Thanks Francois,
Good to have your review.
Coming as it does, after both IETF last call and IESG review, we will try to
sort your comments by importance and pass them on as pointers to the RFC
Editor.
Cheers,
Adrian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Francis Dupont" <francis.dup...@fdupont.fr>
To: <gen-art@ietf.org>
Cc: <jerald.p.marto...@jci.com>; <nicolas.r...@fr.schneider-electric.com>;
<pieter.de...@intec.ugent.be>; <wou...@vooruit.be>;
<adrian.far...@huawei.com>
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 9:45 AM
Subject: review of draft-ietf-roll-building-routing-reqs-07.txt
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-roll-building-routing-reqs-07.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 2009-09-29
IETF LC End Date: 2009-09-24
IESG Telechat date: unknown
Summary: Ready
Major issues: None
Minor issues:
- IMHO the document is a bit USA centric (but it is not a problem
if it is stated in the document, for instance with a reference
from the (US) building automation community, cf 8.2 comment below)
Nits/editorial comments:
- the language of the document is not at the usual level (but at it
should be considered as better it is not a concern)
- 2 page 4, 5.1 and 5.1.1 page 12, 5.3 page 13, 5.4.1 and 5.4.2 page 14.
5.7.2 and 5.7.4 page 16, 5.7.7 page 17. 5.8.4 page 18, 9.2.1 page 20:
e.g. -> e.g.,
- 3.1 page 5: use the occasion to introduce the FMS abbrev, i.e.,
add "(MS)" after "facility management system"
- 4 page 10: the P in P2P (and MP2P / P2MP) is ambiguous:
it can stand for point and the point-to-point term usually
refers to link topology. I propose:
P2P -> (peer-to-peer, P2P)
(MP2P) -> (multi-peers-to-peer, MP2P)
(P2MP) -> (peer-to-multi-peers, P2MP)
- 4 page 10 and 5.4.3 page 14: acknowledgement -> acknowledgment
(for uniformity with the section title where this spelling is
enforced) (multiple occurrences)
- 5.1 page 11: no network knowledge -> no communication network knowledge
- 5.2.2 page 13: even it is also overloaded:
point-to-point -> end-to-end
- 5.4 page 14: i.e. -> i.e.,
- 5.4.3 page 14: 2000mah -> 2000mAh
- 5.7.6 page 17: msec -> ms
- 7 page 19: J. P. -> JP.
- 8.2 page 19: I'd really like to get a reference from the building
automation community: explaining networking to them or an introduction
for us (networking community) or both. I expect there are at least
some framework standards.
- 9.1.2 page 19: 2.4Ghz -> 2.4GHz
(BTW the ISM band text is very USA centric :-)
- 9.3.1 page 20: missing final '.'
- Authors' Addresses page 22: unfinished (???), add +1 for USA phone
number, -- -> - (and BTW try to use the same separator)
Regards
francis.dup...@fdupont.fr
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
