mirror/openldap
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap.git synced 2024-12-27 03:20:22 +08:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Initial '+' draft

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Kurt Zeilenga 2000-07-07 19:46:20 +00:00
parent e18b9336ee
commit 8991c613b2
1 changed files with 221 additions and 0 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

221
doc/drafts/draft-zeilenga-ldapv3bis-opattrs-xx.txt Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,221 @@
INTERNET-DRAFT Kurt D. Zeilenga
Intended Category: Standard Track OpenLDAP Foundation
Expires: 29 December 2000 29 June 2000
LDAPv3: All Operational Attributes
<draft-zeilenga-ldapv3bis-opattrs-00.txt>
1. 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, after appropriate review and
revision, submitted to the RFC Editor as a Standard Track document.
Distribution of this memo is unlimited. Technical discussion of this
document will take place on the IETF LDAP Extension Working Group
mailing list <ietf-ldapext@netscape.com>. Please send editorial
comments directly to the author <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task
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.''
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
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 2000, The Internet Society. All Rights Reserved.
Please see the Copyright section near the end of this document for
more information.
2. Overview
X.500 provides a mechanism for clients to request all operational
attributes be returned with entries provided in response to a search
operation. LDAP [RFC2251] does not provide a similar mechanism to
clients to request the return of operational attributes. The lack of
such a mechanisms hinders discovery of operational attributes present
in an entry.
Zeilenga [Page 1]
INTERNET-DRAFT draft-zeilenga-ldapv3bis-opattrs-00 13 June 2000
This document defines a simple mechanism which clients may use to
request all operation attributes. This document updates RFC 2251 as
detailed below.
The key words ``MUST'', ``MUST NOT'', ``REQUIRED'', ``SHALL'', ``SHALL
NOT'', ``SHOULD'', ``SHOULD NOT'', ``RECOMMENDED'', and ``MAY'' in
this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119
[RFC2119].
3. Changes to RFC 2251
This document updates RFC 2251 as follows:
In Section 3.2.1, Attributes of Entries, the paragraph:
Some attributes, termed operational attributes, are used by
servers for administering the directory system itself. They are
not returned in search results unless explicitly requested by
name. Attributes which are not operational, such as "mail", will
have their schema and syntax constraints enforced by servers, but
servers will generally not make use of their values.
is replaced with:
Some attributes, termed operational attributes, are used by
servers for administering the directory system itself. They are
not returned in search results unless explicitly requested.
Attributes which are not operational, such as "mail", will have
their schema and syntax constraints enforced by servers, but
servers will generally not make use of their values.
In Section 4.5.1, Search Request, the paragraph:
- attributes: A list of the attributes to be returned from each
entry which matches the search filter. There are two special
values which may be used: an empty list with no attributes, and
the attribute description string "*". Both of these signify that
all user attributes are to be returned. (The "*" allows the
client to request all user attributes in addition to specific
operational attributes).
is replaced with:
- attributes: A list of the attributes to be returned from each
entry which matches the search filter. There are three special
values which may be used. An empty list with no attributes
signifies that all user attributes are to be returned. An
attribute list containing the attribute description string "*"
signifies that all user attributes are to be returned. An
attribute list containing the attribute description string "+"
signifies that all operational attributes are to be returned.
Zeilenga [Page 2]
INTERNET-DRAFT draft-zeilenga-ldapv3bis-opattrs-00 13 June 2000
(The "*" allows the client to request all user attributes in
addition to any requested operational attributes. The "+" allows
the client to request all operational attributes in addition to
requested user attributes. A client may list both "*" and "+" to
request all attributes.)
and the paragraph:
Client implementors should note that even if all user attributes
are requested, some attributes of the entry may not be included in
search results due to access control or other restrictions.
Furthermore, servers will not return operational attributes, such
as objectClasses or attributeTypes, unless they are listed by
name, since there may be extremely large number of values for
certain operational attributes. (A list of operational attributes
for use in LDAP is given in [5].)
is replaced with:
Client implementors should note that results may not include all
requested attributes due to access controls or other restrictions.
In addition, client implementors should request types only be
returned when discovering operational attributes as certain
operational attributes may have extremely large number of values.
Furthermore, servers will not return operational attributes, such
as objectClasses or attributeTypes, unless they are requested,
since there may be extremely large number of values for certain
operational attributes. (A list of operational attributes for use
in LDAP is given in [5].)
5. Interoperability Considerations
The addition of this mechanism to LDAPv3 is not believed to cause
significant interoperability problems. A server which does not
support the "+" should ignore the attribute description per RFC 2251,
section 4.5.1 and only return the attributes for the attribute
descriptions strings they do recognize. From the client's
perspective, this is one possible "other restriction" noted above.
5. Security Considerations
This document provides a mechanism which clients may use to discover
operational attributes. Access controls should be used to restrict
access to operational attributes per local policy.
6. Copyright
Zeilenga [Page 3]
INTERNET-DRAFT draft-zeilenga-ldapv3bis-opattrs-00 13 June 2000
Copyright 2000, The Internet Society. 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 implementation 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.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE AUTHORS, THE INTERNET SOCIETY, AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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.
7. Bibliography
[RFC2219] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2251] M. Wahl, T. Howes, S. Kille, "Lightweight
Directory Access Protocol (v3)", RFC 2251,
December 1997.
[X.500] ITU-T Rec. X.500, "The Directory: Overview of
Concepts, Models and Service", 1993.
8. Author's Address
Kurt D. Zeilenga
OpenLDAP Foundation
<Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Zeilenga [Page 4]