Can you precise a little bit more why
you think draft 07 is USA centric? Mainly because of section 8.2 and section
9.1.2? other sections?
Regarding section 8.2, I don't fully
understand your expectation... Do you expect a few words on LON / Echelon,
ASHRAE... for instance?
Have a nice week-end & Best regards,
|Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont <at> fdupont.fr>
Envoyé par : Francis.Dupont <at> fdupont.fr
|gen-art <at> ietf.org
|jerald.p.martocci <at> jci.com, Nicolas Riou/FR/Schneider <at> Europe,
pieter.demil <at> intec.ugent.be, wouter <at> vooruit.be, adrian.farrel <at> huawei.com
|review of draft-ietf-roll-building-routing-reqs-07.txt
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 2009-09-29
IETF LC End Date: 2009-09-24
IESG Telechat date: unknown
Major issues: None
- 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)
- 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
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)
Francis.Dupont <at> fdupont.fr
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.