-
-
-
-
-
-
INTERNET-DRAFT Editor: Kurt D. Zeilenga
Intended Category: Standard Track OpenLDAP Foundation
-Expires in six months 27 October 2003
+Expires in six months 24 October 2004
Obsoletes: RFC 2251, RFC 2252, RFC 2256
+
LDAP: Directory Information Models
- <draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09.txt>
+ <draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12.txt>
+
Status of this Memo
- This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all
- provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
This document is intended to be published as a Standard Track RFC.
Distribution of this memo is unlimited. Technical discussion of this
document will take place on the IETF LDAP Revision Working Group
mailing list <ietf-ldapbis@openldap.org>. Please send editorial
- comments directly to the author <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>.
+ comments directly to the editor <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>.
+
+
+ By submitting this Internet-Draft, I accept the provisions of Section
+ 4 of RFC 3667. By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any
+ applicable patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been
+ disclosed, or will be disclosed, and any of which I become aware will
+ be disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668.
+
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task
- Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
+ Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
+
+
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
- time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
- material or to cite them other than as ``work in progress.''
+ time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material
+ or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
+
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
- <http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt>. The list of
+ <http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt>. The list of
Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
<http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html>.
- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
+
+ Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.
+
Please see the Full Copyright section near the end of this document
for more information.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 1]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
Abstract
+
The Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) is an Internet
protocol for accessing distributed directory services which act in
accordance with X.500 data and service models. This document
describes the X.500 Directory Information Models, as used in LDAP.
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 1]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
Table of Contents
+
Status of this Memo 1
- Abstract
- Table of Contents 2
+ Abstract 2
+ Table of Contents
1. Introduction 3
1.1. Relationship to Other LDAP Specifications
1.2. Relationship to X.501 4
1.4. Common ABNF Productions
2. Model of Directory User Information 6
2.1. The Directory Information Tree 7
- 2.2. Naming of Entries
- 2.3. Structure of an Entry 8
+ 2.2. Structure of an Entry
+ 2.3. Naming of Entries 8
2.4. Object Classes 9
- 2.5. Attribute Descriptions 11
+ 2.5. Attribute Descriptions 12
2.6. Alias Entries 15
3. Directory Administrative and Operational Information 17
3.1. Subtrees
3.2. Subentries
3.3. The 'objectClass' attribute 18
- 3.4. Operational attributes
- 4. Directory Schema 21
- 4.1. Schema Definitions 22
- 4.2. Subschema Subentries 31
- 4.3. 'extensibleObject' 34
- 4.4. Subschema Discovery 35
- 5. DSA (Server) Informational Model
- 5.1. Server-specific Data Requirements 36
+ 3.4. Operational attributes 19
+ 4. Directory Schema 20
+ 4.1. Schema Definitions 23
+ 4.2. Subschema Subentries 30
+ 4.3. 'extensibleObject' 35
+ 4.4. Subschema Discovery
+ 5. DSA (Server) Informational Model 36
+ 5.1. Server-specific Data Requirements
6. Other Considerations 39
- 6.1. Preservation of User Information
+ 6.1. Preservation of User Information 40
6.2. Short Names
- 6.3. Cache and Shadowing 40
+ 6.3. Cache and Shadowing 41
7. Implementation Guidelines
7.1. Server Guidelines
- 7.2. Client Guidelines 41
- 8. Security Considerations
+ 7.2. Client Guidelines
+ 8. Security Considerations 42
9. IANA Considerations
- 10. Acknowledgments 42
- 11. Author's Address
- 12. References 43
- 12.1. Normative References
- 12.2. Informative References 44
- Appendix A. Changes
- A.1 Changes to RFC 2251 44
- A.2 Changes to RFC 2252 46
- A.3 Changes to RFC 2256 48
- Intellectual Property Rights
+ 10. Acknowledgments 43
+ 11. Editor's Address
+ 12. References 44
+
Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 2]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
- Full Copyright 49
+ 12.1. Normative References
+ 12.2. Informative References 45
+ Appendix A. Changes
+ Intellectual Property Rights 50
+ Full Copyright
+
1. Introduction
+
This document discusses the X.500 Directory Information Models
[X.501], as used by the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP)
[Roadmap].
+
The Directory is "a collection of open systems cooperating to provide
directory services" [X.500]. The information held in the Directory is
collectively known as the Directory Information Base (DIB). A
servers (or Directory System Agents (DSA)). A server holds a fragment
of the DIB.
+
The DIB contains two classes of information:
+
1) user information (e.g., information provided and administrated
by users). Section 2 describes the Model of User Information.
+
2) administrative and operational information (e.g., information
used to administer and/or operate the directory). Section 3
describes the model of Directory Administrative and Operational
Information.
+
These two models, referred to as the generic Directory Information
Models, describe how information is represented in the Directory.
These generic models provide a framework for other information models.
Section 4 discusses the subschema information model and subschema
discovery. Section 5 discusses the DSA (Server) Informational Model.
- Other X.500 information models, such as access control, collective
- attribute, distribution knowledge, and replication knowledge
- information models, may be adapted for use in LDAP. Specification of
- how these models apply to LDAP is left to future documents.
+
+ Other X.500 information models, such as access control distribution
+ knowledge, and replication knowledge information models, may be
+ adapted for use in LDAP. Specification of how these models apply to
+ LDAP is left to future documents.
+
1.1. Relationship to Other LDAP Specifications
+
This document is a integral part of the LDAP technical specification
[Roadmap] which obsoletes the previously defined LDAP technical
- specification, RFC 3377, in its entirety.
- This document obsoletes RFC 2251 sections 3.2 and 3.4, as well as
- portions of sections 4 and 6. Appendix A.1 summaries changes to these
Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 3]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+ specification, RFC 3377, in its entirety.
+
+
+ This document obsoletes RFC 2251 sections 3.2 and 3.4, as well as
+ portions of sections 4 and 6. Appendix A.1 summaries changes to these
sections. The remainder of RFC 2251 is obsoleted by the [Protocol],
[AuthMeth], and [Roadmap] documents.
+
This document obsoletes RFC 2252 sections 4, 5 and 7. Appendix A.2
summaries changes to these sections. The remainder of RFC 2252 is
obsoleted by [Syntaxes].
+
This document obsoletes RFC 2256 sections 5.1, 5.2, 7.1 and 7.2.
Appendix A.3 summarizes changes to these sections. The remainder of
RFC 2256 is obsoleted by [Schema] and [Syntaxes].
+
1.2. Relationship to X.501
- This document includes material, with and without adaptation, from the
+
+ This document includes material, with and without adaptation, from
[X.501]. The material in this document takes precedence over that in
[X.501].
+
1.3. Conventions
+
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119].
+
Schema definitions are provided using LDAP description formats (as
defined in Section 4.1). Definitions provided here are formatted
(line wrapped) for readability. Matching rules and LDAP syntaxes
referenced in these definitions are specified in [Syntaxes].
+
1.4. Common ABNF Productions
+
A number of syntaxes in this document are described using Augmented
Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) [RFC2234]. These syntaxes (as well as a
number of syntaxes defined in other documents) rely on the following
common productions:
+
keystring = leadkeychar *keychar
leadkeychar = ALPHA
keychar = ALPHA / DIGIT / HYPHEN
+ number = DIGIT / ( LDIGIT 1*DIGIT )
- number = DIGIT / ( LDIGIT 1*DIGIT )
- ALPHA = %x41-5A / %x61-7A ; "A"-"Z" / "a"-"z"
- DIGIT = %x30 / LDIGIT ; "0"-"9"
- LDIGIT = %x31-39 ; "1"-"9"
+ ALPHA = %x41-5A / %x61-7A ; "A"-"Z" / "a"-"z"
Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 4]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
- HEX = DIGIT / %x41-46 / %x61-66 ; 0-9 / A-F / a-f
-
- SP = 1*SPACE ; one or more " "
- WSP = 0*SPACE ; zero or more " "
-
- NULL = %x00 ; null (0)
- SPACE = %x20 ; space (" ")
- DQUOTE = %x22 ; quote (""")
- SHARP = %x23 ; octothorpe (or sharp sign) ("#")
- DOLLAR = %x24 ; dollar sign ("$")
- SQUOTE = %x27 ; single quote ("'")
- LPAREN = %x28 ; left paren ("(")
- RPAREN = %x29 ; right paren (")")
- PLUS = %x2B ; plus sign ("+")
- COMMA = %x2C ; comma (",")
- HYPHEN = %x2D ; hyphen ("-")
- DOT = %x2E ; period (".")
- SEMI = %x3B ; semicolon (";")
- LANGLE = %x3C ; left angle bracket ("<")
- EQUALS = %x3D ; equals sign ("=")
- RANGLE = %x3E ; right angle bracket (">")
- X = %x58 ; uppercase x ("X")
- ESC = %x5C ; backslash ("\")
- USCORE = %x5F ; underscore ("_")
- LCURLY = %x7B ; left curly brace "{"
- RCURLY = %x7D ; right curly brace "}"
-
- ; Any UTF-8 character
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+ DIGIT = %x30 / LDIGIT ; "0"-"9"
+ LDIGIT = %x31-39 ; "1"-"9"
+ HEX = DIGIT / %x41-46 / %x61-66 ; "0"-"9" / "A"-"F" / "a"-"f"
+
+
+ SP = 1*SPACE ; one or more " "
+ WSP = 0*SPACE ; zero or more " "
+
+
+ NULL = %x00 ; null (0)
+ SPACE = %x20 ; space (" ")
+ DQUOTE = %x22 ; quote (""")
+ SHARP = %x23 ; octothorpe (or sharp sign) ("#")
+ DOLLAR = %x24 ; dollar sign ("$")
+ SQUOTE = %x27 ; single quote ("'")
+ LPAREN = %x28 ; left paren ("(")
+ RPAREN = %x29 ; right paren (")")
+ PLUS = %x2B ; plus sign ("+")
+ COMMA = %x2C ; comma (",")
+ HYPHEN = %x2D ; hyphen ("-")
+ DOT = %x2E ; period (".")
+ SEMI = %x3B ; semicolon (";")
+ LANGLE = %x3C ; left angle bracket ("<")
+ EQUALS = %x3D ; equals sign ("=")
+ RANGLE = %x3E ; right angle bracket (">")
+ ESC = %x5C ; backslash ("\")
+ USCORE = %x5F ; underscore ("_")
+ LCURLY = %x7B ; left curly brace "{"
+ RCURLY = %x7D ; right curly brace "}"
+
+
+ ; Any UTF-8 [UTF-8] encoded Unicode [Unicode] character
UTF8 = UTF1 / UTFMB
UTFMB = UTF2 / UTF3 / UTF4
UTF0 = %x80-BF
UTF4 = %xF0 %x90-BF 2(UTF0) / %xF1-F3 3(UTF0) /
%xF4 %x80-8F 2(UTF0)
- ; Any octet
- OCTET = %x00-FF
- Object identifiers (OIDs) [X.680] are represented in LDAP using a dot-
- decimal format conforming to the ABNF:
+ OCTET = %x00-FF ; Any octet (8-bit data unit)
+
+
+ Object identifiers (OIDs) [X.680] are represented in LDAP using a
+ dot-decimal format conforming to the ABNF:
+
+
+ numericoid = number 1*( DOT number )
- numericoid = number *( DOT number )
Short names, also known as descriptors, are used as more readable
aliases for object identifiers. Short names are case insensitive and
+
Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 5]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
conform to the ABNF:
+
descr = keystring
+
Where either an object identifier or a short name may be specified,
the following production is used:
+
oid = descr / numericoid
+
While the <descr> form is generally preferred when the usage is
restricted to short names referring to object identifiers which
identify like kinds of objects (e.g., attribute type descriptions,
identify multiple kinds of objects or when an unambiguous short name
(descriptor) is not available.
- When the <descr> form is used, the representation SHALL be considered
- invalid if the usage is not restricted as discussed above or the
- implementation cannot determine unambiguously which object identifier
- the <descr> refers to.
+
+ Implementations SHOULD treat short names (descriptors) used in an
+ ambiguous manner (as discussed above) as unrecognized.
+
Short Names (descriptors) are discussed further in Section 6.2.
+
2. Model of Directory User Information
+
As [X.501] states:
+
The purpose of the Directory is to hold, and provide access to,
information about objects of interest (objects) in some 'world'.
An object can be anything which is identifiable (can be named).
+
An object class is an identified family of objects, or conceivable
objects, which share certain characteristics. Every object belongs
to at least one class. An object class may be a subclass of other
the superclasses. There may be subclasses of subclasses, etc., to
an arbitrary depth.
+
A directory entry, a named collection of information, is the basic
unit of information held in the Directory. There are multiple kinds
of directory entries.
+
An object entry represents a particular object. An alias entry
provides alternative naming. A subentry holds administrative and/or
operational information.
+ The set of entries representing the DIB are organized hierarchically
+
+
+
Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 6]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
- The set of entries representing the DIB are organized hierarchically
in a tree structure known as the Directory Information Tree (DIT).
+
Section 2.1 describes the Directory Information Tree
- Section 2.2 discusses naming of entries.
- Section 2.3 discusses the structure of entries.
+ Section 2.2 discusses the structure of entries.
+ Section 2.3 discusses naming of entries.
Section 2.4 discusses object classes.
Section 2.5 discusses attribute descriptions.
Section 2.6 discusses alias entries.
+
2.1. The Directory Information Tree
+
As noted above, the DIB is composed of a set of entries organized
hierarchically in a tree structure known as the Directory Information
Tree (DIT). Specifically, a tree where vertices are the entries.
+
The arcs between vertices define relations between entries. If an arc
exists from X to Y, then the entry at X is the immediate superior of Y
and Y is the immediate subordinate of X. An entry's superiors are the
entry's immediate superior and its superiors. An entry's subordinates
are all of its immediate subordinates and their subordinates.
+
Similarly, the superior/subordinate relationship between object
entries can be used to derive a relation between the objects they
represent. DIT structure rules can be used to govern relationships
between objects.
+
Note: An entry's immediate superior is also known as the entry's
parent and an entry's immediate subordinate is also known as the
entry's child. Entries which have the same parent are known as
siblings.
-2.2. Naming of Entries
-2.2.1. Relative Distinguished Names
+2.2. Structure of an Entry
+
+
+ An entry consists of a set of attributes which hold information about
+ the object which the entry represents. Some attributes represent user
+ information and are called user attributes. Other attributes
+ represent operational and/or administrative information and are called
+ operational attributes.
+
+
+ An attribute is an attribute description (a type and zero or more
+ options) with one or more associated values. An attribute is often
+ referred to by its attribute description. For example, the
+ 'givenName' attribute is the attribute which consists of the attribute
+ description 'givenName' (the 'givenName' attribute type [Schema] and
+ zero options) and one or more associated values.
+
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 7]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+ The attribute type governs whether the attribute can have multiple
+ values, the syntax and matching rules used to construct and compare
+ values of that attribute, and other functions. Options indicate
+ subtypes and other functions.
+
+
+ Attribute values conform to the defined syntax of the attribute type.
+
+
+ No two values of an attribute may be equivalent. Two values are
+ considered equivalent only if they would match according to the
+ equality matching rule of the attribute type. If the attribute type
+ is defined with no equality matching rule, two values are equivalent
+ if and only if they are identical. (See 2.5.1 for other
+ restrictions.)
+
+
+ For example, a 'givenName' attribute can have more than one value,
+ they must be Directory Strings, and they are case insensitive. A
+ 'givenName' attribute cannot hold both "John" and "JOHN" as these are
+ equivalent values per the equality matching rule of the attribute
+ type.
+
+
+ When an attribute is used for naming of the entry, one and only one
+ value of the attribute is used in forming the Relative Distinguished
+ Name. This value is known as a distinguished value.
+
+
+
+2.3. Naming of Entries
+
+
+2.3.1. Relative Distinguished Names
+
Each entry is named relative to its immediate superior. This relative
name, known as its Relative Distinguished Name (RDN) [X.501], is
composed of an unordered set of one or more attribute value assertions
(AVA) consisting of an attribute description with zero options and an
- attribute value. These AVAs are chosen from the attributes of the
- entry.
+ attribute value. These AVAs are chosen to match attribute values
+ (each a distinguished value) of the entry.
+
An entry's relative distinguished name must be unique among all
immediate subordinates of the entry's immediate superior (i.e., all
siblings).
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 7]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+ The following are examples of string representations of RDNs [LDAPDN]:
- The following are example string representations of RDNs [LDAPDN]:
UID=12345
OU=Engineering
CN=Kurt Zeilenga+L=Redwood Shores
+
The last is an example of a multi-valued RDN. That is, an RDN
composed of multiple AVAs.
-2.2.2. Distinguished Names
- An entry's fully qualified name, known as its Distinguished Name (DN)
- [X.501], is the concatenation of its RDN and its immediate superior's
- DN. A Distinguished Name unambiguously refers to an entry in the
- tree. The following are example string representations of DNs
- [LDAPDN]:
-
- UID=nobody@example.com,DC=example,DC=com
- CN=John Smith,OU=Sales,O=ACME Limited,L=Moab,ST=Utah,C=US
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 8]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
-2.2.3. Alias Names
- An alias, or alias name, is "an name for an object, provided by the
- use of alias entries" [X.501]. Alias entries are described in Section
- 2.6.
+2.3.2. Distinguished Names
-2.3. Structure of an Entry
- An entry consists of a set of attributes which hold information about
- the object which entry represents. Some attributes represent user
- information and are called user attributes. Other attributes
- represent operational and/or administrative information and are called
- operational attributes.
+ An entry's fully qualified name, known as its Distinguished Name (DN)
+ [X.501], is the concatenation of its RDN and its immediate superior's
+ DN. A Distinguished Name unambiguously refers to an entry in the
+ tree. The following are examples of string representations of DNs
+ [LDAPDN]:
- An attribute is an attribute description (a type and zero or more
- options) with one or more associated values. An attribute is often
- referred to by its attribute description. For example, the
- 'givenName' attribute is the attribute which consists of the attribute
- description 'givenName' (the 'givenName' attribute type [Schema] and
- zero options) and one or more associated values.
- The attribute type governs whether the attribute can have multiple
- values, the syntax and matching rules used to construct and compare
- values of that attribute, and other functions. Options indicate
- subtypes and other functions. No two values of an attribute may be
- equivalent.
+ UID=nobody@example.com,DC=example,DC=com
+ CN=John Smith,OU=Sales,O=ACME Limited,L=Moab,ST=Utah,C=US
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 8]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+2.3.3. Alias Names
- Two values are considered equivalent if they would match according to
- the equality matching rule of the attribute type. If the attribute
- type is defined with no equality matching rule, two values are
- equivalent if and only if they are identical.
+ An alias, or alias name, is "an name for an object, provided by the
+ use of alias entries" [X.501]. Alias entries are described in Section
+ 2.6.
- For example, the 'givenName' attribute can have can have more than one
- value, they must be Directory Strings, and they are case insensitive.
- The 'givenName' attribute cannot hold both "John" and "JOHN" as these
- are equivalent values per the equality matching rule of the attribute
- type.
2.4. Object Classes
+
An object class is "an identified family of objects (or conceivable
objects) which share certain characteristics" [X.501].
+
As defined in [X.501]:
+
Object classes are used in the Directory for a number of purposes:
+
- describing and categorising objects and the entries that
correspond to these objects;
+
- where appropriate, controlling the operation of the Directory;
+
- regulating, in conjunction with DIT structure rule
specifications, the position of entries in the DIT;
+
- regulating, in conjunction with DIT content rule
specifications, the attributes that are contained in entries;
+
- identifying classes of entry that are to be associated with a
particular policy by the appropriate administrative authority.
+
An object class (a subclass) may be derived from an object class
(its direct superclass) which is itself derived from an even more
generic object class. For structural object classes, this process
2.4.1). An ordered set of superclasses up to the most superior
object class of an object class is its superclass chain.
- An object class may be derived from two or more direct
- superclasses (superclasses not part of the same superclass chain).
- This feature of subclassing is termed multiple inheritance.
-
- Each object class identifies the set of attributes required to be
- present in entries belonging to the class and the set of attributes
Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 9]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+ An object class may be derived from two or more direct
+ superclasses (superclasses not part of the same superclass chain).
+ This feature of subclassing is termed multiple inheritance.
+ Each object class identifies the set of attributes required to be
+ present in entries belonging to the class and the set of attributes
allowed to be present in entries belonging to the class. As an entry
of a class must meet the requirements of each class it belongs to, it
can be said that an object class inherits the sets of allowed and
attribute allowed by its superclass as being required. If an
attribute is a member of both sets, it is required to be present.
+
Each object class is defined to be one of three kinds of object
classes: Abstract, Structural, or Auxiliary.
+
Each object class is identified by an object identifier (OID) and,
optionally, one or more short names (descriptors).
+
2.4.1. Abstract Object Classes
+
An abstract object class, as the name implies, provides a base of
characteristics from which other object classes can be defined to
inherit from. An entry cannot belong to an abstract object class
unless it belongs to a structural or auxiliary class which inherits
from that abstract class.
+
Abstract object classes can not derive from structural nor auxiliary
object classes.
+
All structural object classes derive (directly or indirectly) from the
'top' abstract object class. Auxiliary object classes do not
necessarily derive from 'top'.
+
+ The following is the object class definition (see Section 4.1.1) for
+ the 'top' object class:
+
+
( 2.5.6.0 NAME 'top' ABSTRACT MUST objectClass )
+
All entries belong to the 'top' abstract object class.
+
2.4.2. Structural Object Classes
+
As stated in [X.501]:
+
An object class defined for use in the structural specification of
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 10]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
the DIT is termed a structural object class. Structural object
classes are used in the definition of the structure of the names
of the objects for compliant entries.
+
An object or alias entry is characterised by precisely one
structural object class superclass chain which has a single
structural object class as the most subordinate object class.
object class of the entry.
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 10]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
Structural object classes are related to associated entries:
+
- an entry conforming to a structural object class shall
represent the real-world object constrained by the object
class;
+
- DIT structure rules only refer to structural object classes;
the structural object class of an entry is used to specify the
position of the entry in the DIT;
+
- the structural object class of an entry is used, along with an
associated DIT content rule, to control the content of an
entry.
+
The structural object class of an entry shall not be changed.
+
Each structural object class is a (direct or indirect) subclass of the
'top' abstract object class.
+
Structural object classes cannot subclass auxiliary object classes.
+
Each entry is said to belong to its structural object class as well as
- all classes in its structural object class's superclass chain, which
- always includes 'top'.
+ all classes in its structural object class's superclass chain.
+
2.4.3. Auxiliary Object Classes
- Auxiliary object classes are used augment the characteristics of
+
+ Auxiliary object classes are used to augment the characteristics of
entries. They are commonly used to augment the sets of attributes
- required and allowed attributes to be present in an entry. They can
- be used to describe entries or classes of entries.
+ required and allowed to be present in an entry. They can be used to
+ describe entries or classes of entries.
+
Auxiliary object classes cannot subclass structural object classes.
+
An entry can belong to any subset of the set of auxiliary object
- classes allowed by the DIT content rule associated with structural
+ classes allowed by the DIT content rule associated with the structural
object class of the entry. If no DIT content rule is associated with
the structural object class of the entry, the entry cannot belong to
- any auxiliary object class.
- The set of auxiliary object classes which an entry belongs to can
- change over time.
-2.5. Attribute Descriptions
- An attribute description is composed of an attribute type (see Section
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 11]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 11]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+ any auxiliary object class.
- 2.5.1) and a set of zero or more attribute options (see Section
+ The set of auxiliary object classes which an entry belongs to can
+ change over time.
+
+
+
+2.5. Attribute Descriptions
+
+
+ An attribute description is composed of an attribute type (see Section
+ 2.5.1) and a set of zero or more attribute options (see Section
2.5.2).
+
An attribute description is represented by the ABNF:
- attributedescription = attributetype options
+ attributedescription = attributetype options
attributetype = oid
-
options = *( SEMI option )
-
option = 1*keychar
+
where <attributetype> identifies the attribute type and each <option>
identifies an attribute option. Both <attributetype> and <option>
productions are case insensitive. The order in which <option>s appear
is irrelevant. That is, any two <attributedescription>s which consist
of the same <attributetype> and same set of <option>s are equivalent.
+
Examples of valid attribute descriptions:
+
2.5.4.0
cn;lang-de;lang-en
owner
- An attribute description which consisting of an unrecognized attribute
- type is to be treated as unrecognized. Servers SHALL treat an
- attribute description with an unrecognized attribute option as
- unrecognized. Clients MAY treat an unrecognized attribute option as a
- tagging option (see Section 2.5.2.1).
+
+ An attribute description with an unrecognized attribute type is to be
+ treated as unrecognized. Servers SHALL treat an attribute description
+ with an unrecognized attribute option as unrecognized. Clients MAY
+ treat an unrecognized attribute option as a tagging option (see
+ Section 2.5.2.1).
+
All attributes of an entry must have distinct attribute descriptions.
+
2.5.1. Attribute Types
+
An attribute type governs whether the attribute can have multiple
values, the syntax and matching rules used to construct and compare
values of that attribute, and other functions.
- The attribute type indicates whether the attribute is a user attribute
- or an operational attribute. If operational, the attribute type
- indicates the operational usage and whether the attribute can
- modifiable by users or not. Operational attributes discussed in
- Section 3.4.
- An attribute type (a subtype) may derive from another attribute type
- (a direct supertype). The subtype inherits the matching rules and
+ If no equality matching is specified for the attribute type:
+ - the attribute (of the type) cannot be used for naming;
+
Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 12]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+ - when adding the attribute (or replacing all values), no two values
+ may be equivalent (see 2.2);
+ - individual values of a multi-valued attribute are not to be
+ independently added or deleted;
+ - attribute value assertions (such as matching in search filters and
+ comparisons) using values of such a type cannot be performed.
+
+
+ Otherwise, the equality matching rule is to be used for the purposes
+ of evaluating attribute value assertions concerning the attribute
+ type.
+
+
+ The attribute type indicates whether the attribute is a user attribute
+ or an operational attribute. If operational, the attribute type
+ indicates the operational usage and whether the attribute is
+ modifiable by users or not. Operational attributes are discussed in
+ Section 3.4.
+
+ An attribute type (a subtype) may derive from a more generic attribute
+ type (a direct supertype). The following restrictions apply to
+ subtyping:
+ - a subtype must have the same usage as its direct supertype,
+ - a subtype's syntax must be the same, or a refinement of, its
+ supertype's syntax, and
+ - a subtype must be collective [RFC3671] if its supertype is
+ collective.
- syntax of its supertype. An attribute type cannot be a subtype of an
- attribute of different usage.
An attribute description consisting of a subtype and no options is
- said to the direct description subtype of the attribute description
+ said to be the direct description subtype of the attribute description
consisting of the subtype's direct supertype and no options.
+
Each attribute type is identified by an object identifier (OID) and,
optionally, one or more short names (descriptors).
+
2.5.2. Attribute Options
+
There are multiple kinds of attribute description options. The LDAP
technical specification details one kind: tagging options.
+
Not all options can be associated with attributes held in the
directory. Tagging options can be.
+
Not all options can be used in conjunction with all attribute types.
In such cases, the attribute description is to be treated as
unrecognized.
+
An attribute description that contains mutually exclusive options
shall be treated as unrecognized. That is, "cn;x-bar;x-foo", where
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 13]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
"x-foo" and "x-bar" are mutually exclusive, is to be treated as
unrecognized.
+
Other kinds of options may be specified in future documents. These
documents must detail how new kinds of options they define relate to
tagging options. In particular, these documents must detail whether
values, and how new kinds of options are treated in attribute
description hierarchies.
+
Options are represented as short case insensitive textual strings
conforming to the <option> production defined in Section 2.5 of this
document.
+
Procedures for registering options are detailed in BCP 64 [BCP64bis].
+
2.5.2.1. Tagging Options
+
Attributes held in the directory can have attribute descriptions with
any number of tagging options. Tagging options are never mutually
exclusive.
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 13]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
- An attribute description with N tagging options is considered a direct
+ An attribute description with N tagging options is a direct
(description) subtype of all attribute descriptions of the same
attribute type and all but one of the N options. If the attribute
- type has a supertype, then the attribute description is also
- considered a direct (description) subtype of the attribute description
- of the supertype and the N tagging options. That is,
- 'cn;lang-de;lang-en' is considered a direct subtype of 'cn;lang-de',
- 'cn;lang-en', and 'name;lang-de;lang-en' ('cn' is a subtype of 'name',
- both are defined in [Schema]).
+ type has a supertype, then the attribute description is also a direct
+ (description) subtype of the attribute description of the supertype
+ and the N tagging options. That is, 'cn;lang-de;lang-en' is a direct
+ (description) subtype of 'cn;lang-de', 'cn;lang-en', and
+ 'name;lang-de;lang-en' ('cn' is a subtype of 'name', both are defined
+ in [Schema]).
+
2.5.3. Attribute Description Hierarchies
+
An attribute description can be the direct subtype of zero or more
other attribute descriptions as indicated by attribute type subtyping
(as described in Section 2.5.1) or attribute tagging option subtyping
(as described in Section 2.5.2.1). These subtyping relationships are
used to form hierarchies of attribute descriptions and attributes.
+
As adapted from [X.501]:
+
Attribute hierarchies allow access to the DIB with varying degrees
of granularity. This is achieved by allowing the value components
of attributes to be accessed by using either their specific
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 14]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
attribute description (a direct reference to the attribute) or by
a more generic attribute description (an indirect reference).
+
Semantically related attributes may be placed in a hierarchical
relationship, the more specialized being placed subordinate to the
more generalized. Searching for, or retrieving attributes and
the more specialized descriptions as well as for the quoted
description.
+
Where subordinate specialized descriptions are selected to be
returned as part of a search result these descriptions shall be
returned if available. Where the more general descriptions are
available. An attribute value shall always be returned as a value
of its own attribute description.
+
All of the attribute descriptions in an attribute hierarchy are
treated as distinct and unrelated descriptions for user
modification of entry content.
- An attribute value stored in a object or alias entry is of
-
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 14]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
+ An attribute value stored in an object or alias entry is of
precisely one attribute description. The description is indicated
when the value is originally added to the entry.
- For the purpose of subschema administration of the entry, a required
- attribute specification is fulfilled if the entry contains a value of
- an attribute description belonging to an attribute hierarchy if the
- attribute type of that description is the same as the required
- attribute's type. That is, a "MUST name" specification is fulfilled
- by 'name' or 'name;x-tag-option', but is not fulfilled by 'CN' nor by
- 'CN;x-tag-option'. Likewise, an entry may contain a value of an
- attribute description belonging to an attribute hierarchy if the
- attribute type of that description is either explicitly included in
- the definition of an object class to which the entry belongs or
- allowed by the DIT content rule applicable to that entry. That is,
- 'name' and 'name;x-tag-option' are allowed by "MAY name" (or by "MUST
- name"), but 'CN' and 'CN;x-tag-option' are not allowed by "MAY name"
- (nor by "MUST name").
+
+ For the purpose of subschema administration of the entry, a
+ specification that an attribute is required is fulfilled if the entry
+ contains a value of an attribute description belonging to an attribute
+ hierarchy where the attribute type of that description is the same as
+ the required attribute's type. That is, a "MUST name" specification
+ is fulfilled by 'name' or 'name;x-tag-option', but is not fulfilled by
+ 'CN' nor by 'CN;x-tag-option' (even though 'CN' is a subtype of
+ 'name'). Likewise, an entry may contain a value of an attribute
+ description belonging to an attribute hierarchy where the attribute
+ type of that description is either explicitly included in the
+ definition of an object class to which the entry belongs or allowed by
+ the DIT content rule applicable to that entry. That is, 'name' and
+ 'name;x-tag-option' are allowed by "MAY name" (or by "MUST name"), but
+ 'CN' and 'CN;x-tag-option' are not allowed by "MAY name" (nor by "MUST
+ name").
+
For the purposes of other policy administration, unless stated
otherwise in the specification of the particular administrative model,
treated as distinct and unrelated descriptions.
-2.5.4. Attribute Values
- Attribute values conform to the defined syntax of the attribute.
- When an attribute is used for naming of the entry, one and only one
- value of the attribute is selected to appear in the Relative
- Distinguished Name. This value is known as a distinguished value.
- Only attributes whose descriptions have no options can be used for
- naming.
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 15]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
2.6. Alias Entries
+
As adapted from [X.501]:
- An alias, or an alias name, for an object is a an alternative name
+
+ An alias, or an alias name, for an object is an alternative name
for an object or object entry which is provided by the use of
alias entries.
+
Each alias entry contains, within the 'aliasedObjectName'
attribute (known as the 'aliasedEntryName' attribute in X.500]), a
name of some object. The distinguished name of the alias entry is
thus also a name for this object.
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 15]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
NOTE - The name within the 'aliasedObjectName' is said to be
pointed to by the alias. It does not have to be the
distinguished name of any entry.
+
The conversion of an alias name to an object name is termed
(alias) dereferencing and comprises the systematic replacement of
alias names, where found within a purported name, by the value of
the corresponding 'aliasedObjectName' attribute. The process may
require the examination of more than one alias entry.
+
Any particular entry in the DIT may have zero or more alias names.
It therefore follows that several alias entries may point to the
same entry. An alias entry may point to an entry that is not a
leaf entry and may point to another alias entry.
+
An alias entry shall have no subordinates, so that an alias entry
is always a leaf entry.
+
Every alias entry shall belong to the 'alias' object class.
+
An entry with the 'alias' object class must also belong to an object
class (or classes), or be governed by a DIT content rule, which allows
suitable naming attributes to be present.
+
Example:
dn: cn=bar,dc=example,dc=com
objectClass: top
aliasedObjectName: cn=foo,dc=example,dc=com
+
2.6.1. 'alias' object class
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 16]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
Alias entries belong to the 'alias' object class.
+
( 2.5.6.1 NAME 'alias'
SUP top STRUCTURAL
MUST aliasedObjectName )
+
2.6.2. 'aliasedObjectName' attribute type
+
The 'aliasedObjectName' attribute holds the name of the entry an alias
points to. The 'aliasedObjectName' attribute is known as the
'aliasedEntryName' attribute in X.500.
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 16]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
( 2.5.4.1 NAME 'aliasedObjectName'
EQUALITY distinguishedNameMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12
SINGLE-VALUE )
+
The 'distinguishedNameMatch' matching rule and the DistinguishedName
- (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12) syntax is defined in [Syntaxes].
+ (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12) syntax are defined in [Syntaxes].
+
3. Directory Administrative and Operational Information
+
This section discusses select aspects of the X.500 Directory
Administrative and Operational Information model [X.501]. LDAP
implementations MAY support other aspects of this model.
+
3.1. Subtrees
+
As defined in [X.501]:
+
A subtree is a collection of object and alias entries situated at
the vertices of a tree. Subtrees do not contain subentries. The
prefix sub, in subtree, emphasizes that the base (or root) vertex
of this tree is usually subordinate to the root of the DIT.
+
A subtree begins at some vertex and extends to some identifiable
lower boundary, possibly extending to leaves. A subtree is always
defined within a context which implicitly bounds the subtree. For
example, the vertex and lower boundaries of a subtree defining a
- replicated area are bounded by a naming context. Similarly, the
- scope of a subtree defining a specific administrative area is
- limited to the context of an enclosing autonomous administrative
- area.
+ replicated area are bounded by a naming context.
+
3.2. Subentries
+
A subentry is a "special sort of entry, known by the Directory, used
- to hold information associated with a subtree or subtree refinement"
- [X.501]. Subentries are used in Directory to hold for administrative
- and operational purposes as defined in [X.501]. Their use in LDAP is
- not detailed in this technical specification, but may be detailed in
- future documents.
- The term "(sub)entry" in this specification indicates that servers
- implementing X.500(93) models are, in accordance with X.500(93), to
- use a subentry and that other servers are to use an object entry
- belonging to the appropriate auxiliary class normally used with the
Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 17]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+ to hold information associated with a subtree or subtree refinement"
+ [X.501]. Subentries are used in Directory to hold for administrative
+ and operational purposes as defined in [X.501]. Their use in LDAP is
+ detailed in [RFC3672].
+
+
+ The term "(sub)entry" in this specification indicates that servers
+ implementing X.500(93) models are, in accordance with X.500(93) as
+ described in [RFC3672], to use a subentry and that other servers are
+ to use an object entry belonging to the appropriate auxiliary class
+ normally used with the subentry (e.g., 'subschema' for subschema
+ subentries) to mimic the subentry. This object entry's RDN SHALL be
+ formed from a value of the 'cn' (commonName) attribute [Schema] (as
+ all subentries are named with 'cn').
- subentry (e.g., 'subschema' for subschema subentries) to mimic the
- subentry. This object entry's RDN SHALL be formed from a value of the
- 'cn' (commonName) attribute [Schema].
3.3. The 'objectClass' attribute
+
Each entry in the DIT has an 'objectClass' attribute.
+
( 2.5.4.0 NAME 'objectClass'
EQUALITY objectIdentifierMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38 )
- The 'objectIdentifierMatch' matching rule and OBJECT IDENTIFIER
- (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38) syntax is defined in [Syntaxes].
+
+ The 'objectIdentifierMatch' matching rule and the OBJECT IDENTIFIER
+ (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38) syntax are defined in [Syntaxes].
+
The 'objectClass' attribute specifies the object classes of an entry,
- which (among other things) is used in conjunction with user and system
+ which (among other things) is used in conjunction with the controlling
schema to determine the permitted attributes of an entry. Values of
this attribute can be modified by clients, but the 'objectClass'
attribute cannot be removed.
+
Servers which follow X.500(93) models SHALL restrict modifications of
this attribute to prevent the basic structural class of the entry from
being changed. That is, one cannot change a 'person' into a
'country'.
+
When creating an entry or adding an 'objectClass' value to an entry,
all superclasses of the named classes SHALL be implicitly added as
well if not already present. That is, if the auxiliary class 'x-a' is
a subclass of the class 'x-b', adding 'x-a' to 'objectClass' causes
'x-b' to be implicitly added (if is not already present).
- Servers SHALL restrict modifications of this attribute to prevent a
+
+ Servers SHALL restrict modifications of this attribute to prevent
superclasses of remaining 'objectClass' values from being deleted.
That is, if the auxiliary class 'x-a' is a subclass of the auxiliary
class 'x-b' and the 'objectClass' attribute contains 'x-a' and 'x-b',
an attempt to delete only 'x-b' from the 'objectClass' attribute is an
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 18]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
error.
+
3.4. Operational attributes
+
Some attributes, termed operational attributes, are used or maintained
by servers for administrative and operational purposes. As stated in
[X.501]: "There are three varieties of operational attributes:
and DSA-specific operational attributes."
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 18]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
A directory operational attribute is used to represent operational
and/or administrative information in the Directory Information Model.
This includes operational attributes maintained by the server (e.g.
'createTimestamp') as well as operational attributes which hold values
administrated by the user (e.g. 'ditContentRules').
+
A DSA-shared operational attribute is used to represent information of
- the DSA Information Model. Its values, if shared between DSAs
- (servers) are identical (except during periods of transient
- inconsistency).
+ the DSA Information Model which is shared between DSAs.
+
A DSA-specific operational attribute is used to represent information
- of the DSA Information Model. Its values, if shared between DSAs
- (servers), need not be identical.
+ of the DSA Information Model which is specific to the DSA (though, in
+ some cases, may be derived from information shared between DSAs)
+ (e.g., 'namingContexts').
+
The DSA Information Model operational attributes are detailed in
[X.501].
+
Operational attributes are not normally visible. They are not
returned in search results unless explicitly requested by name.
+
Not all operational attributes are user modifiable.
+
Entries may contain, among others, the following operational
- attributes.
+ attributes:
+
- creatorsName: the Distinguished Name of the user who added this
- entry to the directory.
+ entry to the directory,
+
+
+ - createTimestamp: the time this entry was added to the directory,
- - createTimestamp: the time this entry was added to the directory.
- modifiersName: the Distinguished Name of the user who last
- modified this entry.
+ modified this entry, and
+
- modifyTimestamp: the time this entry was last modified.
+
Servers SHOULD maintain the 'creatorsName', 'createTimestamp',
- 'modifiersName', and 'modifyTimestamp' for all entries of the DIT.
+ 'modifiersName', and 'modifyTimestamp' attributes for all entries of
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 19]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+ the DIT.
+
3.4.1. 'creatorsName'
+
This attribute appears in entries which were added using the protocol
(e.g., using the Add operation). The value is the distinguished name
of the creator.
+
( 2.5.18.3 NAME 'creatorsName'
EQUALITY distinguishedNameMatch
-
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 19]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12
SINGLE-VALUE NO-USER-MODIFICATION
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
The 'distinguishedNameMatch' matching rule and the DistinguishedName
(1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12) syntax are defined in [Syntaxes].
+
3.4.2. 'createTimestamp'
+
This attribute appears in entries which were added using the protocol
(e.g., using the Add operation). The value is the time the entry was
added.
+
( 2.5.18.1 NAME 'createTimestamp'
EQUALITY generalizedTimeMatch
ORDERING generalizedTimeOrderingMatch
SINGLE-VALUE NO-USER-MODIFICATION
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
The 'generalizedTimeMatch' and 'generalizedTimeOrderingMatch' matching
rules and the GeneralizedTime (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.24) syntax
are defined in [Syntaxes].
+
3.4.3. 'modifiersName'
+
This attribute appears in entries which have been modified using the
protocol (e.g., using Modify operation). The value is the
distinguished name of the last modifier.
+
( 2.5.18.4 NAME 'modifiersName'
EQUALITY distinguishedNameMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12
SINGLE-VALUE NO-USER-MODIFICATION
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 20]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
The 'distinguishedNameMatch' matching rule and the DistinguishedName
(1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12) syntax are defined in [Syntaxes].
+
3.4.4. 'modifyTimestamp'
+
This attribute appears in entries which have been modified using the
protocol (e.g., using the Modify operation). The value is the time
the entry was last modified.
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 20]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
( 2.5.18.2 NAME 'modifyTimestamp'
EQUALITY generalizedTimeMatch
ORDERING generalizedTimeOrderingMatch
SINGLE-VALUE NO-USER-MODIFICATION
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
The 'generalizedTimeMatch' and 'generalizedTimeOrderingMatch' matching
rules and the GeneralizedTime (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.24) syntax
are defined in [Syntaxes].
+
+3.4.5. 'structuralObjectClass'
+
+
+ This attribute indicates the structural object class of the entry.
+
+
+ ( 2.5.21.9 NAME 'structuralObjectClass'
+ EQUALITY objectIdentifierMatch
+ SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38
+ SINGLE-VALUE NO-USER-MODIFICATION
+ USAGE directoryOperation )
+
+
+ The 'objectIdentifierMatch' matching rule and OBJECT IDENTIFIER
+ (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38) syntax is defined in [Syntaxes].
+
+
+
+3.4.6. 'governingStructureRule'
+
+
+ This attribute indicates the structure rule governing the entry.
+
+
+ ( 2.5.21.10 NAME 'governingStructureRule'
+ EQUALITY integerMatch
+ SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
+ SINGLE-VALUE NO-USER-MODIFICATION
+ USAGE directoryOperation )
+
+
+ The 'integerMatch' matching rule and INTEGER
+ (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27) syntax is defined in [Syntaxes].
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 21]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
4. Directory Schema
+
As defined in [X.501]:
+
The Directory Schema is a set of definitions and constraints
concerning the structure of the DIT, the possible ways entries are
named, the information that can be held in an entry, the
of the information and the ways in which values of attributes may
be matched in attribute value and matching rule assertions.
+
NOTE 1 - The schema enables the Directory system to, for example:
+
- prevent the creation of subordinate entries of the wrong
object-class (e.g. a country as a subordinate of a person);
+
- prevent the addition of attribute-types to an entry
inappropriate to the object-class (e.g. a serial number to a
person's entry);
+
- prevent the addition of an attribute value of a syntax not
matching that defined for the attribute-type (e.g. a printable
string to a bit string).
+
Formally, the Directory Schema comprises a set of:
+
a) Name Form definitions that define primitive naming relations
for structural object classes;
+
b) DIT Structure Rule definitions that define the names that
entries may have and the ways in which the entries may be
related to one another in the DIT;
+
c) DIT Content Rule definitions that extend the specification of
allowable attributes for entries beyond those indicated by the
-
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 21]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
structural object classes of the entries;
+
d) Object Class definitions that define the basic set of mandatory
and optional attributes that shall be present, and may be
present, respectively, in an entry of a given class, and which
indicate the kind of object class that is being defined;
+
e) Attribute Type definitions that identify the object identifier
by which an attribute is known, its syntax, associated matching
rules, whether it is an operational attribute and if so its
type, whether it is a collective attribute, whether it is
permitted to have multiple values and whether or not it is
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 22]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
derived from another attribute type;
+
f) Matching Rule definitions that define matching rules.
+
And in LDAP:
- g) LDAP Syntaxes definitions that define encodings used in LDAP.
+
+ g) LDAP Syntax definitions that define encodings used in LDAP.
+
4.1. Schema Definitions
+
Schema definitions in this section are described using ABNF and rely
on the common productions specified in Section 1.2 as well as these:
- noidlen = numericoid [ LCURLY len RCURLY ]
+ noidlen = numericoid [ LCURLY len RCURLY ]
len = number
- oids = oid / ( LPAREN WSP oidlist WSP RPAREN )
+ oids = oid / ( LPAREN WSP oidlist WSP RPAREN )
oidlist = oid *( WSP DOLLAR WSP oid )
+
extensions = *( SP xstring SP qdstrings )
+ xstring = "X" HYPHEN 1*( ALPHA / HYPHEN / USCORE )
- xstring = X HYPHEN 1*( ALPHA / HYPHEN / USCORE )
qdescrs = qdescr / ( LPAREN WSP qdescrlist WSP RPAREN )
-
qdescrlist = [ qdescr *( SP qdescr ) ]
-
qdescr = SQUOTE descr SQUOTE
- qdstrings = qdstring / ( LPAREN WSP qdstringlist WSP RPAREN )
+ qdstrings = qdstring / ( LPAREN WSP qdstringlist WSP RPAREN )
qdstringlist = [ qdstring *( SP qdstring ) ]
-
-
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 22]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
qdstring = SQUOTE dstring SQUOTE
+ dstring = 1*( QS / QQ / QUTF8 ) ; escaped UTF-8 string
- dstring = 1*( QS / QQ / QUTF8 ) ; escaped UTF8 string
QQ = ESC %x32 %x37 ; "\27"
-
QS = ESC %x35 ( %x43 / %x63 ) ; "\5C" / "\5c"
- ; Any UTF-8 encoded UCS character
+
+ ; Any UTF-8 encoded Unicode character
; except %x27 ("'") and %x5C ("\")
QUTF8 = QUTF1 / UTFMB
+
; Any ASCII character except %x27 ("'") and %x5C ("\")
QUTF1 = %x00-26 / %x28-5B / %x5D-7F
+
Schema definitions in this section also share a number of common
terms.
+
The NAME field provides a set of short names (descriptors) which are
- be used as aliases for the OID.
+ to be used as aliases for the OID.
+
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 23]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
The DESC field optionally allows a descriptive string to be provided
by the directory administrator and/or implementor. While
specifications may suggest a descriptive string, there is no
requirement that the suggested (or any) descriptive string be used.
+
The OBSOLETE field, if present, indicates the element is not active.
+
Implementors should note that future versions of this document may
expand these definitions to include additional terms. Terms whose
identifier begins with "X-" are reserved for private experiments, and
are followed by <SP> and <qdstrings> tokens.
+
4.1.1. Object Class Definitions
+
Object Class definitions are written according to the ABNF:
+
ObjectClassDescription = LPAREN WSP
numericoid ; object identifier
[ SP "NAME" SP qdescrs ] ; short names (descriptors)
extensions WSP RPAREN
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 23]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
kind = "ABSTRACT" / "STRUCTURAL" / "AUXILIARY"
+
where:
<numericoid> is object identifier assigned to this object class;
NAME <qdescrs> are short names (descriptors) identifying this object
<extensions> describe extensions.
+
4.1.2. Attribute Types
+
Attribute Type definitions are written according to the ABNF:
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 24]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
AttributeTypeDescription = LPAREN WSP
numericoid ; object identifier
[ SP "NAME" SP qdescrs ] ; short names (descriptors)
[ SP "USAGE" SP usage ] ; usage
extensions WSP RPAREN ; extensions
+
usage = "userApplications" / ; user
"directoryOperation" / ; directory operational
"distributedOperation" / ; DSA-shared operational
"dSAOperation" ; DSA-specific operational
+
where:
<numericoid> is object identifier assigned to this attribute type;
NAME <qdescrs> are short names (descriptors) identifying this
DESC <qdstring> is a short descriptive string;
OBSOLETE indicates this attribute type is not active;
SUP oid specifies the direct supertype of this type;
-
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 24]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
- EQUALITY, ORDERING, SUBSTRING provide the oid of the equality,
+ EQUALITY, ORDERING, SUBSTR provide the oid of the equality,
ordering, and substrings matching rules, respectively;
SYNTAX identifies value syntax by object identifier and may suggest
a minimum upper bound;
- COLLECTIVE indicates this attribute type is collective [X.501];
+ SINGLE-VALUE indicates attributes of this type are restricted to a
+ single value;
+ COLLECTIVE indicates this attribute type is collective
+ [X.501][RFC3671];
NO-USER-MODIFICATION indicates this attribute type is not user
modifiable;
USAGE indicates the application of this attribute type; and
<extensions> describe extensions.
+
Each attribute type description must contain at least one of the SUP
- or SYNTAX fields.
+ or SYNTAX fields. If no SYNTAX field is provided, the attribute type
+ description takes its value from the supertype.
+
+
+ If SUP field is provided, the EQUALITY, ORDERING, and SUBSTRING
+ fields, if not specified, take their value from the supertype.
+
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 25]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
Usage of userApplications, the default, indicates that attributes of
this type represent user information. That is, they are user
attributes.
- COLLECTIVE requires usage userApplications. Use of collective
- attribute types in LDAP is not discussed in this technical
- specification.
A usage of directoryOperation, distributedOperation, or dSAOperation
indicates that attributes of this type represent operational and/or
administrative information. That is, they are operational attributes.
+
directoryOperation usage indicates that the attribute of this type is
a directory operational attribute. distributedOperation usage
indicates that the attribute of this DSA-shared usage operational
attribute. dSAOperation usage indicates that the attribute of this
type is a DSA-specific operational attribute.
+
+ COLLECTIVE requires usage userApplications. Use of collective
+ attribute types in LDAP is discussed in [RFC3671].
+
+
NO-USER-MODIFICATION requires an operational usage.
+
Note that the <AttributeTypeDescription> does not list the matching
rules which can be used with that attribute type in an extensibleMatch
- search filter. This is done using the 'matchingRuleUse' attribute
- described in Section 4.1.4.
+ search filter [Protocol]. This is done using the 'matchingRuleUse'
+ attribute described in Section 4.1.4.
+
This document refines the schema description of X.501 by requiring
that the SYNTAX field in an <AttributeTypeDescription> be a string
definition with an optional indication of the suggested minimum bound
of a value of this attribute.
+
A suggested minimum upper bound on the number of characters in a value
with a string-based syntax, or the number of bytes in a value for all
other syntaxes, may be indicated by appending this bound count inside
of curly braces following the syntax's OBJECT IDENTIFIER in an
-
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 25]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
Attribute Type Description. This bound is not part of the syntax name
itself. For instance, "1.3.6.4.1.1466.0{64}" suggests that server
implementations should allow a string to be 64 characters long,
although they may allow longer strings. Note that a single character
of the Directory String syntax may be encoded in more than one octet
- since UTF-8 is a variable-length encoding.
+ since UTF-8 [RFC3629] is a variable-length encoding.
+
4.1.3. Matching Rules
- Matching rules are used by servers to compare attribute values against
- assertion values when performing Search and Compare operations. They
- are also used to identify the value to be added or deleted when
- modifying entries, and are used when comparing a purported
- distinguished name with the name of an entry.
- A matching rule specifies the syntax of the assertion value.
+ Matching rules are used in performance of attribute value assertions,
+ such as in performance of a Compare operation. They are also used in
+ evaluation of a Search filters, in determining which individual values
+ are be added or deleted during performance of a Modify operation, and
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 26]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+ used in comparison of distinguished names.
+
Each matching rule is identified by an object identifier (OID) and,
optionally, one or more short names (descriptors).
+
Matching rule definitions are written according to the ABNF:
+
MatchingRuleDescription = LPAREN WSP
numericoid ; object identifier
[ SP "NAME" SP qdescrs ] ; short names (descriptors)
SP "SYNTAX" SP numericoid ; assertion syntax
extensions WSP RPAREN ; extensions
+
where:
<numericoid> is object identifier assigned to this matching rule;
NAME <qdescrs> are short names (descriptors) identifying this
matching rule;
DESC <qdstring> is a short descriptive string;
OBSOLETE indicates this matching rule is not active;
- SYNTAX identifies the assertion syntax by object identifier; and
+ SYNTAX identifies the assertion syntax (the syntax of the assertion
+ value) by object identifier; and
<extensions> describe extensions.
+
4.1.4. Matching Rule Uses
+
A matching rule use lists the attributes which are suitable for use
with an extensibleMatch search filter.
+
Matching rule use descriptions are written according to the following
ABNF:
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 26]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
MatchingRuleUseDescription = LPAREN WSP
numericoid ; object identifier
[ SP "NAME" SP qdescrs ] ; short names (descriptors)
SP "APPLIES" SP oids ; attribute types
extensions WSP RPAREN ; extensions
+
where:
<numericoid> is the object identifier of the matching rule
associated with this matching rule use description;
NAME <qdescrs> are short names (descriptors) identifying this
matching rule use;
DESC <qdstring> is a short descriptive string;
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 27]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
OBSOLETE indicates this matching rule use is not active;
APPLIES provides a list of attribute types the matching rule applies
to; and
<extensions> describe extensions.
+
4.1.5. LDAP Syntaxes
+
LDAP Syntaxes of (attribute and assertion) values are described in
terms of ASN.1 [X.680] and, optionally, have an octet string encoding
known as the LDAP-specific encoding. Commonly, the LDAP-specific
- encoding is constrained to string of Universal Character Set (UCS)
- [ISO10646] characters in UTF-8 [UTF-8] form.
+ encoding is constrained to a string of Unicode [Unicode] characters in
+ UTF-8 [RFC3629] form.
+
Each LDAP syntax is identified by an object identifier (OID).
+
LDAP syntax definitions are written according to the ABNF:
+
SyntaxDescription = LPAREN WSP
numericoid ; object identifier
[ SP "DESC" SP qdstring ] ; description
extensions WSP RPAREN ; extensions
+
where:
- <numericoid> is object identifier assigned to this LDAP syntax;
+ <numericoid> is the object identifier assigned to this LDAP syntax;
DESC <qdstring> is a short descriptive string; and
<extensions> describe extensions.
+
4.1.6. DIT Content Rules
+
A DIT content rule is a "rule governing the content of entries of a
particular structural object class" [X.501].
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 27]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
For DIT entries of a particular structural object class, a DIT content
rule specifies which auxiliary object classes the entries are allowed
to belong to and which additional attributes (by type) are required,
allowed or not allowed to appear in the entries.
+
The list of precluded attributes cannot include any attribute listed
- as mandatory in rule, the structural object class, or any of the
+ as mandatory in the rule, the structural object class, or any of the
allowed auxiliary object classes.
+
Each content rule is identified by the object identifier, as well as
any short names (descriptors), of the structural object class it
applies to.
+
An entry may only belong to auxiliary object classes listed in the
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 28]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
governing content rule.
+
An entry must contain all attributes required by the object classes
- the entry belongs to as well as all attributed required by the
+ the entry belongs to as well as all attributes required by the
governing content rule.
+
An entry may contain any non-precluded attributes allowed by the
object classes the entry belongs to as well as all attributes allowed
by the governing content rule.
+
An entry cannot include any attribute precluded by the governing
content rule.
+
An entry is governed by (if present and active in the subschema) the
DIT content rule which applies to the structural object class of the
entry (see Section 2.4.2). If no active rule is present for the
entry's structural object class, the entry's content is governed by
the structural object class (and possibly other aspects of user and
- system schema).
+ system schema). DIT content rules for superclasses of the structural
+ object class of an entry are not applicable to that entry.
+
DIT content rule descriptions are written according to the ABNF:
+
DITContentRuleDescription = LPAREN WSP
numericoid ; object identifier
[ SP "NAME" SP qdescrs ] ; short names (descriptors)
[ SP "NOT" SP oids ] ; attribute types
extensions WSP RPAREN ; extensions
- where:
-
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 28]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
+ where:
<numericoid> is the object identifier of the structural object class
associated with this DIT content rule;
NAME <qdescrs> are short names (descriptors) identifying this DIT
<extensions> describe extensions.
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 29]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
4.1.7. DIT Structure Rules and Name Forms
- It is sometimes desirable to regulate where object entries can be
- placed in the DIT and how they can be named based upon their
+
+ It is sometimes desirable to regulate where object and alias entries
+ can be placed in the DIT and how they can be named based upon their
structural object class.
+
4.1.7.1. DIT Structure Rules
+
A DIT structure rule is a "rule governing the structure of the DIT by
specifying a permitted superior to subordinate entry relationship. A
structure rule relates a name form, and therefore a structural object
DIT as subordinates to entries governed by the indicated superior
structure rules" [X.501].
+
DIT structure rule descriptions are written according to the ABNF:
+
DITStructureRuleDescription = LPAREN WSP
ruleid ; rule identifier
[ SP "NAME" SP qdescrs ] ; short names (descriptors)
[ SP "SUP" ruleids ] ; superior rules
extensions WSP RPAREN ; extensions
- ruleids = ruleid / ( LPAREN WSP ruleidlist WSP RPAREN )
+ ruleids = ruleid / ( LPAREN WSP ruleidlist WSP RPAREN )
ruleidlist = ruleid *( SP ruleid )
-
ruleid = number
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 29]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
where:
<ruleid> is the rule identifier of this DIT structure rule;
NAME <qdescrs> are short names (descriptors) identifying this DIT
SUP identifies superior rules (by rule id); and
<extensions> describe extensions.
+
If no superior rules are identified, the DIT structure rule applies
to an autonomous administrative point (e.g. the root vertex of the
subtree controlled by the subschema) [X.501].
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 30]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
4.1.7.2. Name Forms
+
A name form "specifies a permissible RDN for entries of a particular
structural object class. A name form identifies a named object
class and one or more attribute types to be used for naming (i.e.
for the RDN). Name forms are primitive pieces of specification
used in the definition of DIT structure rules" [X.501].
+
Each name form indicates the structural object class to be named,
- a set of required attribute types, and a set of allowed attributes
- types. A particular attribute type cannot be listed in both sets.
+ a set of required attribute types, and a set of allowed attribute
+ types. A particular attribute type cannot be in both sets.
+
Entries governed by the form must be named using a value from each
required attribute type and zero or more values from the allowed
attribute types.
+
Each name form is identified by an object identifier (OID) and,
optionally, one or more short names (descriptors).
+
Name form descriptions are written according to the ABNF:
+
NameFormDescription = LPAREN WSP
numericoid ; object identifier
[ SP "NAME" SP qdescrs ] ; short names (descriptors)
[ SP "MAY" SP oids ] ; attribute types
extensions WSP RPAREN ; extensions
- where:
-
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 30]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
+ where:
<numericoid> is object identifier which identifies this name form;
NAME <qdescrs> are short names (descriptors) identifying this name
form;
naming attributes for this name form; and
<extensions> describe extensions.
+
All attribute types in the required ("MUST") and allowed ("MAY") lists
shall be different.
+
4.2. Subschema Subentries
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 31]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
Subschema (sub)entries are used for administering information about
the directory schema. A single subschema (sub)entry contains all
schema definitions (see Section 4.1) used by entries in a particular
part of the directory tree.
+
Servers which follow X.500(93) models SHOULD implement subschema using
the X.500 subschema mechanisms (as detailed in Section 12 of [X.501]),
and so these are not ordinary object entries but subentries (see
Section 3.2). LDAP clients SHOULD NOT assume that servers implement
any of the other aspects of X.500 subschema.
+
Servers MAY allow subschema modification. Procedures for subschema
modification are discussed in Section 14.5 of [X.501].
+
A server which masters entries and permits clients to modify these
entries SHALL implement and provide access to these subschema
(sub)entries including providing a 'subschemaSubentry' attribute in
- each modifiable entry. This so clients may discover the attributes
+ each modifiable entry. This is so clients may discover the attributes
and object classes which are permitted to be present. It is strongly
RECOMMENDED that all other servers implement this as well.
+
The value of the 'subschemaSubentry' attribute is the name of the
subschema (sub)entry holding the subschema controlling the entry.
+
( 2.5.18.10 NAME 'subschemaSubentry'
EQUALITY distinguishedNameMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12
NO-USER-MODIFICATION SINGLE-VALUE
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
The 'distinguishedNameMatch' matching rule and the DistinguishedName
(1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12) syntax are defined in [Syntaxes].
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 31]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
Subschema is held in (sub)entries belonging to the subschema auxiliary
object class.
+
( 2.5.20.1 NAME 'subschema' AUXILIARY
MAY ( dITStructureRules $ nameForms $ ditContentRules $
objectClasses $ attributeTypes $ matchingRules $
matchingRuleUse ) )
+
The 'ldapSyntaxes' operational attribute may also be present in
subschema entries.
+
Servers MAY provide additional attributes (described in other
documents) in subschema (sub)entries.
+
Servers SHOULD provide the attributes 'createTimestamp' and
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 32]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
'modifyTimestamp' in subschema (sub)entries, in order to allow clients
to maintain their caches of schema information.
+
The following subsections provide attribute type definitions for each
of schema definition attribute types.
+
4.2.1. 'objectClasses'
+
This attribute holds definitions of object classes.
+
( 2.5.21.6 NAME 'objectClasses'
EQUALITY objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.37
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
The 'objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch' matching rule and the
ObjectClassDescription (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.37) syntax are
defined in [Syntaxes].
+
4.2.2. 'attributeTypes'
+
This attribute holds definitions of attribute types.
+
( 2.5.21.5 NAME 'attributeTypes'
EQUALITY objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.3
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
The 'objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch' matching rule and the
AttributeTypeDescription (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.3) syntax are
defined in [Syntaxes].
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 32]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
4.2.3. 'matchingRules'
+
This attribute holds definitions of matching rules.
+
( 2.5.21.4 NAME 'matchingRules'
EQUALITY objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.30
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
The 'objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch' matching rule and the
MatchingRuleDescription (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.30) syntax are
defined in [Syntaxes].
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 33]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
4.2.4 'matchingRuleUse'
+
This attribute holds definitions of matching rule uses.
+
( 2.5.21.8 NAME 'matchingRuleUse'
EQUALITY objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.31
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
The 'objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch' matching rule and the
MatchingRuleUseDescription (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.31) syntax are
defined in [Syntaxes].
+
4.2.5. 'ldapSyntaxes'
+
This attribute holds definitions of LDAP syntaxes.
+
( 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.101.120.16 NAME 'ldapSyntaxes'
EQUALITY objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.54
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
The 'objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch' matching rule and the
SyntaxDescription (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.54) syntax are defined
in [Syntaxes].
-4.2.6. 'dITContentRules'
-
- This attribute lists DIT Content Rules which are in force.
-
- ( 2.5.21.2 NAME 'dITContentRules'
- EQUALITY objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch
+4.2.6. 'dITContentRules'
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 33]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+ This attribute lists DIT Content Rules which are present in the
+ subschema.
+ ( 2.5.21.2 NAME 'dITContentRules'
+ EQUALITY objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.16
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
The 'objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch' matching rule and the
DITContentRuleDescription (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.16) syntax are
defined in [Syntaxes].
+
4.2.7. 'dITStructureRules'
- This attribute lists DIT Structure Rules which are in force.
+
+ This attribute lists DIT Structure Rules which are present in the
+ subschema.
+
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 34]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
( 2.5.21.1 NAME 'dITStructureRules'
EQUALITY integerFirstComponentMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.17
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
The 'integerFirstComponentMatch' matching rule and the
DITStructureRuleDescription (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.17) syntax are
defined in [Syntaxes].
+
4.2.8 'nameForms'
+
This attribute lists Name Forms which are in force.
+
( 2.5.21.7 NAME 'nameForms'
EQUALITY objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.35
USAGE directoryOperation )
+
The 'objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch' matching rule and the
NameFormDescription (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.35) syntax are defined
in [Syntaxes].
+
4.3. 'extensibleObject' object class
- The 'extensibleObject auxiliary object class allows entries belong to
- it to hold any attribute type. The set of allowed attributes of this
- class is implicitly the set of all user attributes.
+
+ The 'extensibleObject' auxiliary object class allows entries that
+ belong to it to hold any user attribute. The set of allowed attribute
+ types of this object class is implicitly the set of all attribute
+ types of userApplications usage.
+
( 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.101.120.111 NAME 'extensibleObject'
SUP top AUXILIARY )
+
The mandatory attributes of the other object classes of this entry are
still required to be present and any precluded attributes are still
not allowed to be present.
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 34]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
- Note that not all servers will implement this object class, and those
- which do not will reject requests to add entries which contain this
- object class, or modify an entry to add this object class.
-
4.4. Subschema Discovery
+
To discover the DN of the subschema (sub)entry holding the subschema
controlling a particular entry, a client reads that entry's
'subschemaSubentry' operational attribute. To read schema attributes
- from the subschema (sub)entry, clients MUST issue a base object search
- where the filter is "(objectClass=subschema)" [Filters] and the list
- of attributes includes the names of the desired schema attributes (as
- they are operational). This filter allows LDAP servers which gateway
- to X.500 to detect that subentry information is being requested.
+ from the subschema (sub)entry, clients MUST issue a Search operation
+ [Protocol] where baseObject is the DN of the subschema (sub)entry,
+ scope is baseObject, filter is "(objectClass=subschema)" [Filters],
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 35]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+ and attributes field lists the names of the desired schema attributes
+ (as they are operational). Note: the "(objectClass=subschema)" filter
+ allows LDAP servers which gateway to X.500 to detect that subentry
+ information is being requested.
+
Clients SHOULD NOT assume a published subschema is complete nor assume
the server supports all of the schema elements it publishes nor assume
the server does not support an unpublished element.
+
5. DSA (Server) Informational Model
+
The LDAP protocol assumes there are one or more servers which jointly
- provide access to a Directory Information Tree (DIT).
+ provide access to a Directory Information Tree (DIT). The server
+ holding the original information is called the "master" (for that
+ information). Servers which hold copies of the original information
+ are referred to as "shadowing" or "caching" servers.
+
As defined in [X.501]:
+
context prefix: The sequence of RDNs leading from the Root of the
DIT to the initial vertex of a naming context; corresponds to
the distinguished name of that vertex.
- DIB fragment: The portion of the DIB that is held by one master
- DSA, comprising one or more naming contexts.
+
+ and:
+
naming context: A subtree of entries held in a single master DSA.
+
That is, a naming context is the largest collection of entries,
starting at an entry that is mastered by a particular server, and
including all its subordinates and their subordinates, down to the
entries which are mastered by different servers. The context prefix
is the name of the initial entry.
+
The root of the DIT is a DSA-specific Entry (DSE) and not part of any
naming context (or any subtree); each server has different attribute
values in the root DSE.
+5.1. Server-specific Data Requirements
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 35]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+ An LDAP server SHALL provide information about itself and other
+ information that is specific to each server. This is represented as a
+ group of attributes located in the root DSE, which is named with the
+ DN with zero RDNs (whose [LDAPDN] representation is as the zero-length
+ string).
-5.1. Server-specific Data Requirements
+ These attributes are retrievable, subject to access control and other
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 36]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+ restrictions, if a client performs a Search operation [Protocol] with
+ an empty baseObject, scope of baseObject, the filter "(objectClass=*)"
+ [Filters], and with the attributes field listing the names of the
+ desired attributes. It is noted that root DSE attributes are
+ operational, and like other operational attributes, are not returned
+ in search requests unless requested by name.
- An LDAP server SHALL provide information about itself and other
- information that is specific to each server. This is represented as a
- group of attributes located in the root DSE (DSA-Specific Entry),
- which is named with the zero-length LDAPDN. These attributes are
- retrievable, subject to access control and other restrictions, if a
- client performs a base object search of the root with the filter
- "(objectClass=*)" [Filters] requesting the desired attributes. It is
- noted that root DSE attributes are operational, and like other
- operational attributes, are not returned in search requests unless
- requested by name.
The root DSE SHALL NOT be included if the client performs a subtree
search starting from the root.
+
Servers may allow clients to modify attributes of the root DSE where
appropriate.
+
The following attributes of the root DSE are defined in [Syntaxes].
Additional attributes may be defined in other documents.
+
- altServer: alternative servers;
+
- namingContexts: naming contexts;
+
- supportedControl: recognized LDAP controls;
+
- supportedExtension: recognized LDAP extended operations;
+
- supportedLDAPVersion: LDAP versions supported; and
+
- supportedSASLMechanisms: recognized Simple Authentication and
Security Layers (SASL) [SASL] mechanisms.
- The values of these attributes provided may depend on session specific
- and other factors. For example, a server supporting the SASL EXTERNAL
- mechanism might only list "EXTERNAL" when the client's identity has
- been established by a lower level. See [AuthMeth].
+
+ The values provided for these attributes may depend on
+ session-specific and other factors. For example, a server supporting
+ the SASL EXTERNAL mechanism might only list "EXTERNAL" when the
+ client's identity has been established by a lower level. See
+ [AuthMeth].
+
The root DSE may also include a 'subschemaSubentry' attribute. If so,
- it refers to the subschema (sub)entry holding schema controlling
- attributes of the root DSE. Client SHOULD NOT assume that the
- subschema (sub)entry controlling the root DSE controls any entry held
- by the server. General subschema discovery procedures are provided in
- Section 4.4.
+ it refers to the subschema (sub)entry holding the schema controlling
+ the root DSE. Clients SHOULD NOT assume that this subschema
+ (sub)entry controls other entries held by the server. General
+ subschema discovery procedures are provided in Section 4.4.
+5.1.1. 'altServer'
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 36]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+ The 'altServer' attribute lists URIs referring to alternative servers
+ which may be contacted when this server becomes unavailable. URIs for
+ servers implementing the LDAP are written according to [LDAPURL].
+ Other kinds of URIs may be provided. If the server does not know of
-5.1.1. 'altServer'
- The 'altServer' attribute lists URLs referring to alternative servers
- which may be contacted when this server becomes unavailable. If the
- server does not know of any other servers which could be used this
- attribute will be absent. Clients may cache this information in case
- their preferred server later becomes unavailable.
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 37]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+ any other servers which could be used this attribute will be absent.
+ Clients may cache this information in case their preferred server
+ later becomes unavailable.
+
( 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.101.120.6 NAME 'altServer'
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26
USAGE dSAOperation )
+
The IA5String (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26) syntax is defined in
[Syntaxes].
+
5.1.2. 'namingContexts'
+
The 'namingContexts' attribute lists the context prefixes of the
naming contexts the server masters or shadows (in part or in whole).
If the server is a first-level DSA [X.501], it should list (in
gateway to a public X.500 directory) this attribute will be absent.
If the server believes it masters or shadows the entire directory, the
attribute will have a single value, and that value will be the empty
- string (indicating the root of the DIT). This attribute allows a
- client to choose suitable base objects for searching when it has
- contacted a server.
+ string (indicating the root of the DIT).
+
+
+ This attribute may be used, for example, to select a suitable entry
+ name for subsequent operations with this server.
+
( 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.101.120.5 NAME 'namingContexts'
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12
USAGE dSAOperation )
+
The DistinguishedName (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12) syntax is
defined in [Syntaxes].
+
5.1.3. 'supportedControl'
- The 'supportedControl' attribute lists object identifiers identifying
- the request controls the server supports. If the server does not
- support any request controls, this attribute will be absent.
+ The 'supportedControl' attribute lists object identifiers identifying
+ the request controls [Protocol] the server supports. If the server
+ does not support any request controls, this attribute will be absent.
Object identifiers identifying response controls need not be listed.
+
Procedures for registering object identifiers used to discovery of
protocol mechanisms are detailed in BCP 64 [BCP64bis].
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 37]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
( 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.101.120.13 NAME 'supportedControl'
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38
USAGE dSAOperation )
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 38]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
The OBJECT IDENTIFIER (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38) syntax is
defined in [Syntaxes].
+
5.1.4. 'supportedExtension'
+
The 'supportedExtension' attribute lists object identifiers
- identifying the extended operations which the server supports. If the
- server does not support any extended operations, this attribute will
- be absent.
+ identifying the extended operations [Protocol] which the server
+ supports. If the server does not support any extended operations,
+ this attribute will be absent.
+
+
+ An extended operation generally consists of an extended request and an
+ extended response but may also include other protocol data units (such
+ as intermediate responses). The object identifier assigned to the
+ extended request is used to identify the extended operation. Other
+ object identifiers used in the extended operation need not be listed
+ as values of this attribute.
- An extended operation comprises a ExtendedRequest, possibly other PDUs
- defined by extension, and an ExtendedResponse [Protocol]. The object
- identifier assigned to the ExtendedRequest is used to identify the
- extended operation. Other object identifiers associated with the
- extended operation need not be listed.
Procedures for registering object identifiers used to discovery of
protocol mechanisms are detailed in BCP 64 [BCP64bis].
+
( 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.101.120.7 NAME 'supportedExtension'
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38
USAGE dSAOperation )
+
The OBJECT IDENTIFIER (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38) syntax is
defined in [Syntaxes].
+
5.1.5. 'supportedLDAPVersion'
+
The 'supportedLDAPVersion' attribute lists the versions of LDAP which
the server supports.
+
( 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.101.120.15 NAME 'supportedLDAPVersion'
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
USAGE dSAOperation )
+
The INTEGER (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27) syntax are defined in
[Syntaxes].
+
5.1.6. 'supportedSASLMechanisms'
+
The 'supportedSASLMechanisms' attribute lists the SASL mechanisms
+ [SASL] which the server recognizes and/or supports [AuthMeth]. The
+ contents of this attribute may depend on the current session state.
+ If the server does not support any SASL mechanisms this attribute will
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 38]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 39]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
- [RFC2222] which the server recognizes. The contents of this attribute
- may depend on the current session state. If the server does not
- support any SASL mechanisms this attribute will not be present.
+ not be present.
+
( 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.101.120.14 NAME 'supportedSASLMechanisms'
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15
USAGE dSAOperation )
+
The Directory String (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15) syntax is defined
in [Syntaxes].
+
6. Other Considerations
+
6.1. Preservation of User Information
+
Syntaxes may be defined which have specific value and/or value form
(representation) preservation requirements. For example, a syntax
containing digitally signed data can mandate the server preserve both
the value and form of value presented to ensure signature is not
invalidated.
- Where such requirements have not be explicitly stated, servers SHOULD
- preserve the value of user information but MAY return the value in a
- different form. And where a server is unable (or unwilling) to
+
+ Where such requirements have not been explicitly stated, servers
+ SHOULD preserve the value of user information but MAY return the value
+ in a different form. And where a server is unable (or unwilling) to
preserve the value of user information, the server SHALL ensure that
an equivalent value (per Section 2.3) is returned.
+
6.2. Short Names
+
Short names, also known as descriptors, are used as more readable
aliases for object identifiers and are used to identify various schema
elements. However, it is not expected that LDAP implementations with
(stateOrProvinceName) might be displayed to a German-speaking user as
"Land".
+
The same short name might have different meaning in different
subschemas and, within a particular subschema, the same short name
might refer to different object identifiers each identifying a
different kind of schema element.
+
Implementations MUST be prepared that the same short name might be
used in a subschema to refer to the different kinds of schema
+ elements. That is, there might be an object class 'x-fubar' and an
+ attribute type 'x-fubar' in a subschema.
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 39]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 40]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
- elements. That is, there might be an object class 'x-fubar' and an
- attribute type 'x-fubar' in a subschema.
Implementations MUST be prepared that the same short name might be
used in the different subschemas to refer to the different schema
elements. That is, there might be two matching rules 'x-fubar', each
in different subschemas.
+
Procedures for registering short names (descriptors) are detailed in
BCP 64 [BCP64bis].
+
6.3. Cache and Shadowing
+
Some servers may hold cache or shadow copies of entries, which can be
used to answer search and comparison queries, but will return
referrals or contact other servers if modification operations are
by the originating server.
+
7. Implementation Guidelines
+
7.1 Server Guidelines
- Servers MUST recognize all attribute types and object classes names
+
+ Servers MUST recognize all names of attribute types and object classes
defined in this document but, unless stated otherwise, need not
support the associated functionality. Servers SHOULD recognize all
the names of attribute types and object classes defined in Section 3
and 4, respectively, of [Schema].
+
Servers MUST ensure that entries conform to user and system schema
rules or other data model constraints.
- Servers MAY support the 'extensibleObject' object class.
Servers MAY support DIT Content Rules. Servers MAY support DIT
Structure Rules and Name Forms.
+
Servers MAY support alias entries.
+
+ Servers MAY support the 'extensibleObject' object class.
+
+
Servers MAY support subentries. If so, they MUST do so in accordance
- with [X.501]. Servers which do not support subentries SHOULD use
+ with [RFC3672]. Servers which do not support subentries SHOULD use
object entries to mimic subentries as detailed in Section 3.2.
+
Servers MAY implement additional schema elements. Servers SHOULD
provide definitions of all schema elements they support in subschema
+ (sub)entries.
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 40]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
- (sub)entries.
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 41]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
7.2 Client Guidelines
- Clients MUST NOT display nor attempt to decode as ASN.1, a value if
- its syntax is not known. The implementation may attempt to discover
- the subschema of the source entry, and retrieve the values of
- 'attributeTypes' from the subschema (sub)entry.
- Clients MUST NOT assume the LDAP-specific string encoding is
- restricted to a UTF-8 encoded string of UCS characters or any
- particular subset of particular subset of UCS (such as a printable
- subset) unless such restriction is explicitly stated.
+ In the absence of prior agreements with servers, clients SHOULD NOT
+ assume that servers support any particular schema elements beyond
+ those referenced in Section 7.1. The client can retrieve subschema
+ information as described in Section 4.4.
+
+
+ Clients MUST NOT display nor attempt to decode as ASN.1, a value if
+ its syntax is not known. Clients MUST NOT assume the LDAP-specific
+ string encoding is restricted to a UTF-8 encoded string of Unicode
+ characters or any particular subset of Unicode (such as a printable
+ subset) unless such restriction is explicitly stated. Clients SHOULD
+ NOT send attribute values in a request that are not valid according to
+ the syntax defined for the attributes.
- Clients MUST NOT send attribute values in a request that are not valid
- according to the syntax defined for the attributes.
8. Security Considerations
+
Attributes of directory entries are used to provide descriptive
information about the real-world objects they represent, which can be
people, organizations or devices. Most countries have privacy laws
regarding the publication of information about people.
+
General security considerations for accessing directory information
with LDAP are discussed in [Protocol] and [AuthMeth].
+
9. IANA Considerations
+
It is requested that the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
- update the LDAP descriptors registry as indicated the following
+ update the LDAP descriptors registry as indicated in the following
template:
+
Subject: Request for LDAP Descriptor Registration Update
Descriptor (short name): see comment
Object Identifier: see comment
Author/Change Controller: IESG
Comments:
- The following descriptors (short names) should be updated to refer
- to RFC XXXX.
+
+ The following descriptors (short names) should be added to
+ the registry.
+
+
+ NAME Type OID
+ ------------------------ ---- -----------------
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 41]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 42]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+ governingStructureRule A 2.5.21.10
+ structuralObjectClass A 2.5.21.9
+
+
+ The following descriptors (short names) should be updated to
+ refer to this RFC.
NAME Type OID
------------------------ ---- -----------------
alias O 2.5.6.1
- aliasedEntryName A 2.5.4.1
aliasedObjectName A 2.5.4.1
altServer A 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.101.120.6
attributeTypes A 2.5.21.5
top O 2.5.6.0
+
10. Acknowledgments
+
This document is based in part on RFC 2251 by M. Wahl, T. Howes, and
S. Kille; RFC 2252 by M. Wahl, A. Coulbeck, T. Howes, S. Kille; and
RFC 2556 by M. Wahl, all products of the IETF Access, Searching and
Indexing of Directories (ASID) Working Group. This document is also
based in part on "The Directory: Models" [X.501], a product of the
International Telephone Union (ITU). Additional text was borrowed
- from RFC 2253 by Mark Wahl, Tim Howes, and Steve Kille.
+ from RFC 2253 by M. Wahl, T. Howes, and S. Kille.
+
- This document is a product of the IETF LDAP Revison (LDAPBIS) Working
+ This document is a product of the IETF LDAP Revision (LDAPBIS) Working
Group.
-11. Author's Address
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 43]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+11. Editor's Address
+
Kurt Zeilenga
E-mail: <kurt@openldap.org>
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 42]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+12. References
+
+
+ [[Note to the RFC Editor: please replace the citation tags used in
+ referencing Internet-Drafts with tags of the form RFCnnnn.]]
-12. References
12.1. Normative References
+
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14 (also RFC 2119), March 1997.
+
[RFC2234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997.
- [BCP64bis] Zeilenga, K., "IANA Considerations for LDAP", draft-
- ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-xx.txt, a work in progress.
+
+ [RFC3629] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
+ 10646", RFC 3629 (also STD 63), November 2003.
+
+
+ [RFC3671] Zeilenga, K., "Collective Attributes in LDAP", RFC 3671,
+ December 2003.
+
+
+ [RFC3672] Zeilenga, K. and S. Legg, "Subentries in LDAP", RFC
+ 3672, December 2003.
+
+
+ [BCP64bis] Zeilenga, K., "IANA Considerations for LDAP",
+ draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-xx.txt, a work in progress.
+
[Roadmap] Zeilenga, K. (editor), "LDAP: Technical Specification
Road Map", draft-ietf-ldapbis-roadmap-xx.txt, a work in
progress.
+
[Protocol] Sermersheim, J. (editor), "LDAP: The Protocol",
draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-xx.txt, a work in progress.
+
[AuthMeth] Harrison, R. (editor), "LDAP: Authentication Methods and
Connection Level Security Mechanisms",
draft-ietf-ldapbis-authmeth-xx.txt, a work in progress.
- [LDAPDN] Zeilenga, K. (editor), "LDAP: String Representation of
- Distinguished Names", draft-ietf-ldapbis-dn-xx.txt, a
- work in progress.
[Filters] Smith, M. (editor), LDAPbis WG, "LDAP: String
Representation of Search Filters",
draft-ietf-ldapbis-filter-xx.txt, a work in progress.
+
+ [LDAPDN] Zeilenga, K. (editor), "LDAP: String Representation of
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 44]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+ Distinguished Names", draft-ietf-ldapbis-dn-xx.txt, a
+ work in progress.
+
+
[LDAPURL] Smith, M. (editor), "LDAP: Uniform Resource Locator",
draft-ietf-ldapbis-url-xx.txt, a work in progress.
+
[SASL] Melnikov, A. (Editor), "Simple Authentication and
Security Layer (SASL)",
draft-ietf-sasl-rfc2222bis-xx.txt, a work in progress.
+
[Syntaxes] Legg, S. (editor), "LDAP: Syntaxes and Matching Rules",
draft-ietf-ldapbis-syntaxes-xx.txt, a work in progress.
+
[Schema] Dally, K. (editor), "LDAP: User Schema",
draft-ietf-ldapbis-user-schema-xx.txt, a work in
progress.
- [UTF-8] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
- 10646", draft-yergeau-rfc2279bis-xx.txt, a work in
-
+ [Unicode] The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version
+ 3.2.0" is defined by "The Unicode Standard, Version 3.0"
+ (Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley, 2000. ISBN 0-201-61633-5),
+ as amended by the "Unicode Standard Annex #27: Unicode
+ 3.1" (http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr27/) and by the
+ "Unicode Standard Annex #28: Unicode 3.2"
+ (http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr28/).
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 43]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
- progress.
-
- [ISO10646] International Organization for Standardization,
- "Universal Multiple-Octet Coded Character Set (UCS) -
- Architecture and Basic Multilingual Plane", ISO/IEC
- 10646-1 : 1993.
-
- [ASCII] Coded Character Set--7-bit American Standard Code for
- Information Interchange, ANSI X3.4-1986.
[X.500] International Telecommunication Union -
Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "The Directory
-- Overview of concepts, models and services,"
X.500(1993) (also ISO/IEC 9594-1:1994).
+
[X.501] International Telecommunication Union -
Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "The Directory
-- Models," X.501(1993) (also ISO/IEC 9594-2:1994).
+
[X.680] International Telecommunication Union -
Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "Abstract
Syntax Notation One (ASN.1) - Specification of Basic
Notation", X.680(1997) (also ISO/IEC 8824-1:1998).
+
12.2. Informative References
+
None.
+
Appendix A. Changes
+
This appendix is non-normative.
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 45]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
This document amounts to nearly a complete rewrite of portions of RFC
2251, RFC 2252, and RFC 2256. This rewrite was undertaken to improve
overall clarity of technical specification. This appendix provides a
portions of these documents.
+
A.1 Changes to RFC 2251
+
This document incorporates from RFC 2251 sections 3.2 and 3.4,
portions of Section 4 and 6 as summarized below.
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 44]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
A.1.1 Section 3.2 of RFC 2251
+
Section 3.2 of RFC 2251 provided a brief introduction to the X.500
data model, as used by LDAP. The previous specification relied on
[X.501] but lacked clarity in how X.500 models are adapted for use by
LDAP. This document describes the X.500 data models, as used by LDAP
- in greater detail, especially in areas where the models require
- adaptation is needed.
+ in greater detail, especially in areas where adaptation is needed.
+
Section 3.2.1 of RFC 2251 described an attribute as "a type with one
or more associated values." In LDAP, an attribute is better described
as an attribute description, a type with zero or more options, and one
or more associated values.
+
Section 3.2.2 of RFC 2251 mandated that subschema subentries contain
objectClasses and attributeTypes attributes, yet X.500(93) treats
these attributes as optional. While generally all implementations
attribute.
+
A.1.2 Section 3.4 of RFC 2251
+
Section 3.4 of RFC 2251 provided "Server-specific Data Requirements".
This material, with changes, was incorporated in Section 5.1 of this
document.
+
Changes:
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 46]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
- Clarify that attributes of the root DSE are subject to "other
restrictions" in addition to access controls.
+
- Clarify that only recognized extended requests need to be enumerated
'supportedExtension'.
+
- Clarify that only recognized request controls need to be enumerated
'supportedControl'.
+
- Clarify that root DSE attributes are operational and, like other
operational attributes, will not be returned in search requests
unless requested by name.
- - Clarify that not all root DSE attributes are user modifiable.
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 45]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
+ - Clarify that not all root DSE attributes are user modifiable.
- Remove inconsistent text regarding handling of the
available (see Section 4.4 of this document).
+
A.1.2 Section 4 of RFC 2251
+
Portions of Section 4 of RFC 2251 detailing aspects of the information
model used by LDAP were incorporated in this document, including:
+
- Restriction of distinguished values to attributes whose descriptions
- have no options (from Section 4.1.3).
+ have no options (from Section 4.1.3);
+
- Data model aspects of Attribute Types (from Section 4.1.4),
- Attribute Descriptions (from 4.1.4), Attribute (from 4.1.8),
- Matching Rule Identifier (from 4.1.9).
+ Attribute Descriptions (from 4.1.5), Attribute (from 4.1.8),
+ Matching Rule Identifier (from 4.1.9); and
+
- User schema requirements (from Section 4.1.6, 4.5.1, and 4.7).
+
+Clarifications to these portions include:
+
+
+ - Subtyping and AttributeDescriptions with options.
+
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 47]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
A.1.3 Section 6 of RFC 2251
+
The Section 6.1 and the second paragraph of Section 6.2 of RFC 2251
where incorporated into this document.
+
A.2 Changes to RFC 2252
+
This document incorporates Sections 4, 5 and 7 from RFC 2252.
+
A.2.1 Section 4 of RFC 2252
+
The specification was updated to use Augmented BNF [RFC2234]. The
string representation of an OBJECT IDENTIFIER was tighten to
disallow leading zeros as described in RFC 2252 text.
+
The <descr> syntax was changed to disallow semicolon (U+003B)
characters to appear to be consistent its natural language
-
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 46]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
specification "descr is the syntactic representation of an object
descriptor, which consists of letters and digits, starting with a
letter." In a related change, the statement "an
AttributeDescription can be used as the value in a NAME part of an
AttributeTypeDescription" was deleted. RFC 2252 provided no
- specification as to the semantics of attribute options appearing in
+ specification of the semantics of attribute options appearing in
NAME fields.
+
RFC 2252 stated that the <descr> form of <oid> SHOULD be preferred
over the <numericoid> form. However, <descr> form can be ambiguous.
To address this issue, the imperative was replaced with a statement
available. Additionally, an expanded discussion of descriptor
issues is discussed in Section 6.2 (Short Names).
+
The ABNF for a quoted string (qdstring) was updated to reflect
support for the escaping mechanism described in 4.3 of RFC 2252.
+
A.2.2 Section 5 of RFC 2252
+
Definitions of operational attributes provided in Section 5 of RFC
2252 where incorporated into this document.
+
The 'namingContexts' description was clarified. A first-level DSA
should publish, in addition to other values, "" indicating the root
of the DIT.
+
+
+
+
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 48]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+
+
+
+ The 'altServer' description was clarified. It may hold any URI.
+
+
The 'supportedExtension' description was clarified. A server need
only list the OBJECT IDENTIFIERs associated with the extended
requests of the extended operations it recognizes.
+
The 'supportedControl' description was clarified. A server need
only list the OBJECT IDENTIFIERs associated with the request
controls it recognizes.
+ Descriptions for the 'structuralObjectClass' and
+ 'governingStructureRule' operational attribute types were added.
+
+
+
A.2.3 Section 7 of RFC 2252
+
Section 7 of RFC 2252 provides definitions of the 'subschema' and
'extensibleObject' object classes. These definitions where
integrated into Section 4.2 and Section 4.3 of this document,
implementation requirement. This was incorporated into Section 7 of
this document.
- The specification of 'extensibleObject' was clarified of how it
-
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 47]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
+ The specification of 'extensibleObject' was clarified of how it
interacts with precluded attributes.
+
A.3 Changes to RFC 2256
+
This document incorporates Sections 5.1, 5.2, 7.1, and 7.2 of RFC
2256.
+
Section 5.1 of RFC 2256 provided the definition of the 'objectClass'
attribute type. This was integrated into Section 2.4.1 of this
document. The statement "One of the values is either 'top' or
'alias'" was replaced with statement that one of the values is 'top'
as entries belonging to 'alias' also belong to 'top'.
+
Section 5.2 of RFC 2256 provided the definition of the
'aliasedObjectName' attribute type. This was integrated into
Section 2.6.2 of this document.
+
Section 7.1 of RFC 2256 provided the definition of the 'top' object
class. This was integrated into Section 2.4.1 of this document.
+
Section 7.2 of RFC 2256 provided the definition of the 'alias'
object class. This was integrated into Section 2.6.1 of this
document.
-Intellectual Property Rights
-
- The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
- intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to pertain
- to the implementation or use of the technology described in this
- document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or
- might not be available; neither does it represent that it has made any
- effort to identify any such rights. Information on the IETF's
- procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
- standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
- claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of
- licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to
- obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary
- rights by implementors or users of this specification can be obtained
- from the IETF Secretariat.
-
- The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
- copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
- rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
- this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
- Director.
-
-
-
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 48]
-\f
-INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09 27 October 2003
-
-
-Full Copyright
-
- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
-
- This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
- others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
- or assist in its implmentation may be prepared, copied, published and
- distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind,
- provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
- included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
- document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
- the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
- Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
- developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
- copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed,
- or as required to translate it into languages other than English.
-
-
-
-
-
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 49]
+INTERNET-DRAFT draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-12 24 October 2004
+Intellectual Property Rights
+ The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
+ Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
+ pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
+ this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
+ might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
+ made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
+ on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found
+ in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
+ Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
+ assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
+ attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
+ such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification
+ can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
+ http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
+ The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
+ copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
+ rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
+ this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
+ ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
+Full Copyright
+ Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject
+ to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
+ except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
+ This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
+ "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
+ OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
+ ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
+ INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
+ INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
+ WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
-Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 49]
-\f
+Zeilenga LDAP Models [Page 50]
\ No newline at end of file
projects / openldap / blobdiff