please find attached my comments on your very nice paper. as you will see most of them are minor -- it is clear that you already put in a lot of work in this paper. great job! ...and let me know if any of my comments don't make sense...

*** Thanks, Fabian.  I incorporated most of your very useful comments!  

I put in my defintion for sub-mm: 300-1000um.  I also added my version of "far-infared": 40-300um, and thus I think it's safe to keep my statement that the far-ir/submm sky emission mostly comes from MW cirrus and background galaxies.

I didn't work in your LABOCA/APEX suggestion, as that sentence and its references focus on the gap *between* 160-170 and 850-870um.  I could add references for galaxy work done at 160-170 and 850-870um, but that list would be long.  But I have changed "850" here to "850-870" to indirectly include LABOCA in that sentence.

You ask how I calculated the percentage agreement between MIPS and PACS.  I say in the text that I carried out an error-weighted average; though the scatter seems large, the contribution of the most uncertain points (which provide the largest scatter) carries less weight.  Another way to look at it: though the scatter may be large, the average is still close to the expected value.

The error bars for, e.g., the last figure, are small (~size of the symbol), and so I don't include them.