Internet-Draft David Chadwick LDAPExt WG University of Salford Intended Category: Standards Track Sean Mullan Sun Microsystems Expires: 11 June 2001 11 December 2000 Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3 STATUS OF THIS MEMO This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all the provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026 [1]. 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. This Internet-Draft expires on 11 June 2001. Comments and suggestions on this document are encouraged. Comments on this document should be sent to the LDAPEXT working group discussion list: ietf-ldapext@netscape.com or directly to the authors. ABSTRACT This document describes a control for the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol v3 that is used to return a subset of attribute values from an entry, specifically, only those values that match a "values return" filter. Without support for this control, a client must retrieve all of an attribute's values and search for specific values locally. 1. Introduction When reading an attribute from an entry using LDAPv3 [2], it is normally only possible to read either the attribute type, or the attribute type and all its values. It is not possible to selectively read just a few of the attribute values. If an attribute holds many values, for example, the userCertificate attribute, or the subschema publishing operational attributes objectClasses and attributeTypes [3], then it may be desirable for the user to be able to selectively retrieve a subset of the values, specifically, those attribute values that match some user defined selection criteria. Without the control specified in this [ID/standard/document] a client must read all of the attribute's values and filter out the unwanted values, necessitating the client to implement the matching rules. It also requires the client to potentially read and process many irrelevant values, which can be inefficient if the values are large or complex, or there are many values stored per attribute. This [ID/Standard/document] specifies an LDAPv3 control to enable a user to return only those values that matched (i.e. returned TRUE to) one or more elements of a newly defined "values return" filter. This control can be especially useful when used in conjunction with extensible matching rules that match on one or more components of complex binary attribute values. 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 RFC 2119 [5]. 2. The valuesReturnFilter Control The valuesReturnFilter control MAY be critical or non-critical as determined by the user. It only has meaning for the Search operation, and SHOULD only be added to the Search operation by the client. If the server supports the control and it is present on a Search operation, the server MUST obey the control regardless of the value of the criticality flag. If the control is marked as critical, and either the server does not support the control or the control is applied to an operation other than Search, then the server MUST return an unavailableCriticalExtension error. If the control is not marked as critical, and either the server does not support the control or the control is applied to an operation other than Search, then the server MUST ignore the control. The object identifier for this control is 1.2.826.0.1.3344810.2.3 The controlValue is an OCTET STRING, whose value is the BER encoding of a value of the type ValuesReturnFilter. ValuesReturnFilter ::= SEQUENCE OF SimpleFilterItem SimpleFilterItem ::= CHOICE { equalityMatch [3] AttributeValueAssertion, substrings [4] SubstringFilter, greaterOrEqual [5] AttributeValueAssertion, lessOrEqual [6] AttributeValueAssertion, present [7] AttributeDescription, approxMatch [8] AttributeValueAssertion, extensibleMatch [9] SimpleMatchingAssertion } SimpleMatchingAssertion ::= SEQUENCE { matchingRule [1] MatchingRuleId OPTIONAL, type [2] AttributeDescription OPTIONAL, --- at least one of the above must be present matchValue [3] AssertionValue} All the above data types have their standard meanings as defined in [2]. If the server supports this control, the server MUST make use of the control as follows: (1) The Search Filter is first executed in order to determine which entries satisfy the Search criteria (these are the filtered entries). The control has no impact on this step. (2) If the typesOnly parameter of the Search Request is TRUE, the control has no effect and the Search Request SHOULD be processed as if the control had not been specified. (3) If the attributes parameter of the Search Request consists of a list containing only the attribute with OID "1.1" (specifying that no attributes are to be returned), the control has no effect and the Search Request SHOULD be processed as if the control had not been specified. (4) For each attribute listed in the attributes parameter of the Search Request, the server MUST apply the control as follows to each entry in the set of filtered entries: i) Every attribute value that evaluates TRUE against one or more elements of the ValuesReturnFilter is placed in the corresponding SearchResultEntry. ii) Every attribute value that evaluates FALSE or undefined against all elements of the ValuesReturnFilter is not placed in the corresponding SearchResultEntry. An attribute that has no values selected is returned with an empty set of vals. Note. If the AttributeDescriptionList is empty or comprises "*" then the control MUST be applied against every attribute. 3. Relationship to X.500 The control is a superset of the matchedValuesOnly (MVO) boolean of the X.500 DAP [4] Search argument, as amended in the latest version [6]. Close examination of the matchedValuesOnly boolean by the LDAPEXT group revealed ambiguities and complexities in the MVO boolean that could not easily be resolved. For example, it was not clear if the MVO boolean governed only those attribute values that contributed to the overall truth of the filter, or all of the attribute values even if the filter item containing the attribute evaluated to false. For this reason the LDAPEXT group decided to replace the MVO boolean with a simple filter that removes any uncertainty as to whether an attribute value has been selected or not. 4. Relationship to other LDAP Controls The purpose of this control is to select zero, one or more attribute values from each requested attribute in a filtered entry, and to discard the remainder. Once the attribute values have been discarded by this control they MUST NOT be re-instated into the Search results by other controls. This control acts independently of other LDAP controls such as server side sorting [10] and duplicate entries [7]. However, there might be interactions between this control and other controls so that a different set of Search Result Entries are returned, or the entries are returned in a different order, depending upon the sequencing of this control and other controls in the LDAP request. For example, with server side sorting, if sorting is done first, and value return filtering second, the set of Search Results may appear to be in the wrong order since the value filtering may remove the attribute values upon which the ordering was done. (The sorting document specifies that entries without any sort key attribute values should be treated as coming after all other attribute values.) Similarly with duplicate entries, if duplication is performed before value filtering, the set of Search Result Entries may contain identical duplicate entries, each with an empty set of attribute values, because the value filtering removed the attribute values that were used to duplicate the results. For these reasons it is recommended that the ValuesReturnFilter control in a SearchRequest SHOULD precede other controls that affect the number and ordering of SearchResultEntrys. 5. Examples All entries are provided in LDIF format [8]. The string representation of the valuesReturnFilter in the examples below uses the following ABNF notation: valuesReturnFilter = "(" 1*simpleFilterItem ")" simpleFilterItem = "(" item ")" where item is as defined by RFC2254 [11]. (1) The first example shows how the control can be set to return all attribute values from one attribute type (e.g. telephoneNumber) and a subset of values from another attribute type (e.g. mail). The entries below represent organizationalPerson object classes located somewhere beneath the distinguished name dc=ac, dc=uk. dn: cn=Sean Mullan, ou=people, dc=sun, dc=ac, dc=uk cn: Sean Mullan sn: Mullan objectClass: organizationalPerson objectClass: person objectClass: inetOrgPerson mail: sean.mullan@hotmail.com mail: mullan@east.sun.com telephoneNumber: + 781 442 0926 telephoneNumber: 555-9999 dn: cn=David Chadwick, ou=isi, o=salford, dc=ac, dc=uk cn: David Chadwick sn: Chadwick objectClass: organizationalPerson objectClass: person objectClass: inetOrgPerson mail: d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk An LDAP search operation is specified with a baseObject set to the DN of the search base (i.e. dc=ac, dc=uk), a subtree scope, a filter set to (sn=mullan), and the list of attributes to be returned set to "mail, telephoneNumber". In addition, a ValuesReturnFilter control is set to ((mail=*hotmail.com)(telephoneNumber=*)) The search results returned by the server would consist of the following entry: dn: cn=Sean Mullan, ou=people, dc=sun, dc=ac, dc=uk mail: sean.mullan@hotmail.com telephoneNumber: + 781 442 0926 telephoneNumber: 555-9999 Note that the control has no effect on the values returned for the "telephoneNumber" attribute (all of the values are returned), since the control specified that all values should be returned. (2) The second example shows how one might retrieve a single attribute type subschema definition for the "gunk" attribute with OID 1.2.3.4.5 from the subschema subentry Assume the subschema subentry is held below the root entry with DN cn=subschema subentry, o=myorg and this holds an attributeTypes operational attribute holding the descriptions of the 35 attributes known to this server (each description is held as a single attribute value of the attributeTypes attribute). dn: cn=subschema subentry, o=myorg cn: subschema subentry objectClass: subschema attributeTypes: ( 2.5.4.3 NAME 'cn' SUP name ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.4.6 NAME 'c' SUP name SINGLE-VALUE ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.4.0 NAME 'objectClass' EQUALITY objectIdentifierMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38 ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.18.2 NAME 'modifyTimestamp' EQUALITY generalizedTimeMatch ORDERING generalizedTimeOrderingMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.24 SINGLE-VALUE NO-USER- MODIFICATION USAGE directoryOperation ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.21.6 NAME 'objectClasses' EQUALITY objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.37 USAGE directoryOperation ) attributeTypes: ( 1.2.3.4.5 NAME 'gunk' EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch SUBSTR caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.44{64} ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.21.5 NAME 'attributeTypes' EQUALITY objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.3 USAGE directoryOperation ) plus another 28 - you get the idea. The user creates an LDAP search operation with a baseObject set to cn=subschema subentry, o=myorg, a scope of base, a filter set to (objectClass=subschema), the list of attributes to be returned set to "attributeTypes", and the ValuesReturnFilter set to ((attributeTypes=1.2.3.4.5)) The search result returned by the server would consist of the following entry: dn: cn=subschema subentry, o=myorg attributeTypes: ( 1.2.3.4.5 NAME 'gunk' EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch SUBSTR caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.44{64} ) (3) The final example shows how the control can be used to match on a userCertificate attribute value with a particular key usage bit set (in this case the key encipherment bit). Note that this example requires the LDAP server to support the certificateMatch matching rule defined in [9] and extensible matching. The entry below represent a pkiUser object class stored in the directory. dn: cn=David Chadwick + serialNumber=123456, ou=people, o=University of Salford, c=gb cn: David Chadwick + serialNumber=123456 objectClass: person objectClass: organizationalPerson objectClass: pkiUser objectClass: inetOrgPerson sn: Chadwick mail: d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk userCertificate: {binary representation of certificate including key usage bit of digitalSignature (0)} userCertificate: {binary representation of certificate including key usage bit of nonRepudiation (1)} userCertificate: {binary representation of certificate including key usage bit of key encipherment (2)} userCertificate: {binary representation of certificate including key usage bit of data encipherment (3)} An LDAP search operation is specified with a baseObject set to o=University of Salford, c=gb, a subtree scope, a filter set to (sn=chadwick) and the list of attributes to be returned set to "userCertificate;binary". In addition, a ValuesReturnFilter control is set to ((userCertificate:2.5.13.35:=(USE'001'B))) The search result returned by the server would consist of the following entry: dn: cn=David Chadwick + serialNumber=123456, ou=people, o=University of Salford, c=gb userCertificate;binary: {binary representation of certificate with key usage bit of key encipherment (2)} 6. Security Considerations This [ID/standard/document] does not primarily discuss security issues. Note however that attribute values MUST only be returned if the access controls applied by the LDAP server allow them to be returned, and in this respect the effect of the ValuesReturnFilter control is of no consequence. Note that the ValuesReturnFilter control may have a positive effect on the deployment of public key infrastructures. Certain PKI operations, like searching for specific certificates, become more practical when combined with X.509 certificate matching rules at the server, and more scalable, since the control avoids the downloading of potentially large numbers of irrelevant certificates which would have to be processed and filtered locally (which in some cases is very difficult to perform). 7. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank members of the LDAPExt list for their constructive comments on earlier versions of this [ID/standard/document], and in particular to Harald Alvestrand who first suggested having an attribute return filter and Bruce Greenblatt who first proposed a syntax for this control. 8. Copyright Copyright (C) The Internet Society (date). 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 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. 9. References [1] S. Bradner. "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", RFC 2026, October 1996. [2] M. Wahl, T. Howes, S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3)", Dec. 1997, RFC 2251 [3] M. Wahl, A. Coulbeck, T. Howes, S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Attribute Syntax Definitions", RFC 2252, Dec 1997 [4] ITU-T Rec. X.511, "The Directory: Abstract Service Definition", 1993. [5] S.Bradner. "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997. [6] Draft ISO/IEC 9594 / ITU-T Rec X.511 (2001) The Directory: Abstract Service Definition. [7] J. Sermersheim. "LDAP Control for a Duplicate Entry Representation of Search Results", Internet Draft , October 2000. [8] G. Good. "The LDAP Data Interchange Format (LDIF) - Technical Specification". RFC 2849, June 2000. [9] D. Chadwick, S.Legg. "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure - Additional LDAP Schema for PKIs and PMIs", Internet Draft , September 2000 [10] T. Howes, M. Wahl, A. Anantha, "LDAP Control Extension for Server Side Sorting of Search Results", RFC 2891, August 2000 [11] T. Howes. "The String Representation of LDAP Search Filters". RFC 2254, December 1997. 10. Authors Addresses David Chadwick IS Institute University of Salford Salford M5 4WT England Email: d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk Tel: +44 161 295 5351 Sean Mullan Sun Microsystems East Point Business Park Dublin 3 Ireland Tel: +353 1 853 0655 Email: sean.mullan@sun.com 11. Changes since version 2 i) Revised the examples to be more appropriate ii) Section on interactions with other LDAP controls added iii) Removed Editor's note concerning present filter iv) Tightened wording about its applicability to other operations and use of criticality field Changes since version 3 i) Mandated that at least one of type and matchingRule in simpleMatchingAssertion be present ii) Fixed LDIF mistakes in the examples iii) Additional minor editorials only Changes since version 4 i) corrected the ABNF for single items of valuesReturnFilter