1 / 10

GEC 20 Proposal & GEC 18 Survey Results

GEC 20 Proposal & GEC 18 Survey Results. Sarah Edwards Marshall Brinn Niky Riga March 18, 2014. Why are we here?. Today we want to: brainstorm ways to make the GEC format better fit the needs of the community we hope to review a specific proposal for the GEC format.

armine
Download Presentation

GEC 20 Proposal & GEC 18 Survey Results

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GEC 20 Proposal &GEC 18 Survey Results Sarah Edwards Marshall Brinn Niky Riga March 18, 2014

  2. Why are we here? Today we want to: • brainstorm ways to make the GEC format better fit the needs of the community • we hope to review a specific proposal for the GEC format

  3. GEC 18 Survey Comments • Sent survey to GEC attendees after GEC18 • 78 people answered the survey • half were experimenters • quarter were newcomers • Most common comments: • More small group debugging/coding/hands-on • Most useful parts of GEC: • Hands-On Tutorials • Face-to-Face meetings (both networking and working on experiments/code) • Don’t start on a Sunday • A notable minority couldn’t attend all desired sessions • This was heavily biased towards experimenters

  4. Proposal Goals • Which parts of the conference could be better for each audience? • Experimenters -- more advanced tutorials & debugging • Operations – continue to keep on one day • Developers – space for small group work • Newcomers – move intro sequence earlier to allow attendance at more advanced tutorials • Clarify the “marketing” of the GEC agenda for these audiences • From GEC18 survey: More space for small group interactions • More “coding sprint” style sessions for experimenters & developers • Lightening talks?

  5. Proposed Rough Agenda

  6. SELECTED COMMENTS

  7. Format • “Smaller group coding sprints. Separate tutorials from other sessions to be able to attend them, something close to a single track conference. Flash talks on demos in the beginning of the conference to decide what I want to see. A roster of attendees will be handy for planning side meetings in advance.” • One comment: Longer breaks for when tutorials run late. • Lots of mention of OpenFlow (and conflicts with tutorials)

  8. Format • “The demo session is nice, but I found it impossible to get to talk to everyone -- and I tried! Maybe there could be a demo "track" (i.e., add another parallel track) in which people could give a technical talk, and do a demo (maybe give them a half hour to do so?).“ • “Please design day long session on a specific topics in each GEC. For example in GEC -19 : Python-Controller Design, GEC-20: OEDL /GIMI Thank you all.”

  9. Satisfying Multiple Audiences • “It feels like two different conferences now. One for learning to use GENI, and one that is the lowest common denominator among the attendees (using geni, running geni, building geni). So the larger sessions are almost meaningless. The focus on learning geni is good, maybe have a conference more devoted to that outreach. You're trying to do too much and one size no longer fits all.” • One comment: “The GECs seem either geared for newcomers, or for very experienced people with projects funded by the GPO. If you don't fall into either of those categories, it's not clear to me what sessions you should attend to be of the most value.” • “some sessions seemed geared more towards providing feedback to the GPO on the status of various projects”

  10. “Instead of speakers reporting on their experiences running other GENI-like efforts, I'd be more interested in listening to talks on the GENI architecture itself and challenges with managing it, i.e. problems that the community might be interested in doing research on and finding solutions for.”

More Related