infocom-topic-selection

INFOCOM Topic Selection

Decide the venue before drafting. INFOCOM — the IEEE International Conference on Computer

Communications, the IEEE ComSoc networking flagship — is the broad, large-scale networking

venue. Its defining feature relative to its siblings is **breadth plus a living analytical

tradition**: a well-posed model with a theorem and a convincing evaluation is a first-class INFOCOM

paper, not a second-class one. A pure systems-building paper is welcome, but so is a

scheduling/optimization/queueing/game-theory result that SIGCOMM or NSDI would push to a journal.

The routing question that matters most

The decisive question is rarely "is this networking?" but **"is the contribution a model/analysis, a

built system, or a measurement — and which community rewards that shape now?"** INFOCOM is the safe

home for the analytical and the broad; SIGCOMM/NSDI pull toward built-and-measured systems with a

deployment story. Use the finer signals below and the live calendar to choose.

Sibling-venue routing table

| Signal in your project | Better home | Why |

|---|---|---|

| Modeling/optimization/algorithmic core (scheduling, resource allocation, queueing, game theory, network economics) with analysis + simulation | IEEE INFOCOM | Its analytical tradition treats theorems-with-evaluation as first-class |

| Broad networking contribution, ready now, with the next INFOCOM deadline nearer | IEEE INFOCOM | Large flagship; broad scope and reviewer pool |

| A built, deployed system with a measured Internet/datacenter deployment story | ACM SIGCOMM | Rewards architecture + real deployment; smaller, systems-first |

| A systems artifact whose case is a real implementation and hard performance numbers | USENIX NSDI | Networked-systems building, artifact-heavy |

| Wireless/mobile system with real devices, PHY/MAC + measurement | ACM MobiCom / MobiSys | Mobile-computing center of gravity |

| A focused protocol-design/analysis contribution | IEEE ICNP | Protocols venue; narrower than INFOCOM |

| Study too long or too incremental for a nine-page conference limit | IEEE/ACM ToN, IEEE JSAC | Journals with no page ceiling and a revise-and-resubmit cycle |

Contribution shapes INFOCOM rewards

• Analytical / optimization — a scheduling, resource-allocation, routing, caching, or

network-economics problem formulated cleanly, with structural results or an algorithm with

provable guarantees, validated in simulation. The queueing/optimization lineage is native here.

• Protocol / mechanism design — a new protocol or control mechanism (congestion control,

access, coordination) with analysis and evaluation on a simulator or modest testbed.

• Wireless and PHY/MAC — modeling and technique for wireless, cellular, 5G/6G, IoT, or

backscatter, often blending analysis with measurement.

• Measurement / empirical networking — a study of real network behavior with a dataset and

methodology a reviewer can scrutinize.

• Learning-for-networking — ML applied to a networking problem, where the networking lesson

(not the model) is the contribution (see the modeling-swap test).

The modeling-vs-building and model-swap tests

Two quick tests sharpen a borderline verdict:

• Modeling-vs-building axis: if the heart is a formulation and analysis (with simulation to

confirm), INFOCOM fits and SIGCOMM/NSDI may not. If the heart is a *built system with a

deployment/measurement story*, the systems venues fit better and an analysis-only INFOCOM framing

undersells it.

• Model-swap test: if the paper leans on a learner, ask whether the networking lesson survives

swapping the model. If not, the model is the contribution and an ML venue fits better; if yes, the

networking framing is real and INFOCOM welcomes it.

Evidence maturity, without the ladder cliché

Fit is necessary but not sufficient. A formulation with a theorem but no evaluation reads as

incomplete for the main track; a system evaluated only on a toy topology needs realistic scale

before it convinces; a measurement without a methodology a reviewer can audit will not survive the

crowded pool. INFOCOM's scale means a marginal paper competes against ~1,400 others for ~19% of

slots — submit when the analysis and the evaluation are both ready.

Cheap reconnaissance before committing

[Scope]   scan the last two INFOCOM programs (dblp conf/infocom) for your subarea
          -> several recent papers = a reviewer pool exists; near-zero = mismatch or opening
[Shape]   is your core a model/algorithm, a built system, or a measurement?
          -> model/algorithm leans INFOCOM; built-and-deployed leans SIGCOMM/NSDI
[Calendar] compare the next INFOCOM deadline (late July) with SIGCOMM/NSDI/MobiCom/journal dates
          -> route to the nearest honest fit rather than idling a year

Decision procedure

[Audience] who acts differently if the claim holds? -> network designers/operators/theorists?
[Claim type] analytical / protocol / wireless / measurement / learning-for-networking
[Axis] model-and-analyze -> INFOCOM; build-and-deploy -> SIGCOMM/NSDI; wireless system -> MobiCom
[Sibling check] protocol-focused -> ICNP; too long/incremental -> ToN/JSAC
[Verdict] INFOCOM main track / sibling venue / journal, with a one-line reason

Run this before the writing skills; a wrong venue decision wastes every later step. When the verdict

is INFOCOM, continue with infocom-workflow for the calendar and infocom-writing-style for the

paper shape.