60-367 Computer Networks   Fall 2016


Instructor:    Dr. Robert D. Kent








Assignment Marking

Ikjot Saini




Assign/Lab:  3, 5, 6

David Mulatti    




Assign/Lab:   2, 4 + BONUS

NOTE:  GA Office Hours listed above will be held in ER3146.  All Group Lab exercises will be graded by GAs.  Students should contact them during office hours, or by email, to set up appointments for each Lab evaluation. 

Students should visit the GA noted above for marking assignment/labs according to number (see the table above).


Course Group Laboratory Assignments:  


The Group Lab Exercises for this course are aimed at practical application.  Students will form groups of 1-3 students each.  Each group will work to achieve all aspects of a set of problems that are described in each lab assignment file.  These problems will involve working with standard networking software tools, and may also require programming work for which the Java language (and packages) or Python will be suitable.  The project work should be completed by the stated due dates/weeks and arrangements made with the GA to present the work in sessions that must be accompanied by all students in the group.  Student marks for each group lab exercise are assigned on a group basis with the same mark assigned to each student in a group, unless the marker determines that significant differences exist in individual student comprehension and technical knowledge.


Assignment/Lab Number

Group Lab Exercise

Due date

Lab Exercise Files (PDF for download)

1 (no mark)

Introduction to Wireshark

Week 5




Week 6





Week 7





Week 8





Week 9



802.11 and SSL

Week 10




Labs below are optional and supplied for the interested students.  A bonus mark will be added to the total mark for students who successfully complete all or part of the labs.



Optional Bonus (2 marks)

Wireshark_DHCP_v7.0.pdf Wireshark_DNS_v7.0.pdf




Each lab exercise will be evaluated out of 5 marks, with 3 marks allocated to the entire group, and 2 marks allocated to each individual student within a group.  Evaluation is based on objective measures, including achieving correct and complete answers to questions and activities posed within each exercise and also posed during the evaluation interview with GA teaching staff.


The GAs will follow the procedures outlined below, provided as a guide to students:

(A) Group Mark (out of 3)

   3 - Group has completed most of the lab work and has provided answers to most (at least 80%) of the questions stated in the lab.  Very few mistakes are made.

   2 - Group has completed parts of the lab work in entirety, but is missing some portions of the work;  the group has provided answers to some of the questions (at least 65%) but not all.  Some mistakes are made but the majority of work is sound.

   1 - Group has completed only a small part of the lab work and has provided only some answers to a subset of questions asked (at least 35%).  Several mistakes are made.

   0 - Group has done very little or no work, has not provided answers to questions, mistakes are common.


(B) Individual Mark (out of 2)

   2 - The individual student is able to answer correctly the majority of questions asked during the evaluation meeting

   1 - The individual student is able to answer correctly at least one-half of the questions asked during the evaluation meeting.

   0 - The individual student is not able to answer questions completely or accurately and reflects a lack of understanding of theory and/or practice.


Course Research Essay:   Click Here – Research Essay.


The essay for this course is aimed at library research.  The student is required to research an advanced topic from a list provided by the instructor during the first week of lectures, write a detailed report, and submit the report in PDF, Word or OpenOffice compatible file formats to the instructor.  Each student must work independently and the mark for the research essay is assigned on an individual basis.  Plagiarism is absolutely forbidden and will result in a mark of zero (0).  Failure to properly use and cite references will result in significant penalties.


·     All essays will be marked by Dr. Kent.  The following brief description of evaluation is intended as a guide to students.

o     Marks of 9-10.    Student did excellent work, well organized, good spelling and grammar, narrowed topic coverage with details, definitions of all terms used, proper use of references and citations.

o     Marks of 7-8.5.   Student did good work, lacking in one or more of: organization, spelling and grammar, too broad a topic coverage, lacking details, definitions of terms used, inadequate or insufficient use of references.

o     Marks of 5-6.5.   Student did adequate work, but lacked organization, details, definitions, insufficient references, typically too high level and historical rather than a technical essay.

o     Marks of 0-4.9    Student did not engage the work in a manner that leads to understanding, lacked organization, details, definitions, insufficient references, typically too high level and historical, rather than a technical essay, confused statements and illogical conclusions.

Policy on cheating:

The professor and teaching assistants for 60-367 will put a great deal of effort into helping students to understand and to learn the material in the course.  However, they will not tolerate any form of cheating.


The professors and teaching assistants will report any case of cheating to the Director of the School of Computer Science.  If sufficient evidence is available, the Director will begin a formal process according to the University Senate Bylaws.  The instructor will not negotiate with students who are accused of cheating but will pass all information to the Director of the School of Computer Science.


The following behaviours will be regarded as cheating (together with other acts that would normally be regarded as cheating in the broad sense of the term):


·        Copying assignments

·        Allowing another student to copy an assignment from you and present it as their own work

·        Copying from another student during a test or exam

·        Referring to notes, textbooks, etc. during a test or exam

·        Talking during a test or an exam

·        Not sitting at the pre-assigned seat during a test or exam

·        Communicating with another student in any way during a test or exam

·        Having access to the exam/test paper prior to the exam/test

·        Asking a proctor for the answer to a question during an exam/test

·        Presenting another person’s work as your own

·        Using web resources and information without proper referencing and quotation indicators

·        Modifying answers after they have been marked

·        Any other behaviour which attempts unfairly to give you an advantage over other students in the grade-assessment process

·        Refusing to obey the instructions of the officer in charge of an examination.


Copyright 2016.  Dr. Robert D. Kent.  All rights reserved.  All content on this website is the responsibility of R. D. Kent.  Report all errors and problems to Dr. Kent.