Dear Finn Arve,

At 8:44 +0100 3/11/05, Finn Arve Aagesen wrote:

Dear All

Sorry for not attending this time.

Can I ask if you also can send me the list of the problems these strategic actions intend to solve?

This action is just intended to save IFIP (TC6)! No less... If we don't change our trajectory, we're going straight to the wall.

I miss actions to solve some of "my real problems" and I see actions that make "my problems" worse.

This is certainly not intended. Let us know your problems and how they are becoming worse. We'll take that into account.

Best regards, Guy

As an example: I did not find the concept <stimulate> in the list of recommendations.

Best regards from Finn Arve...

----- Original Message ---- From: mailto:rboutaba@bbcr.uwaterloo.caraouf boutaba To: mailto:ifip-tc6@informatik.rwth-aachen.deifip-tc6@informatik.rwth-aachen.de Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 11:21 AM Subject: [ifip-tc6] TC6 strategy planning

Please find attached the draft minutes of the TC6 strategic planning meeting in Wroclaw (Poland), October 29-30, 2005. Regards Raouf

---

ifip-tc6 mailing list mailto:ifip-tc6@lists.RWTH-Aachen.DEifip-tc6@lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/ifip-tc6http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/ifip-tc6

---

ifip-tc6 mailing list ifip-tc6@lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/ifip-tc6

Dear All,

I have been following with great interest the deliberation on "future" and "strategy".

I have the following to share:

It appears that Digital Library is the way to go. IEEE and ACM have established it in the research community. If we do not have a credible library for "easy" access and sharing, the "citation" of papers published in IFIP conferences will come down drastically. So we need to do it. It may be worth while keeping it in the top of our agenda. Funding sources can be Sponsorships, projects such as EU, individual subscription.

Our meetings must be more in number; but online - Internet based. With agenda circulated ahead of time and structured expression of opinion, we could derive more from these electronic meetings. We have to "self-fund" through projects we already have. It requires only broadband connection (2Mbps and above).

We must have a retrieval system for our conferences. Please see http://netlab.cs.iitm.ernet.in http://netlab.cs.iitm.ernet.in/ and click on IACITS 2005 (Indo-Australian Conference on IT Security) to get an idea of what I mean. It cost us a mere 2500 USD to do it. It provides a permanent "digital" record. I do not what it will cost when we scale it to all conferences that we do! As we work on various aspects of networking, it will turn out to be an excellent source of data for all that we do. I will be happy to write projects with one or more of you to provide funding for the same! We can also get sponsors - Indian industry and government will support - that is the impression I got so far.

It is unclear to me as to how we generate "revenue". The only "value" proposition we have is "knowledge creation" and the only "packaged product" we have is "conference" and "conference proceedings". Or am I missing something?

Since business plan is mentioned quite frequently, it may be a good idea to understand the market and where "good" raw material is available. If we locate our factory or factories near the "source" of raw material and near the "sink' called market, we can do very well. In this connection, we may want to collect the following statistics:

How many papers are written by each country? How many are accepted in various conferences? What is the quality of the paper and what is the quality of the conference (in a scale 0-1)?

Where are IFIP papers cited? What is the impact factor, judged as resulting in patents or products? Where are the beneficiaries located around the globe? What is the country-wide distribution of contributions in IEEE, ACM, IFIP, Private (Elsevier, Springer, etc.)?

What does UN report say about economy and growth? What are the regions, countries mentioned as potential? Is the prediction correct, since the report was published? Can we benefit from it?

I understand that even answers to these questions will fill a conference. I am sure that we have WGs interested in these aspects as well. Perhaps we can take help from them.

In a lighter vein, we get project to understand what we need to do! Or we run a conference to understand the issue itself!!

Professor S V Raghavan Department of Computer Science and Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Madras Chennai 600036 INDIA Tel: 91 44 2257 4359 Fax: 91 44 2257 0563 Res: 91 44 2257 6359 Email: mailto:svr@cs.iitm.ernet.in svr@cs.iitm.ernet.in Web: http://netlab.cs.iitm.ernet.in http://netlab.cs.iiitm.ernet.in/

_____

From: ifip-tc6-bounces@lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE [mailto:ifip-tc6-bounces@lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE] On Behalf Of raouf boutaba Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2005 10:23 PM To: 'Finn Arve Aagesen'; ifip-tc6@informatik.rwth-aachen.de Subject: Re: [ifip-tc6] TC6 strategy planning

Dear Finn:

The main problems as perceived by most TC6 members are: - IFIP TC6 has little impact worldwide compared to other organizations - IFIP business model (e.g., expecting revenue from book royalties) is deemed to failure

Therefore, TC6 members decided to use the last meeting as a brainstorming session to discuss problems and devise a strategy for the future. Two groups were formed to discuss various aspects of TC6 business and how to improve them. These include: (1) governance (TC and WGs); (2) Conferences/Workshops; (3) Business Model; (4) Publications.

The set of recommendations is the result of the brainstorming sessions and have been distributed to obtain further input from other TC6 colleagues. One cannot expect solutions to these problems from a short meeting. However, Ad hoc committees (composed of a Chair and few members each) have been created to explore further the identified issues and report back to TC6. These include a committee on Governance, a committee on publications, business model and quality control, and a committee on digital library. I suppose that the TC6 meeting minutes will reflect this.

In general, many believe that it is urgent to revisit the way TC6 conducts its business in order to better serve the community. Being small compared to other similar organizations such as IEEE and ACM (as it is the case now for TC6 and IFIP in general) can be exploited to better take into account the way the world is changing, for example by providing open access quality publications.

We look forward to your and others input.

Best regards Raouf

-----Original Message----- From: ifip-tc6-bounces@lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE [mailto:ifip-tc6-bounces@lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE] On Behalf Of Finn Arve Aagesen Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 2:44 AM To: raouf boutaba; ifip-tc6@informatik.rwth-aachen.de Cc: Finn Arve Aagesen Subject: Re: [ifip-tc6] TC6 strategy planning Dear All

Sorry for not attending this time.

Can I ask if you also can send me the list of the problems these strategic actions intend to solve?

I miss actions to solve some of "my real problems" and I see actions that make "my problems" worse.

As an example: I did not find the concept <stimulate> in the list of recommendations.

Best regards from Finn Arve...

----- Original Message ---- From: raouf mailto:rboutaba@bbcr.uwaterloo.ca boutaba To: ifip-tc6@informatik.rwth-aachen.de Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2005 11:21 AM Subject: [ifip-tc6] TC6 strategy planning

Please find attached the draft minutes of the TC6 strategic planning meeting in Wroclaw (Poland), October 29-30, 2005. Regards Raouf

_____

_______________________________________________ ifip-tc6 mailing list ifip-tc6@lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/ifip-tc6