imc-topic-selection

name	imc-topic-selection
description	Use when deciding whether an empirical networking project belongs at ACM IMC or should be routed to SIGCOMM, NSDI, CoNEXT, PAM, USENIX Security, WWW, or a journal, using the measurement-first test, the dataset/vantage-point lens, the ethics-gate check, and the two-deadline calendar.

IMC Topic Selection

Decide the venue before measuring. IMC — the ACM Internet Measurement Conference, sponsored by ACM SIGCOMM — is the home for work whose contribution is what it measured about the real Internet and how. A technically strong system whose measurement is a supporting evaluation is respected here and then routed to SIGCOMM or NSDI; a modest technique that reveals something real and new about the deployed network is IMC-shaped.

The measurement-first test

Ask: is the measurement the contribution, or the support?

• If the paper's lasting value is a finding about the Internet, a dataset/platform, or a measurement methodology, it is IMC-shaped.
• If the lasting value is a new system, protocol, or algorithm and the measurement merely evaluates it, it belongs at a systems venue. IMC will read a systems paper wearing a measurement title as out of scope.

The quick check: if you swapped the specific system for another and re-ran the study, would the measurement lesson about the network survive? If yes, it is a measurement paper.

Sibling-venue routing table

Signal in your project	Better home	Why
The contribution is a finding, dataset, or methodology about the real Internet	ACM IMC	The measurement flagship; ethics + availability + Replicability culture
A new system/protocol/architecture, evaluated with measurement	SIGCOMM / NSDI	Systems and networked-systems design flagships
A networked-systems design with a strong experimental component	CoNEXT	Networking systems and experiments
Focused active-measurement / methods work, often network-path or topology	PAM	Passive and Active Measurement — a measurement sibling
The core is an attack/defense or vulnerability, measurement in support	USENIX Security / CCS / NDSS	Security venues; measurement is a method there
The core is Web-platform or online-ecosystem measurement with a Web-community fit	WWW / IMC	Both plausible; choose by community and calendar
Study too large/longitudinal for a conference, or a dataset-first artifact	A journal (e.g., ToN, CCR) or a dataset venue	No conference page/scope ceiling; some offer dataset tracks

Contribution shapes IMC rewards

• Internet-wide measurement of an ecosystem — scanning or platform data revealing how a piece of infrastructure is really deployed and configured (the HTTPS-ecosystem lineage).
• Active measurement of deployed systems — probing real hosts/networks to quantify a property in the wild, done safely (the deployed-TCP-resilience lineage).
• Longitudinal empirical study — vantage-point analysis that changes what the community believes about how the Internet behaves (the email-security lineage).
• Methodology / instrument validity — auditing a measurement input or technique the field relies on (the top-lists lineage) — a distinctly prized IMC mode.
• Dataset / platform contribution — a reusable dataset or measurement platform with honest coverage analysis (the DoS-ecosystem lineage; the Community Contribution Award target).

The ethics-gate check (before you commit)

IMC's mandatory Ethics section and IRB/disclosure expectations are stricter than most systems venues. Before choosing IMC, confirm you can clear the gate:

• If the measurement touches human subjects or user data, can you obtain IRB approval/exemption in time?
• If it is active measurement, can you design it to be safe and provide opt-out?
• If it exposes vulnerabilities, will you commit to responsible disclosure?

A project that cannot clear the ethics gate is not IMC-ready regardless of fit (imc-experiments, imc-submission).

The two-deadline calendar as a routing input

IMC's two deadlines a year, plus the One-Shot-Revision path, make it unusually forgiving of timing: if your measurement will be ready for cycle 2 but a sibling venue's single deadline has passed, IMC may be the nearest honest fit. Compare the next IMC deadline against SIGCOMM/NSDI/CoNEXT/PAM dates and route to the nearest fit rather than waiting a year.

Cheap reconnaissance before committing

[Scope]     scan the last two IMC programs (dblp, sigcomm.org) for your subarea
            -> 3+ recent papers = a reviewer pool exists; 0 = opening or mismatch
[Citations] is your bibliography majority measurement venues (IMC/PAM/SIGCOMM-measurement)?
            -> majority systems/security => reviewers may read you as a visitor; frame accordingly
[Ethics]    can you clear the IRB/safety/disclosure gate before the deadline? -> if not, not IMC-ready
[Calendar]  compare the next IMC deadline (two/year) with sibling venues -> nearest honest fit

Decision procedure

[Contribution] finding-about-the-Internet / dataset / methodology / system?
[Measurement-first test] does the network lesson survive swapping the system? -> yes = IMC
[Sibling check] system core -> SIGCOMM/NSDI; attack/defense core -> Security; path/topology -> PAM
[Ethics gate] IRB/safety/disclosure clearable? -> if not, reconsider
[Calendar] nearest honest deadline among IMC's two cycles and siblings
[Verdict] IMC / 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 IMC, continue with imc-workflow for the calendar and imc-writing-style for the paper shape.