sigcomm-topic-selection

SIGCOMM Topic Selection

Use this before writing, and before committing the single yearly deadline. SIGCOMM is the

broad networking flagship: it rewards a contribution to the design, measurement, or analysis

of networks and communication systems that is stated as a mechanism or architecture and

proven under realistic conditions. Reopen the current CFP's topic list before final

routing — emphasis drifts between editions.

Fit test

• Prefer SIGCOMM when the contribution is a networking-stack idea — a protocol, transport or

congestion mechanism, routing or forwarding architecture, data-center or wide-area fabric,

programmable-data-plane technique, network measurement result, or systems-for-networking

design — with evaluation on a testbed, trace, or deployment.

• The bar is a principle that travels, not a tuned deployment. A single-site tuning win

with no generalizable mechanism reads as under-contribution here even if the numbers are

good.

• Both tracks live under this bar: research wants design novelty and depth; experience

wants lessons only real operation at scale can teach.

Where else the work might belong

| Signal in the project | Better-fit venue | Why |

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

| Networked-systems build with heavy implementation, USENIX-style | NSDI | Design-and-implementation focus; two deadlines a year |

| Mobile, wireless, or physical-layer / RF mechanism | MobiCom (or SIGMOBILE venues) | Over-the-air and device evidence is that community's core |

| Solid networking result, but incremental for the flagship | CoNEXT | SIGCOMM's sister venue for strong but narrower contributions |

| Pure Internet/traffic measurement with no new mechanism | IMC | Measurement-methodology venue; SIGCOMM wants measurement to motivate a mechanism |

| Performance modeling / analysis as the contribution | SIGMETRICS | Analytical and evaluation-method emphasis |

| OS/storage/distributed-systems core, networking secondary | OSDI / SOSP | Systems-first framing |

The routing that trips people up

SIGCOMM and NSDI overlap heavily, and authors agonize over the split. A workable heuristic:

if the paper's spine is a **networking abstraction, protocol, or measurement-driven design

argument, it leans SIGCOMM; if the spine is a built-and-deployed system whose value is in

the engineering and implementation**, it leans NSDI. Neither is a rule — strong papers cross

the line both ways — but the single SIGCOMM deadline means a misroute costs a year, so decide

deliberately. IMC is the other frequent confusion: a measurement paper needs a **mechanism or

a design implication** to be SIGCOMM rather than IMC.

Vignette: where a congestion-control result goes

A project proposes a new congestion signal and shows it cuts tail flow-completion time on a

data-center testbed. SIGCOMM reading: strong fit — a transport mechanism with tail

evidence under realistic traffic is the house genre (compare DCTCP and pFabric in the

exemplars). Strip the mechanism and keep only a measurement of how badly today's schemes

behave, and it drifts toward IMC; rebuild it as a fully implemented, deployed RPC stack whose

contribution is the system, and NSDI becomes competitive. Same core, three homes.

Sharpening moves before committing

• Name the mechanism in one sentence: the protocol change, the architectural shift, or

the measured invariant. If no mechanism exists, the SIGCOMM framing does not exist either.

• Decide the track honestly and early; the experience track is a strength for real

deployments, not a demotion.

• Confirm the evaluation can reach testbed, trace, or deployment evidence, not

simulation only; simulation-only fabric claims are a quiet fit failure at this venue.

• Weigh the one-deadline cost: if the result is a year from convincing, plan the year

rather than gambling the single February slot.

Output format

[Fit] strong SIGCOMM / possible SIGCOMM / better elsewhere
[Track] research / experience / n-a
[Best venue] SIGCOMM / NSDI / MobiCom / CoNEXT / IMC / SIGMETRICS / other
[Mechanism sentence] <one sentence naming the networking contribution>
[Top rejection risk] <novelty / evidence realism / measurement-only / scope>
[Next action] <mechanism, evaluation, framing, or venue switch>