is it interesting for the venue?
is it correct?
is it improving the state-of-the-art?
Title
✓ abstract,
✓ conclusions,
✓ scan references.
- Designing for understandability
- The Raft consensus algorithm
- 5.1 Raft basics
- 5.2 Leader election
- 5.3 Log replication
- 5.4 Safety
- 5.4.1 Election restriction
- 5.4.2 Committing entries from previous terms
- 5.4.3 Safety argument
- 5.5 Follower and candidate crashes
- 5.6 Timing and availability
- Cluster membership changes
What type of paper is this? A measure- ment paper? An analysis of an existing system? A description of a research prototype?
Which other papers is it related to? context
Do the assumptions appear to be valid? Correctness
Clarity
Well written? easy to follow
Are the mathematical formulas correct? Does the diagrams make sense? Are the axis graphs properly labeled? Relevant references
Based on: How to Read a Paper by S. Keshav, June 26, 2012