to a positive or negative flow at the end!!)
>
>"My motivation for seeking this joint sponsorship comes from my desire
>to launch a truly international conference on Optical Networks.
>TC 6 has no criticial mass in optical networks (unlike for instance,
>areas such as performance evaluation, or ATM networks back a few years
>ago). IEEE's ONTC has a critical mass, but they do not have a conference
>of their own... So, this marriage is likely to generate the correct
>environment
>within which a successful international conference can be born."
>
>Since I won't be at the meeting either, I would like to go on record
>as supporting joint sponshorship for this event. I find Harry's
>reasoning a good justification. I find joint sponsorship a good way
>to make up for the ground we have lost in the optical networking
>world in the past.
>
There are two sides of the coin:
Firstly, I agree that a joint sponsorship would be good in order
to make up for the ground we lost in Optical Networking.
Now the idea of having IEEE in the boat is nice but it also a
certain "cheap trick" and it shows some laziness by WG 6.10.
Secondly, the cooperation with IEEE risks to be a killer of IFIP
and in particular of TC6. IEEE insists of having the copyright for publication
and this is not acceptable for us. If we would accept then we would be
very soon in the same situation as ICCC which are fully bankrupt and
which want to
dissolve themselves. Thus my position here is clear: No joint event if we
loose the
copyright for publication!
I know that it is already too late for that in the case of the
IM (Integrated Management) conference series but we definitively will have to
stop these IEEE crocodiles in the future.
We will of course discuss that topic in Bangkok; Agenda topic 11, I'll rename
it accordingly.
Best regards
Otto
Dear Otto, Harry, and others on IFIP TC6:
I support Harry Perros and Harry Rudin's position on this issue and
believe that there is a lot to be gained by joint cooperation between IFIP,
the IEEE, or other member societies of IFIP. We must not lose site of the
fact that there are significant reasons why a conference might want
sponsorship by an organization like the IEEE. One reason is that the IEEE
provides financial backing for a conference so that the organizers do not
face grave financial consequences in the event that the event fails. This
is something that it is critically important for many conference
organizers. The IEEE also offers other services for helping out
conferences which IFIP doesn't.
Regarding publications, there are advantages to using the IEEE press since
the proceedings will be widely available via the IEEE digital library.
Several discussions we have had within TC6 have highlighted the continuing
problems that IFIP publications have faced. Therefore, it should be clear
why people prefer going with the IEEE press.
It is also important for us to give significant weight to the views of
people like Harry Perros in deciding what is best for their communities.
Harry was unanimously endorsed as the WG6.10 Chair a few months ago by
everyone on the TC6 mailing list who expressed an opinion, previously
chaired WG6.3, and is quite senior in the networking research community.
If he thinks that this kind of an agreement is best for ONDM, then I trust
his judgement. If we simply reject agreements like this, one consequence
could be that organizers of such conferences simply drop IFIP in which case
IFIP gets nothing.
It is a mistake to simply view IFIP as a competitor to the IEEE, ACM, or
any other IFIP member societies. My understanding is that given the IFIP
fee structure, the IEEE Computer Society pays one of the largest membership
fees to IFIP of any organization. When the Chair of our TC refers to IEEE
members as "crocodiles" and "scavengers", that sets the wrong tone for
bringing about the cooperation which is needed for us to be the most
effective. As an international organization, IFIP has a significant role
to play in the computer science research community. Despite the fact that
the IEEE and ACM have a large number of international members, many people
still see them as being US-based. Therefore, having an endorsement from an
organization from IFIP should be something that conferences naturally seek
out for achieving international stature. If we focus on this aspect and
work with all of the member societies to better publicize IFIP events in
countries all over the world, then there would be significantly more
conferences that would seek out our endorsement.
Best Regards,
Arun
|---------+------------------------------------->
| | Otto Spaniol |
| | <spaniol(a)informatik.rwth-a|
| | achen.de> |
| | Sent by: |
| | ifip-tc6-bounces(a)lists.RWT|
| | H-Aachen.DE |
| | |
| | |
| | 11/11/2004 07:58 AM |
| | |
|---------+------------------------------------->
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| |
| To: Harry Perros <hp(a)csc.ncsu.edu>, ifip-tc6(a)informatik.rwth-aachen.de |
| cc: |
| Subject: Re: [ifip-tc6] Meeting 2004/2 agenda |
| |
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Dear Harry (P) and others,
>
>I don't know what you mean by "cheap trick" and laziness by WG 6.10.
>
>I have worked EXTREMELY hard since last May to rebuild the 6.10, which
>WAS IN SHAMBLES !!! (PLEASE READ MY REPORT)
>
>I have invested a huge amount of time in negotiating this with ONTC,
>because I believe that's the way to go.
>
>So, I don't expect to hear a thanks for all this.. but I don't think
>your perception and characterization is appropriate.
>
>You are certainly entitled to your own opinion for joint conferences.
>However, I hope that TC6 takes decisoin democratically and not be
>decree from its Chairman.
>
>So, let's see what the popular vote is on this case.
>
>Harry the lazy
>
Certainly my wording was too hard and I apologize for that. You know me.
But on the other hand it was also on purpose in order to awake
the delegates whose number will be not so numerous at meeting 2004/2.
Also for me the distance and cost for going to Thailand is
significant and thus I'm somewhat diappointed to see so many
apologies.
The situation is really critical (at least as it looks to me):
1. Look at the proposal for the contract mdification in the IM case
(made by Raouf Boutaba who will also not come).
It is attached and there it is clearly written what those IEEE
crocodiles (or should I name them scavengers) intend to do.
Just check the changes which are mentioned in red colour:
The sentence "IFIP will hold the copyright" has just been deleted!
As a consolation it is mentioned: "Pay IFIP a sum equal to the royalties
paid by the publisher for the 2003 IM event
multiplied by the ratio of Full registrants to the 2003 IM event".
This is just to make us sleeping.
I guarantee to you that this will not be valid any more for IM 2007
and onwards when IEEE will have discovered that these royalties are
higher
than those paid by the new IFIP publisher.
A prof for this speculation is already your ONDM 2005 approach; see
below.
And so it will go on with a full domino effect (at least we call
it like this in German language and you will know what I mean).
The IM contract is still pending but I would very much like to say no
to it.
Let's the IFIP publication committee decide upon it - but they
also are very cautious and don't express themselves despite many
promises
made to Raouf; Joe Turner said he would "solve the problem" by October 7
but of course he didn't react until today. This makes me upset.
2. Now for the case of WG 6.10:
I have also attached your proposal for all others.
Here you said that IFIP organised ONDC but that the organisors now
want a cooperation with IEEE from 2005 onwards. You mention the
predecessor IM of such a cooperation (just another example of the
domino effect!).
But you already start (!!!) with the sentence "The copyright will be
owned by IEEE" thus you do not fight but you give it away for free!
Of course nothing is mentioned any more concerning any royalties;
thus you are even faster than IM where we will loose the royalties
only from 2007 onwards! In your WG 6.10 you state that "WG 6.10 has to
go to bed with IEEE ONTC". Sorry, but that is prostitution!
I'm extremely sorry but selling an event to IEEE is not to be considered
(at least by me) as extremely hard work.
Why can't we believe in our own strength? Is it absolutely necessary
for becoming slaves of IEEE with minimum income and minimum influence?
Sorry for these hard but maybe clear position.
I invite all delegates to comment in order that we can have a substantial
discussion in Bangkok even if many of you will not be present there.
Best regards
Otto
_______________________________________________
ifip-tc6 mailing list
ifip-tc6(a)lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/ifip-tc6
#### IFIPagreement1127(revised) 3.doc has been removed from this note on
November 11, 2004 by Arun Iyengar
#### IFIPIEEE.doc has been removed from this note on November 11, 2004 by
Arun Iyengar
#### Report2004(2) .doc has been removed from this note on November 11,
2004 by Arun Iyengar
Dear all,
please find enclosed the preliminary meeting agenda for meeting 2004/2
in Bangkok.
Please send me a message if you want that additional topics should be treated.
The timing is as follows:
Sunday, Nov. 21, 2004:
9.30: Meeting begins.
Location: Meeting Room #DLC1002, 10th Floor, Shinawatra Tower III,
with standard meeting equipments (LCD, OHP, flip chart). However,
since it is on Sunday there is no notebook or a PC in the room.
Wireless Internet connection possible but not guaranteed.
Lunch at 14th Floor, Shinawatra Tower III.
17.30: Transportation to Si Phraya for a dinner cruise by 2-3 vans
19.00 - 21.00: Dinner cruise on Chao Phraya River.
Monday, Nov. 22, 2004:
9.00: Meeting begins (again):
Location: Meeting Room #StudyRoom1, 15th Floor, Shinawatra Tower III
with meeting equipments + a PC + wireless Internet connection.
Lunch at 14th Floor, Shinawatra Tower III.
Dinner: This is not yet finalized. If we can find a nice restaurant not
far from Shin III, we can finish the meeting later than 16:30 (17:00 or
17:30 could be possible). Another option for the dinner is "Pueng
Chom" at
Soi Aree (Phaholyothin 5).
INTELLCOMM will sponsor room rental fees, lunch and coffee breaks,
transportation to dinner (by vans). Thanks a lot to INTELLCOMM!
Dinners will be paid from TC6 fund. Thanks a lot to IFIP!
The location of Shinawatra Tower III is found on the INTELLCOMM web pages.
You can reach me in Bangkok (I arrive Saturday before the meeting)
via mobile phone: +49 172 273 4814.
My hotel is:
Trinity Hotel Silom, 425/15 Soi Silom, Silom Rd.
Tel.: +66 2 231 5416.
Note that due to the varying equipment in the meeting rooms it is
possible that
agenda points are treated in a sequence which is different from the
proposed one.
Best regards
Otto
[Apologies for multiple postings]
2nd Call for Papers
5th IEEE International Workshop on
Algorithms for Wireless, Mobile, Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks
(IEEE WMAN 05)
April 4-8, 2005, Denver, Colorado, USA
(Omni Interlocken Resort)
To be held in conjunction with IPDPS 2005
Supported by the IEEE Computer Society
http://ru1.cti.gr/wman05/
SCOPE:
The field of wireless and mobile computing is an important research
challenging area, that emerges from the integration among personal
computing distributed computing, cellular technology and the Web. This is
possible due to the continuously increasing interaction between
communication and computing, which is changing the information access from
the current reactive ``anytime anywhere'' into the incoming proactive
``all the time everywhere'' approach. Nowadays, there is a large variety
of networks spanning from the well-known cellular networks to
non-infrastructured wireless networks such as mobile ad hoc networks and
sensor networks.
This scenario raises a number of interesting, and difficult, algorithmic
issues in diverse areas such as location management, resource allocation,
ubiquitous information, network connectivity, reliability and security,
and energy consumption.
This workshop is intended to cover contributions in both the design and
analysis of discrete algorithms and the system modelling in the context of
mobile, wireless, ad-hoc, and sensor networks. In particular, it aims at
bringing together the practitioners and theoreticians of the field. We are
seeking for papers that are original, unpublished and not currently under
review. The objective of this workshop is to bring together leading
technologists and researchers in these ``critical areas'' of research in
order to have a forum for discussing fundamental challenges, identifying
future perspectives, and exchanging ideas about ongoing research.
Authors are solicited to submit original unpublished manuscripts for this
workshop. Accepted papers will be published in the proceedings (by IEEE CS
Press) of the IPDPS workshops.
TOPICS:
The scope of this workshop includes, but is not limited, to:
* frequency and channel assignment algorithms
* cryptography and security
* distributed algorithms
* pricing modeling and solutions
* algorithms for satellite communications
* mechanisms design and cooperation enforcement
* algorithms and modeling on satellite and radio networks
* algorithms for resource management in mobile, wireless and ad-hoc networks
* data management on mobile and wireless computing
* algorithms for single-hop and multiple-hop packet radio networks
* routing, and communication primitives in ad hoc and sensor networks
* synchronization and scheduling issues in mobile and ad hoc networks
* energy saving protocols for ad hoc and sensor networks
* complexity analysis of algorithms for mobile environments
* caching and prefetching for information access in wireless networks
* algorithms and modeling for tracking and locating mobile users
IMPORTANT DATES:
Workshop Paper Due: November 20, 2004, 5pm EST
Notification of Acceptance/Rejection: December 22, 2004
Camera-Ready Paper Due: January 15, 2004
SUBMISSION GUIDELINES AND PUBLICATION:
Authors are invited to submit manuscripts reporting original unpublished
research and recent developments in the topics related to the WMAN
workshop. The length of the papers should be a maximum of 10 double-column
single-spaced pages including figures and references on 8.5 by 11 inch
paper using at least 10 point font (based upon IEEE Proceedings Style).
Please remember that the final versions will be restricted to 8 pages.
Authors must submit their papers electronically via EDAS
(http://edas.info/)
Note that once the paper gets accepted, it is MANDATORY that at least one
author should attend the workshop and present the paper.
The accepted papers will be published in the same printed abstract volume
and CD-ROM proceedings as other workshops of the IPDPS 2005 conference by
the IEEE Computer Society Press and IEEE online library.
General Chair:
Cristina M. Pinotti
Dept. of Computer Sciences and Telecommunications
University of Trento
ITALY
E-mail: pinotti(a)science.unitn.it
Program Committee Co-Chairs:
Azzedine Boukerche
SITE University of Ottawa
Canada
E-mail: boukerch(a)site.uottawa.ca
Sotiris Nikoletseas
Dept. of Computer Engineering and Informatics,
University of Patras, and Computer Technology Institute,
Greece
E-mail: nikole(a)cti.gr
Publicity Chair:
Ioannis Chatzigiannakis
Dept. of Computer Engineering and Informatics,
University of Patras, and Computer Technology Institute,
Greece
E-mail: ichatz(a)cti.gr
Steering Committee
Sajal K. Das,
Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering,
University of Texas at Arlington, USA
Mohan Kumar,
Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering,
University of Texas at Arlington, USA
Program Committee (to be finalized):
Azzedine Boukerche (Co-Chair), University of Ottawa, Canada
Ioannis Chatzigiannakis, University of Patras and CTI, Greece
Andrea Clementi, University of Rome La Sapienza, Italy
Marco Conti, IIT - CNR, Italy
Josep Diaz, Technical University of Catalonia, Spain
Shlomi Dolev, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
Magnus Halldorsson, University of Iceland, Iceland
Wendi Heinzelman, University of Rochester, USA
Klaus Jansen, University of Kiel, Germany
Elias Koutsoupias, University of Athens, Greece
Mirek Kutylowski, Wroclaw University of Technology, Poland
Bhaskar Krishnamachari, University of Southern California, USA
Robert Leese, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
Alessandro Mei, University of Rome La Sapienza, Italy
Sotiris Nikoletseas (Co-Chair), University of Patras and CTI, Greece
Mohamed Ould-Khaoua, University of Glasgow, UK
David Peleg, Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel
Roberto De Prisco, University of Salerno, Italy
Cauligi Raghavendra, University of Southern California, USA
Jose Rolim, University of Geneva, Switzerland
Peter Sanders, Max Planck Institute for CS, Germany
Mirela Sechi Moretti A.N., Barddal University, Brazil
Alex Shvartsman, MIT, USA
Peter Triantafilloy, University of Patras, Greece
Peter Widmayer, ETH Zurich, Switzerland
Dear all,
it was brought to my attention that our TC6 calendar is (was)
somewhat outdated. This was true, unfortunately. Sorry!
I've made some correction, the new calendar is attached.
But!!! Please check it carefully and send my further corrections.
In particular, I urge the chairpersons to do that.
By the way: The reports from 6.7 and 6.11 for the Bangkok meeting
are still missing.
Best regards
Otto
Dear all,
finally we have a new (old) TC6 delegate from India.
It is our good friend S V Raghavan! See below.
Congratulations to Raghavan!
We look forward to meting you at meeting 2004/2 in Bangkok.
Best regards
Otto
--------------------------------------------------------------
To:
Dr. Spaniol
Chairman TC-6 IFIP
Dear Dr. Spaniol,
We are pleased to nominate Prof. S.V. Raghavan,
Professor, Department of Computer Science, Indian
Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India as the
the Computer Society of India representative to the
IFIP Technical Committee TC-6.
You will soon be receiving a communication in this
regard, also from our Immediate Past President Mr.
Anand K Pathak who will now be the IFIP representative
of Computer society of India in place of Prof.
C.R.Muthukrishnan.
I shall be grateful if you can kindly confirm your
acceptance of this representation at the earliest. I
have marked a copy of this mail to Prof. Raghavan
also.
With kind and warm regards
mlravi
President
Computer Society of India
----------
Dear Mr. Otto Spaniol,
I propose a name of Prof. S.V.Raghavan, HEAD-Dept. of CS,
> IITM, Chennai as CSI representative for TC-6 at IFIP in place of Dr. N.
Chandrashekhar. I request you to make necessary changes in your record.
Thanks,
A. K. Pathak
CSI Representative in IFIP
