> We are pleased to announce something new at the Sigcomm Conference > this year: In addition to posting every paper online, we are > publishing a public review for every paper (written and signed by a > Program Committee member), along with an online discussion > forum. It's free, it's public and it's now available at: > > There seems to be a direction toward PC transparency elsewhere so > maybe its not crazy to suggest increased transparency in the NANOG PC.
This is different from what we have been discussing. In their case, program committee members have relevant expertise in the subject area. Their PC members only review papers that are in their specific area of expertise and decline to review papers outside of that. Once a paper is reviewed by experts and accepted, possibly subject to changes in a shepherding process, the final paper is then publicly reviewed. Given that NANOG presentations do not require a paper to be submitted, this would be hard to retrofit into NANOG. Certainly, the PC would not be competent to review a presenter unless they have relevant expertise and are present during the session at the NANOG meeting. The NANOG PC does not appear to have the same rigor with regard to the expertise of members. If you go to one meeting in the last year, then you are qualified to be a PC member. Each member must review ALL presentations submitted. Etc. Logistically, it seems to be wiser to move towards asking all presenters to provide a paper or slideset that stands alone. Then, once that is in place, move towards some kind of organized critical review of all accepted presentations. --Michael Dillon
