Document: draft-ietf-sip-mib-11
Reviewer: Harald Tveit Alvestrand
Date: August 9, 2006
Summary: Ready, a few nits.

In the eyes of someone who's not a SIP expert or a MIB expert, this 
document seems in good shape!

Nits found:

- In section 5.2, the section on assigning applName to SIP entities is 
consistently using RECOMMENDED and SHOULD, except this sentence:
       "for any combination of Proxy, Registrar, or Redirect Server being

      managed as a single aggregate entity, the applName value for the
      combined server entity MUST reflect the appropriate combination
      followed by a unique application instance identifier."

For consistency, perhaps use SHOULD?

The SIP-COMMON-MIB sipCommonCfgTable example on page 8 seems to have two rows of inconsistent type. Formatting error?

The naming of the sipCfgTimer* values seems singularly uninformative :-)

IANA question: the IANA section directs IANA to assign 4 numbers under mib-2 for the 4 component MIBs. Is this common practice,
or does one want to use mib-2.sip.sipTC, mib-2.sip.sipCommonMIB and so on - assigning one value for SIP mibs and indexing
the MIBs under that?

I'm happy with this either way, but would like to know that we're following current practice....