Instructor: Dr.
Robert D. Kent
TEACHING ASSISTANTS:
GA |
Days |
Time |
Email |
Assignment Marking |
Ikjot Saini |
Tuesday |
3:00pm-5:00pm |
saini11s@uwindsor.ca |
Assign/Lab: 3, 5, 6 |
David Mulatti |
Thursday |
3:00pm-5:00pm |
mulatti@uwindsor.ca |
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). |
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 |
|
2 |
TCP and UDP |
Week 6 |
|
3 |
HTTP and NAT |
Week 7 |
|
4 |
ICMP and IP |
Week 8 |
|
5 |
Ethernet |
Week 9 |
|
6 |
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. |
||
|
DHCP and DNS |
Optional Bonus (2 marks) |
Evaluation:
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.
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.
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.