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)