Raw review as receive for the submitted version - notes TBA

Acceptance Note

On behalf of the entire Technical Program Committee of the 17th
International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks
(ICCCN 2008), it is our pleasure to inform you that 
your paper

XXXXXX
A Light Weight Method for Maintaining Clock Synchronization for Networked Systems

has been accepted for presentation at the conference. 

The reviews are below or can be found at XXXX, using your EDAS user
name .

This year, ICCCN 2008 received a record number of 399 submissions across
all the conference tracks. Each paper went through a rigorous review
process (led by the Track Chairs of the respective tracks) and almost
all papers received 3+ independent reviews. After a careful selection
phase, 104 papers were accepted for presentation at the
conference. The acceptance ratio for the conference was thus 26%. Detailed
information regarding your presentation schedule will be available as part 
of the technical program on the conference website shortly.

Review 1

====== TPC Review 1 =======

*** Recommendation: Your overall rating.
Likely accept   (top 25% but not top 15%, significant contribution) (4)

*** Contributions: What are the major issues addressed in the paper? Do you consider them important? Comment on the degree of novelty, creativity, impact, and technical depth in the paper.

- Clock synchronization has always appeared as an important problem in networks and distributed systems.
- This paper proposes to reduce the frequency of synchronization by using a linear regression obtained during a training sequence.
- This makes the solution very interesting for wireless ad hoc and sensor networks

*** Strengths: What are the major reasons to accept the paper? [Be brief.]

- This paper proposes to reduce the frequency of synchronization by using a linear regression obtained during a training sequence.
- This makes the solution very interesting for wireless ad hoc and sensor networks

*** Weakness: What are the most important reasons NOT to accept the paper? [Be brief.]

- None. 

- However the paper would be improved by inserting a new section dealing more explicitly with wireless ad hoc and sensor networks and their specificities: high dynamicity in topology, traffic, interferences, limited network resources...

*** Detailed Comments: Please provide detailed comments that will be helpful to the TPC for assessing the paper. Also provide feedback to the authors.

- In Section II, could you explain when you use the results provided by the linear regression: at which period does a node adjust its clock (without synchronization provided by the ground truth system)?

- It seems that in your experiments you have not considered adversary conditions that are usual in wireless ad hoc and sensor networks: medium access contention, radio interferences, high variability of traffic.
It would be interesting to add a new section dealing explicitly with these networks and presenting results for these types of networks in adversary conditions.

Review 2

======= TPC Review 2 =======

*** Recommendation: Your overall rating.
Accept if room  (top 35% but not top 25%, borderline for ICCCN) (3)

*** Contributions: What are the major issues addressed in the paper? Do you consider them important? Comment on the degree of novelty, creativity, impact, and technical depth in the paper.

This paper presents a light weight technique to maintain clock synchronization for networked systems. The basic idea is interesting and may contribute in the field.

*** Strengths: What are the major reasons to accept the paper? [Be brief.]

The work is solid.

*** Weakness: What are the most important reasons NOT to accept the paper? [Be brief.]

Application issues have not been discussed.

*** Detailed Comments: Please provide detailed comments that will be helpful to the TPC for assessing the paper. Also provide feedback to the authors.

The proposed technique for maintaining clock synchronization between networked systems has been well conceived with experimental evaluation. Teh work is solid.

Application issues based on further experiments in practical environments are highly expected to be addressed.

Review 3

======= TPC Review 3 =======

*** Recommendation: Your overall rating.
Likely accept   (top 25% but not top 15%, significant contribution) (4)

*** Contributions: What are the major issues addressed in the paper? Do you consider them important? Comment on the degree of novelty, creativity, impact, and technical depth in the paper.

The authors present a light weight technique for correcting for clock drift between systems that will allow for millisecond accuracy during long periods of time.

*** Strengths: What are the major reasons to accept the paper? [Be brief.]

Applicable research.

*** Weakness: What are the most important reasons NOT to accept the paper? [Be brief.]

I recommend acceptance.

*** Detailed Comments: Please provide detailed comments that will be helpful to the TPC for assessing the paper. Also provide feedback to the authors.

The authors might also consider to refer to the following two papers:

Konrad Iwanicki , Maarten van Steen  and Spyros Voulgaris, 
"Gossip-Based Clock Synchronization for Large Decentralized Systems",  
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer Berlin / Heidelberg,  
Vol.3996/2006. 

"Clock synchronization for wireless sensor networks: a survey",  
Bharath Sundararaman, Ugo Buy,  and Ajay D. Kshemkalyani , 
Ad Hoc Networks, Vol. 3, Issue 3, May 2005, pp. 281-323.