mirror of
https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap.git
synced 2024-12-21 03:10:25 +08:00
1793 lines
52 KiB
Plaintext
1793 lines
52 KiB
Plaintext
|
||
|
||
|
||
Network Working Group L. Howard
|
||
Internet-Draft PADL Software
|
||
Obsoletes: 2307 (if approved) H. Chu, Ed.
|
||
Intended status: Informational Symas Corp.
|
||
Expires: February 10, 2010 August 9, 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
An Approach for Using LDAP as a Network Information Service
|
||
draft-howard-rfc2307bis-02.txt
|
||
|
||
Status of this Memo
|
||
|
||
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
|
||
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
|
||
|
||
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 will expire on February 10, 2010.
|
||
|
||
Copyright Notice
|
||
|
||
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
|
||
document authors. All rights reserved.
|
||
|
||
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
|
||
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of
|
||
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
|
||
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
|
||
and restrictions with respect to this document.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 1]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
Abstract
|
||
|
||
This document describes a mechanism for mapping entities related to
|
||
TCP/IP and the UNIX system [UNIX] into [X.500] entries so that they
|
||
may be resolved with the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
|
||
[RFC4511]. A set of attribute types and object classes are proposed,
|
||
along with specific guidelines for interpreting them. The intention
|
||
is to assist the deployment of LDAP as an organizational nameservice.
|
||
No proposed solutions are intended as standards for the Internet.
|
||
Rather, it is hoped that a general consensus will emerge as to the
|
||
appropriate solution to such problems, leading eventually to the
|
||
adoption of standards. The proposed mechanism has already been
|
||
implemented with some success.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 2]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
1. Background and Motivation
|
||
|
||
The UNIX (R) operating system, and its derivatives (specifically,
|
||
those which support TCP/IP and conform to the X/Open Single UNIX
|
||
specification [UNIX]) require a means of looking up entities, by
|
||
matching them against search criteria or by enumeration. (Other
|
||
operating systems that support TCP/IP may provide some means of
|
||
resolving some of these entities. This schema is applicable to those
|
||
environments also.)
|
||
|
||
These entities include users, groups, IP services (which map names to
|
||
IP ports and protocols, and vice versa), IP protocols (which map
|
||
names to IP protocol numbers and vice versa), RPCs (which map names
|
||
to ONC Remote Procedure Call [RFC1057] numbers and vice versa), NIS
|
||
netgroups, booting information (boot parameters and MAC address
|
||
mappings), filesystem mounts, IP hosts and networks.
|
||
|
||
Resolution requests are made through a set of C functions, provided
|
||
in the UNIX system's C library. For example, the UNIX system utility
|
||
"ls", which enumerates the contents of a filesystem directory, uses
|
||
the C library function getpwuid() in order to map user IDs to login
|
||
names. Once the request is made, it is resolved using a
|
||
"nameservice" which is supported by the client library. The
|
||
nameservice may be, at its simplest, a collection of files in the
|
||
local filesystem which are opened and searched by the C library.
|
||
Other common nameservices include the Network Information Service
|
||
(NIS) and the Domain Name System (DNS) [RFC1034]. (The latter is
|
||
typically used for resolving hosts, services and networks.) Both
|
||
these nameservices have the advantage of being distributed and thus
|
||
permitting a common set of entities to be shared amongst many
|
||
clients.
|
||
|
||
LDAP is a distributed, hierarchical directory service access protocol
|
||
which is used to access repositories of users and other network-
|
||
related entities. Because LDAP is often not tightly integrated with
|
||
the host operating system, information such as users may need to be
|
||
kept both in LDAP and in an operating system supported nameservice
|
||
such as NIS. By using LDAP as the primary means of resolving these
|
||
entities, these redundancy issues are minimized and the scalability
|
||
of LDAP can be exploited. (By comparison, NIS services based on flat
|
||
files do not have the scalability or extensibility of LDAP or X.500.)
|
||
|
||
The object classes and attributes defined below are suitable for
|
||
representing the aforementioned entities in a form compatible with
|
||
LDAP and X.500 directory services.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 3]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
2. General Issues
|
||
|
||
2.1. Terminology
|
||
|
||
The key words "MUST", "SHOULD", and "MAY" used in this document are
|
||
to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
|
||
|
||
For the purposes of this document, the term "nameservice" refers to a
|
||
service, such as NIS or flat files, that is used by the operating
|
||
system to resolve entities within a single, local naming context.
|
||
Contrast this with a "directory service" such as LDAP, which supports
|
||
extensible schema and multiple naming contexts.
|
||
|
||
The term "NIS-related entities" broadly refers to entities which are
|
||
typically resolved using the Network Information Service. (NIS was
|
||
previously known as YP.) Deploying LDAP for resolving these entities
|
||
does not imply that NIS be used, as a gateway or otherwise. In
|
||
particular, the host and network classes are generically applicable,
|
||
and may be implemented on any system that wishes to use LDAP or X.500
|
||
for host and network resolution.
|
||
|
||
The "DUA" (directory user agent) refers to the LDAP client querying
|
||
these entities, such as an LDAP to NIS gateway or the C library. The
|
||
"client" refers to the application which ultimately makes use of the
|
||
information returned by the resolution. It is irrelevant whether the
|
||
DUA and the client reside within the same address space. The act of
|
||
the DUA making this information to the client is termed
|
||
"republishing".
|
||
|
||
To avoid confusion, the term "login name" refers to the user's login
|
||
name (being the value of the uid attribute) and the term "user ID"
|
||
refers to the user's integer identification number (being the value
|
||
of the uidNumber attribute).
|
||
|
||
The phrases "resolving an entity" and "resolution of entities" refer
|
||
respectively to enumerating NIS-related entities of a given type, and
|
||
matching them against a given search criterion. One or more entities
|
||
are returned as a result of successful "resolutions" (a "match"
|
||
operation will only return one entity).
|
||
|
||
The use of the term UNIX does not confer upon this schema the
|
||
endorsement of owners of the UNIX trademark. Where necessary, the
|
||
term "TCP/IP entity" is used to refer to protocols, services, hosts,
|
||
and networks, and the term "UNIX entity" to its complement. (The
|
||
former category does not mandate the host operating system supporting
|
||
the interfaces required for resolving UNIX entities.)
|
||
|
||
The OIDs defined below are derived from iso(1) org(3) dod(6)
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 4]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
internet(1) directory(1) nisSchema(1)
|
||
|
||
2.2. Schema
|
||
|
||
The attributes and classes defined in this document are summarized
|
||
below.
|
||
|
||
2.2.1. Attributes
|
||
|
||
The following attributes are defined in this document:
|
||
|
||
uidNumber
|
||
gidNumber
|
||
gecos
|
||
homeDirectory
|
||
loginShell
|
||
shadowLastChange
|
||
shadowMin
|
||
shadowMax
|
||
shadowWarning
|
||
shadowInactive
|
||
shadowExpire
|
||
shadowFlag
|
||
memberUid
|
||
memberNisNetgroup
|
||
nisNetgroupTriple
|
||
ipServicePort
|
||
ipServiceProtocol
|
||
ipProtocolNumber
|
||
oncRpcNumber
|
||
ipHostNumber
|
||
ipNetworkNumber
|
||
ipNetmaskNumber
|
||
macAddress
|
||
bootParameter
|
||
bootFile
|
||
nisMapName
|
||
nisMapEntry
|
||
nisPublicKey
|
||
nisSecretKey
|
||
nisDomain
|
||
automountMapName
|
||
automountKey
|
||
automountInformation
|
||
|
||
Additionally, some of the attributes defined in [RFC4519] and
|
||
[RFC3112] are required.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 5]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
2.2.2. Attribute Option
|
||
|
||
Centralizing a name service in LDAP allows heterogeneous systems to
|
||
obtain their information from a single place. However in some cases,
|
||
this information cannot be used uniformly on all of the client
|
||
systems. These attribute options are defined to allow system-
|
||
specific values to be used where necessary. The options are defined
|
||
as the following:
|
||
|
||
host-<hostname>
|
||
hostos-<ostype>
|
||
|
||
where hostname is a string representing the name of a specific
|
||
machine, and ostype is a string representing a particular operating
|
||
system.
|
||
|
||
For example, a user named "Babs Jensen" may have a different home
|
||
directory on different machines. This could be represented as:
|
||
|
||
homeDirectory: /home/babsj
|
||
homeDirectory;hostos-sunos: /export/home/bjensen
|
||
homeDirectory;host-babshost: /home/root
|
||
|
||
These attribute options follow sub-typing semantics. If a DUA
|
||
requests an attribute to be returned in a search operation, and does
|
||
not specify an option, all subtypes of that attribute are returned.
|
||
|
||
2.2.3. Object Classes
|
||
|
||
The following object classes are defined in this document:
|
||
|
||
posixAccount
|
||
shadowAccount
|
||
posixGroup
|
||
ipService
|
||
ipProtocol
|
||
oncRpc
|
||
ipHost
|
||
ipNetwork
|
||
nisNetgroup
|
||
nisMap
|
||
nisObject
|
||
ieee802Device
|
||
bootableDevice
|
||
nisKeyObject
|
||
nisDomainObject
|
||
automountMap
|
||
automount
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 6]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
Additionally, some of the attributes defined in [RFC4519] are
|
||
required.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 7]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
3. Attribute Definitions
|
||
|
||
This section contains attribute definitions to be implemented by DUAs
|
||
supporting this schema:
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.0 NAME 'uidNumber'
|
||
DESC 'An integer uniquely identifying a user in an
|
||
administrative domain'
|
||
EQUALITY integerMatch
|
||
ORDERING integerOrderingMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.1 NAME 'gidNumber'
|
||
DESC 'An integer uniquely identifying a group in an
|
||
administrative domain'
|
||
EQUALITY integerMatch
|
||
ORDERING integerOrderingMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.2 NAME 'gecos'
|
||
DESC 'The GECOS field; the common name'
|
||
EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch
|
||
SUBSTRINGS caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.3 NAME 'homeDirectory'
|
||
DESC 'The absolute path to the home directory'
|
||
EQUALITY caseExactIA5Match
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.4 NAME 'loginShell'
|
||
DESC 'The path to the login shell'
|
||
EQUALITY caseExactIA5Match
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 8]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.5 NAME 'shadowLastChange'
|
||
EQUALITY integerMatch
|
||
ORDERING integerOrderingMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.6 NAME 'shadowMin'
|
||
EQUALITY integerMatch
|
||
ORDERING integerOrderingMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.7 NAME 'shadowMax'
|
||
EQUALITY integerMatch
|
||
ORDERING integerOrderingMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.8 NAME 'shadowWarning'
|
||
EQUALITY integerMatch
|
||
ORDERING integerOrderingMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.9 NAME 'shadowInactive'
|
||
EQUALITY integerMatch
|
||
ORDERING integerOrderingMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.10 NAME 'shadowExpire'
|
||
EQUALITY integerMatch
|
||
ORDERING integerOrderingMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.11 NAME 'shadowFlag'
|
||
EQUALITY integerMatch
|
||
ORDERING integerOrderingMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 9]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.12 NAME 'memberUid'
|
||
EQUALITY caseExactMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.13 NAME 'memberNisNetgroup'
|
||
EQUALITY caseExactMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.14 NAME 'nisNetgroupTriple'
|
||
DESC 'Netgroup triple'
|
||
EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch
|
||
SUBSTRINGS caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.15 NAME 'ipServicePort'
|
||
DESC 'Service port number'
|
||
EQUALITY integerMatch
|
||
ORDERING integerOrderingMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.16 NAME 'ipServiceProtocol'
|
||
DESC 'Service protocol name'
|
||
EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.17 NAME 'ipProtocolNumber'
|
||
DESC 'IP protocol number'
|
||
EQUALITY integerMatch
|
||
ORDERING integerOrderingMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.18 NAME 'oncRpcNumber'
|
||
DESC 'ONC RPC number'
|
||
EQUALITY integerMatch
|
||
ORDERING integerOrderingMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 10]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.19 NAME 'ipHostNumber'
|
||
DESC 'IPv4 addresses as a dotted decimal omitting leading
|
||
zeros or IPv6 addresses as defined in RFC2373'
|
||
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.20 NAME 'ipNetworkNumber'
|
||
DESC 'IP network omitting leading zeros, eg. 192.168'
|
||
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.21 NAME 'ipNetmaskNumber'
|
||
DESC 'IP netmask omitting leading zeros, eg. 255.255.255.0'
|
||
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.22 NAME 'macAddress'
|
||
DESC 'MAC address in maximal, colon separated hex
|
||
notation, eg. 00:00:92:90:ee:e2'
|
||
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.23 NAME 'bootParameter'
|
||
DESC 'rpc.bootparamd parameter'
|
||
EQUALITY caseExactIA5Match
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.24 NAME 'bootFile'
|
||
DESC 'Boot image name'
|
||
EQUALITY caseExactIA5Match
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.26 NAME 'nisMapName'
|
||
DESC 'Name of a generic NIS map'
|
||
EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15{64} )
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 11]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.27 NAME 'nisMapEntry'
|
||
DESC 'A generic NIS entry'
|
||
EQUALITY caseExactMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15{1024}
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.28 NAME 'nisPublicKey'
|
||
DESC 'NIS public key'
|
||
EQUALITY octetStringMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.40
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.29 NAME 'nisSecretKey'
|
||
DESC 'NIS secret key'
|
||
EQUALITY octetStringMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.40
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.30 NAME 'nisDomain'
|
||
DESC 'NIS domain'
|
||
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26{256} )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.31 NAME 'automountMapName'
|
||
DESC 'automount Map Name'
|
||
EQUALITY caseExactMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.32 NAME 'automountKey'
|
||
DESC 'Automount Key value'
|
||
EQUALITY caseExactMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.1.33 NAME 'automountInformation'
|
||
DESC 'Automount information'
|
||
EQUALITY caseExactMatch
|
||
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15
|
||
SINGLE-VALUE )
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 12]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
4. Class Definitions
|
||
|
||
This section contains class definitions to be implemented by DUAs
|
||
supporting the schema.
|
||
|
||
Various schema for mail routing and delivery using LDAP directories
|
||
have been proposed, and as such this document does not consider
|
||
schema for representing mail aliases or distribution lists.
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.0 NAME 'posixAccount' SUP top AUXILIARY
|
||
DESC 'Abstraction of an account with POSIX attributes'
|
||
MUST ( cn $ uid $ uidNumber $ gidNumber $ homeDirectory )
|
||
MAY ( authPassword $ userPassword $ loginShell $ gecos $
|
||
description ) )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.1 NAME 'shadowAccount' SUP top AUXILIARY
|
||
DESC 'Additional attributes for shadow passwords'
|
||
MUST uid
|
||
MAY ( authPassword $ userPassword $ description $
|
||
shadowLastChange $ shadowMin $ shadowMax $
|
||
shadowWarning $ shadowInactive $
|
||
shadowExpire $ shadowFlag ) )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.2 NAME 'posixGroup' SUP top AUXILIARY
|
||
DESC 'Abstraction of a group of accounts'
|
||
MUST gidNumber
|
||
MAY ( authPassword $ userPassword $ memberUid $
|
||
description ) )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.3 NAME 'ipService' SUP top STRUCTURAL
|
||
DESC 'Abstraction an Internet Protocol service.
|
||
Maps an IP port and protocol (such as tcp or udp)
|
||
to one or more names; the distinguished value of
|
||
the cn attribute denotes the service's canonical
|
||
name'
|
||
MUST ( cn $ ipServicePort $ ipServiceProtocol )
|
||
MAY description )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.4 NAME 'ipProtocol' SUP top STRUCTURAL
|
||
DESC 'Abstraction of an IP protocol. Maps a protocol number
|
||
to one or more names. The distinguished value of the cn
|
||
attribute denotes the protocol canonical name'
|
||
MUST ( cn $ ipProtocolNumber )
|
||
MAY description )
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 13]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.5 NAME 'oncRpc' SUP top STRUCTURAL
|
||
DESC 'Abstraction of an Open Network Computing (ONC)
|
||
[RFC1057] Remote Procedure Call (RPC) binding.
|
||
This class maps an ONC RPC number to a name.
|
||
The distinguished value of the cn attribute denotes
|
||
the RPC service canonical name'
|
||
MUST ( cn $ oncRpcNumber )
|
||
MAY description )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.6 NAME 'ipHost' SUP top AUXILIARY
|
||
DESC 'Abstraction of a host, an IP device. The distinguished
|
||
value of the cn attribute denotes the host's canonical
|
||
name. Device SHOULD be used as a structural class'
|
||
MUST ( cn $ ipHostNumber )
|
||
MAY ( authPassword $ userPassword $ l $ description $
|
||
manager ) )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.7 NAME 'ipNetwork' SUP top STRUCTURAL
|
||
DESC 'Abstraction of a network. The distinguished value of
|
||
the cn attribute denotes the network canonical name'
|
||
MUST ipNetworkNumber
|
||
MAY ( cn $ ipNetmaskNumber $ l $ description $ manager ) )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.8 NAME 'nisNetgroup' SUP top STRUCTURAL
|
||
DESC 'Abstraction of a netgroup. May refer to other
|
||
netgroups'
|
||
MUST cn
|
||
MAY ( nisNetgroupTriple $ memberNisNetgroup $ description ) )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.9 NAME 'nisMap' SUP top STRUCTURAL
|
||
DESC 'A generic abstraction of a NIS map'
|
||
MUST nisMapName
|
||
MAY description )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.10 NAME 'nisObject' SUP top STRUCTURAL
|
||
DESC 'An entry in a NIS map'
|
||
MUST ( cn $ nisMapEntry $ nisMapName )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.11 NAME 'ieee802Device' SUP top AUXILIARY
|
||
DESC 'A device with a MAC address; device SHOULD be
|
||
used as a structural class'
|
||
MAY macAddress )
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 14]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.12 NAME 'bootableDevice' SUP top AUXILIARY
|
||
DESC 'A device with boot parameters; device SHOULD be
|
||
used as a structural class'
|
||
MAY ( bootFile $ bootParameter ) )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.14 NAME 'nisKeyObject' SUP top AUXILIARY
|
||
DESC 'An object with a public and secret key'
|
||
MUST ( cn $ nisPublicKey $ nisSecretKey )
|
||
MAY ( uidNumber $ description ) )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.15 NAME 'nisDomainObject' SUP top AUXILIARY
|
||
DESC 'Associates a NIS domain with a naming context'
|
||
MUST nisDomain )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.16 NAME 'automountMap' SUP top STRUCTURAL
|
||
MUST ( automountMapName )
|
||
MAY description )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.17 NAME 'automount' SUP top STRUCTURAL
|
||
DESC 'Automount information'
|
||
MUST ( automountKey $ automountInformation )
|
||
MAY description )
|
||
|
||
|
||
( 1.3.6.1.1.1.2.18 NAME 'groupOfMembers' SUP top STRUCTURAL
|
||
DESC 'A group with members (DNs)'
|
||
MUST cn
|
||
MAY ( businessCategory $ seeAlso $ owner $ ou $ o $
|
||
description $ member ) )
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 15]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
5. Implementation Details
|
||
|
||
5.1. Suggested Resolution Methods
|
||
|
||
The preferred means of directing a client application (one using the
|
||
shared services of the C library) to use LDAP as its information
|
||
source for the functions listed in Appendix B is to modify the source
|
||
code to directly query LDAP. As the source to commercial C libraries
|
||
and applications is rarely available to the end-user, one could
|
||
emulate a supported nameservice (such as NIS). (This is also an
|
||
appropriate opportunity to perform caching of entries across process
|
||
address spaces.) In the case of NIS, reference implementations are
|
||
widely available and the RPC interface is well known.
|
||
|
||
The means by which the operating system is directed to use LDAP is
|
||
implementation dependent. For example, some operating systems and C
|
||
libraries support end-user extensible resolvers using dynamically
|
||
loadable libraries and a nameservice "switch" (NSS). The means in
|
||
which the DUA locates LDAP servers is also implementation dependent.
|
||
|
||
5.2. Interpreting User and Group Entries
|
||
|
||
User and group resolution is initiated by the functions prefixed by
|
||
getpw and getgr respectively. The uid attribute contains the user's
|
||
login name. The cn attribute, in posixGroup entries, contains the
|
||
group's name. This document preserves the use of the uid attribute
|
||
even though, being a naming attribute, its syntax is case
|
||
insensitive. This may cause a problem with existing deployments
|
||
where there exist login names differing only in case. If DUAs
|
||
support attribute mapping, a different attribute MAY be used to
|
||
represent users' login names.
|
||
|
||
The account object class provides a convenient structural class for
|
||
posixAccount, and SHOULD be used where additional attributes are not
|
||
required. Likewise, the groupOfMembers object class SHOULD be used
|
||
for groups. (The groupOfUniqueNames object class is deprecated and
|
||
SHOULD NOT be used.)
|
||
|
||
It is suggested that uid and cn are used as the naming attribute for
|
||
posixAccount and posixGroup entries, respectively. Group members may
|
||
either be login names (values of memberUid) or distinguished names
|
||
(values of member). In the latter case, the distinguished name must
|
||
be mapped to one or more login names by examining the name's RDN or,
|
||
if it is not distinguished by uid, performing a base search on the DN
|
||
with a filter of "(objectclass=*)". DUAs MAY wish to cache DN to
|
||
login name mappings. The DUA MAY traverse nested groups.
|
||
|
||
An account's GECOS field is preferably determined by a value of the
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 16]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
gecos attribute. If no gecos attribute exists, the value of the cn
|
||
attribute MUST be used. (The existence of the gecos attribute allows
|
||
information embedded in the GECOS field, such as a user's telephone
|
||
number, to be returned to the client without overloading the cn
|
||
attribute. It also accommodates directories where the common name
|
||
does not contain the user's full name.)
|
||
|
||
5.2.1. Using Attribute Options
|
||
|
||
Some posixAccount attributes may be accompanied by options
|
||
(Section 2.2.2) identifying particular hosts or operating system
|
||
types. The attribute with a hostos option matching the operating
|
||
system of the DUA SHOULD be used in preference to an attribute
|
||
without any associated options. The attribute with a host option
|
||
matching the hostname of the DUA SHOULD be used in preference to any
|
||
other attribute.
|
||
|
||
5.2.2. Authentication Considerations
|
||
|
||
5.2.2.1. Using Password Values
|
||
|
||
When authenticating using a NIS to LDAP gateway or using NSS, a
|
||
lookup is performed to retrieve the password attribute and the value
|
||
is used in the DUA to authenticate a user. This approach to
|
||
authentication is deprecated, as it requires that read access to the
|
||
password attribute be granted across a network.
|
||
|
||
An entry of class posixAccount, posixGroup, or shadowAccount without
|
||
an authPassword or userPassword attribute MUST NOT be used for
|
||
authentication. In this case the client SHOULD be returned a non-
|
||
matchable password such as "x".
|
||
|
||
If userPassword is used, its values MUST be represented by the
|
||
following syntax:
|
||
|
||
passwordvalue = schemeprefix hashedpasswd
|
||
schemeprefix = "{" scheme "}"
|
||
scheme = "crypt" / "md5" / "sha" / "ssha" / altscheme
|
||
altscheme = "x-" keystring
|
||
hashedpasswd = hashed password
|
||
|
||
The hashed password contains a plaintext key hashed using the
|
||
algorithm scheme. If the schema is "sha", the hashed password is the
|
||
base64 encoding of the SHA-1 digest of the plaintext password.
|
||
|
||
userPassword values which do not adhere to this syntax MUST NOT be
|
||
used for authentication. The DUA MUST iterate through the values of
|
||
the attribute until a value matching the above syntax is found. Only
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 17]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
if hashedpassword is an empty string does the user have no password.
|
||
DUAs are not required to consider hashing schemes which the client
|
||
will not recognize; in most cases, it may be sufficient to consider
|
||
only "crypt".
|
||
|
||
DUA MAY use the authPassword attribute instead of userPassword,
|
||
defined in [RFC3112]. The DUA MUST iterate the values of the
|
||
authPassword attribute until a value whose scheme is CRYPT is found.
|
||
The DUA MAY iterate through the values of the userPassword attribute,
|
||
using the syntax defined here, until a value whose scheme is CRYPT is
|
||
found. If no conforming value is found, the client MUST be returned
|
||
a non-matchable password such as "x". Authentication using schemes
|
||
other than CRYPT is, although advisable, beyond the scope of this
|
||
document
|
||
|
||
Below is an example of an authPassword attribute:
|
||
|
||
authPassword: CRYPT$X5/DBrWPOQQaI
|
||
|
||
Below is an example of a (deprecated) userPassword attribute:
|
||
|
||
userPassword: {CRYPT}X5/DBrWPOQQaI
|
||
|
||
A DUA MAY utilize the attributes in the shadowAccount class to
|
||
provide shadow password service (getspnam() and getspent()). In such
|
||
cases, the DUA MUST NOT make use of the userPassword attribute for
|
||
getpwnam() et al, and MUST return a non-matchable password (such as
|
||
"x") to the client instead.
|
||
|
||
5.2.2.2. Using LDAP Bind
|
||
|
||
The preferred method for authenticating users with LDAP is to perform
|
||
an LDAP Bind operation with the user's name and password. In this
|
||
case the method the DSA uses to store and verify the password is
|
||
completely internal to the DSA and not of any concern to the DUA.
|
||
|
||
Likewise, using the shadowAccount attributes requires the DUA to
|
||
handle password policy enforcement. However the policies expressed
|
||
in the shadowAccount are limited in scope, and not uniformly
|
||
applicable to all the systems that will be using LDAP.
|
||
|
||
The preferred method is to leave password policy enforcement to the
|
||
DSA, so that it will be uniformly enforced across all of the various
|
||
systems that rely on the directory. This enforcement occurs
|
||
implicitly when authenticating using LDAP Bind if the DSA supports
|
||
the LDAP password policy [I-D.behera-ldap-password-policy]
|
||
mechanisms.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 18]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
The means in which authentication in the DUA is configured is
|
||
implementation dependent. Typically it is accomplished using [PAM].
|
||
Further details of authentication are beyond the scope of this
|
||
document.
|
||
|
||
5.2.3. Naming Considerations
|
||
|
||
On UNIX systems, users and groups reside in separate name spaces and
|
||
it is common for the same name to be used by both a user and a group.
|
||
Since they are in separate name spaces there is no ambiguity and no
|
||
conflict. However, when integrating a name service into LDAP the
|
||
directory may be used with other systems besides UNIX and its
|
||
derivatives. In particular, the Microsoft Windows operating system
|
||
may also use LDAP for its own name service. In Windows, users and
|
||
groups reside in a single name space and so one cannot use the same
|
||
name for both a user and a group.
|
||
|
||
Conflicts in naming conventions may arise in other deployments as
|
||
well, and should be carefully taken into account when migrating from
|
||
other naming services into LDAP.
|
||
|
||
5.3. Interpreting Hosts and Networks
|
||
|
||
The ipHostNumber and ipNetworkNumber attributes are defined in
|
||
preference to dNSRecord (defined in [RFC1279]), in order to simplify
|
||
the DUA's role in interpreting entries in the directory. A dNSRecord
|
||
expresses a complete resource record, including time to live and
|
||
class data, which is extraneous to this schema.
|
||
|
||
Additionally, the ipHost and ipNetwork classes permit a host or
|
||
network (respectively) and all its aliases to be represented by a
|
||
single entry in the directory. This is not necessarily possible if a
|
||
DNS resource record is mapped directly to an LDAP entry.
|
||
Implementations that wish to use LDAP to master DNS zone information
|
||
are not precluded from doing so, and may simply avoid the ipHost and
|
||
ipNetwork classes.
|
||
|
||
This document redefines, although not exclusively, the ipNetwork
|
||
class defined in [RFC1279], in order to achieve consistent naming
|
||
with ipHost. The ipNetworkNumber attribute is also used in the
|
||
siteContact object class [ROSE].
|
||
|
||
The authPassword and userPassword attributes are included in ipHost
|
||
such that hosts MAY be treated as authentication principals. The
|
||
treatment of these attributes and inherent caveats considered in
|
||
Section 5.2 apply here also.
|
||
|
||
The trailing zeros in a network address MUST be omitted. CIDR-style
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 19]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
network addresses (eg. 192.168.1/24) MAY be used. Leading zeros MUST
|
||
be removed from all components of an IPv6 address string as defined
|
||
by [RFC2373], section 2.2, item 1. The IPv6 address string MUST be
|
||
further normalized by following the "::" syntax as defined in
|
||
[RFC2373], section 2.2, item 2. In addition, "::" MUST be used to
|
||
replace the longest string of zero bits. If there are two or more
|
||
longest strings of zero bits, then the first string MUST be replaced.
|
||
In addition, the syntax defined by [RFC2373], section 2.2, item 3
|
||
MUST NOT be used. IPv4 addresses MUST be represented by the IPv4
|
||
dotted decimal string syntax.
|
||
|
||
For example the following address:
|
||
|
||
1080:0000:0:0:08:800:200C:417A
|
||
FF01:0:0:0:0:0:01
|
||
0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0001
|
||
0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0
|
||
|
||
MUST be normalized as:
|
||
|
||
1080::8:800:200C:417A
|
||
FF01::101
|
||
0::1
|
||
::
|
||
|
||
5.4. Interpreting Other Entities
|
||
|
||
In general, a one-to-one mapping between entities and LDAP entries is
|
||
proposed, in that each entity has exactly one representation in the
|
||
DIT. In some cases this is not feasible; for example, a service
|
||
which is represented in more than one protocol domain. Consider the
|
||
following entry:
|
||
|
||
dn: cn=domain,ou=services,dc=aja,dc=com
|
||
objectClass: top
|
||
objectClass: ipService
|
||
cn: domain
|
||
cn: nameserver
|
||
ipServicePort: 53
|
||
ipServiceProtocol: tcp
|
||
ipServiceProtocol: udp
|
||
|
||
This entry MUST map to the following two (2) services entities:
|
||
|
||
domain 53/tcp nameserver
|
||
domain 53/udp nameserver
|
||
|
||
While the above two entities may be represented as separate LDAP
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 20]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
entities, with different distinguished names (such as cn=domain+
|
||
ipServiceProtocol=tcp, ... and cn=domain+ipServiceProtocol=udp, ...)
|
||
it is convenient to represent them as a single entry. If a service
|
||
is represented in multiple protocol domains with different ports,
|
||
then multiple entries are required; multi-valued RDNs MAY be used to
|
||
distinguish them.)
|
||
|
||
With the exception of authPassword and userPassword values, empty
|
||
values (consisting of a zero length string) are returned by the DUA
|
||
to the client. The DUA MUST reject any entries which do not conform
|
||
to the schema (missing mandatory attributes). Non-conforming entries
|
||
SHOULD be ignored while enumerating entries.
|
||
|
||
The nisDomainObject object class is provided to associate a NIS
|
||
domain with a naming context. A DUA would retrieve the NIS domain
|
||
name from a configuration file and enumerate the naming contexts
|
||
served by an LDAP server, searching each naming context for
|
||
(nisDomain=%s). The first matching entry that is found MAY be used
|
||
as a search base for configuration profile information or for entries
|
||
themselves. For example, the following example shows an association
|
||
between the NIS domain "nis.aja.com" and the naming context
|
||
"dc=aja,dc=com":
|
||
|
||
dn: dc=aja,dc=com
|
||
objectClass: top
|
||
objectClass: domain
|
||
objectClass: nisDomainObject
|
||
dc: aja
|
||
nisDomain: nis.aja.com
|
||
|
||
The nisObject object class MAY be used as a generic means of
|
||
representing NIS entities. Its use is not encouraged; where support
|
||
for entities not described in this schema is desired, an appropriate
|
||
schema should be devised. Implementers are strongly advised to
|
||
support end-user extensible mappings between NIS entities and object
|
||
classes. (Where the nisObject class is used, the nisMapName
|
||
attribute MAY be used as a RDN.) The nisObject class might be used
|
||
to represent automount information.
|
||
|
||
5.5. Canonicalizing entries with multi-valued naming attributes
|
||
|
||
For entities such as hosts, services, networks, protocols, and RPCs,
|
||
where there may be one or more aliases, the respective entry's
|
||
relative distinguished name SHOULD be used to determine the canonical
|
||
name. Any other values for the same attribute are used as aliases.
|
||
For example, the service described in Section 5.4 has the canonical
|
||
name "domain" and exactly one alias, "nameserver".
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 21]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
The schema in this document generally only defines one attribute per
|
||
class which is suitable for distinguishing an entity (excluding any
|
||
attributes with integer syntax; it is assumed that entries will be
|
||
distinguished on name). Usually, this is the common name (cn)
|
||
attribute. This aids the DUA in determining the canonical name of an
|
||
entity, as it can examine the value of the relative distinguished
|
||
name. Aliases are thus any values of the distinguishing attribute
|
||
(such as cn) which do not match the canonical name of the entity.
|
||
|
||
In the event that a different attribute is used to distinguish the
|
||
entry, as may be the case where these object classes are used as
|
||
auxiliary classes, the entry's canonical name may not be present in
|
||
the RDN. In this case, the DUA MUST choose one of the non-
|
||
distinguished values to represent the entity's canonical name. As
|
||
the directory server guarantees no ordering of attribute values, it
|
||
may not be possible to distinguish an entry deterministically. This
|
||
ambiguity SHOULD NOT be resolved by mapping one directory entry into
|
||
multiple entities.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 22]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
6. Implementation Focus
|
||
|
||
Gateways between NIS and LDAP have been developed by PADL Software
|
||
and Sun Microsystems. They both support this schema.
|
||
|
||
An open source implementation of the C library resolution code has
|
||
been written and is available from PADL Software. It supports C
|
||
libraries on GNU, BSD, AIX, and Solaris operating systems. PADL have
|
||
also made available a set of scripts for migrating flat files into a
|
||
form suitable for loading into an LDAP server. Another open source
|
||
implementation of the C library code is available from the OpenLDAP
|
||
Project.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 23]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
7. Security Considerations
|
||
|
||
The entirety of related security considerations are outside the scope
|
||
of this document. It is noted that making passwords encrypted with a
|
||
widely understood hash function (such as crypt()) available to non-
|
||
privileged users is dangerous because it exposes them to dictionary
|
||
and brute-force attacks. This is proposed only for compatibility
|
||
with existing UNIX system implementations. Sites where security is
|
||
critical SHOULD consider using a strong authentication service for
|
||
user authentication.
|
||
|
||
Alternatively, the encrypted password could be made available only to
|
||
a subset of privileged DUAs, which would provide "shadow" password
|
||
service to client applications. This may be difficult to enforce.
|
||
|
||
Because the schema represents operating system-level entities, access
|
||
to these entities SHOULD be granted on a discretionary basis. (There
|
||
is little point in restricting access to data which will be
|
||
republished without restriction, however.) It is particularly
|
||
important that only administrators can modify entries defined in this
|
||
schema, with the exception of allowing a principal to change their
|
||
password (which MAY be done on behalf of the user by a client bound
|
||
as a superior principal, such that password restrictions MAY be
|
||
enforced). For example, if a user were allowed to change the value
|
||
of their uidNumber attribute, they could subvert security by
|
||
equivalencing their account with the superuser account.
|
||
|
||
A subtree of the DIT which is to be republished by a DUA (such as a
|
||
NIS gateway) SHOULD be within the same administrative domain that the
|
||
republishing DUA represents. (For example, principals outside an
|
||
organization, while conceivably part of the DIT, should not be
|
||
considered with the same degree of authority as those within the
|
||
organization.)
|
||
|
||
Finally, care should be exercised with integer attributes of a
|
||
sensitive nature (particularly the uidNumber and gidNumber
|
||
attributes) which contain zero-length values. DUAs MAY treat such
|
||
values as corresponding to the "nobody" or "nogroup" user and group,
|
||
respectively.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 24]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
8. Acknowledgements
|
||
|
||
Thanks to Bob Joslin of the Hewlett Packard Company, and to all those
|
||
that helped with this document's predecessor, RFC 2307.
|
||
|
||
UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 25]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
9. References
|
||
|
||
[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",
|
||
STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.
|
||
|
||
[RFC1057] Sun Microsystems, Inc., "RPC: Remote Procedure Call
|
||
Protocol specification: Version 2", RFC 1057, June 1988.
|
||
|
||
[RFC1279] Hardcastle-Kille, S., "X.500 and Domains", RFC 1279,
|
||
November 1991.
|
||
|
||
[RFC2373] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
|
||
Architecture", RFC 2373, July 1998.
|
||
|
||
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
|
||
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
|
||
|
||
[RFC4511] Sermersheim, J., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
|
||
(LDAP): The Protocol", RFC 4511, June 2006.
|
||
|
||
[RFC4515] Smith, M. and T. Howes, "Lightweight Directory Access
|
||
Protocol (LDAP): String Representation of Search Filters",
|
||
RFC 4515, June 2006.
|
||
|
||
[RFC4519] Sciberras, A., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
|
||
(LDAP): Schema for User Applications", RFC 4519,
|
||
June 2006.
|
||
|
||
[RFC3112] Zeilenga, K., "LDAP Authentication Password Schema",
|
||
RFC 3112, May 2001.
|
||
|
||
[I-D.behera-ldap-password-policy]
|
||
Sermersheim, J., Poitou, L., and H. Chu, "Password Policy
|
||
for LDAP Directories",
|
||
draft-behera-ldap-password-policy-10 (work in progress),
|
||
August 2009.
|
||
|
||
[ROSE] Rose, M., "The Little Black Book: Mail Bonding with OSI
|
||
Directory Services", ISBN 0-13-683210-5, 2001.
|
||
|
||
[X.500] ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC21, "Information Processing Systems - Open
|
||
Systems Interconnection - The Directory: Overview of
|
||
Concepts, Models and Service", 1988.
|
||
|
||
[UNIX] Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and The
|
||
Open Group, "IEEE Std 1003.1, 2004 Edition, Single UNIX
|
||
Specification Version 3", IEEE Standard 1003.1, 2004.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 26]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
[PAM] Samar, V. and R. Schemers, "Unified Login with Pluggable
|
||
Authentication Modules (PAM)", OSF RFC 86.0, October 1995.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 27]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
Appendix A. Example Entries
|
||
|
||
The examples described in this section are provided to illustrate the
|
||
schema described in this draft. They are not meant to be exhaustive.
|
||
|
||
The following entry is an example of the posixAccount class:
|
||
|
||
dn: uid=lester,ou=people,dc=aja,dc=com
|
||
objectClass: top
|
||
objectClass: account
|
||
objectClass: posixAccount
|
||
uid: lester
|
||
cn: Lester the Nightfly
|
||
gecos: Lester
|
||
uidNumber: 10
|
||
gidNumber: 10
|
||
loginShell: /bin/csh
|
||
userPassword: {crypt}$X5/DBrWPOQQaI
|
||
homeDirectory: /home/lester
|
||
|
||
This corresponds to the UNIX system password file entry:
|
||
|
||
lester:X5/DBrWPOQQaI:10:10:Lester:/home/lester:/bin/sh
|
||
|
||
The following entry is an example of the ipHost class:
|
||
|
||
dn: cn=josie.aja.com,ou=hosts,dc=aja,dc=com
|
||
objectClass: top
|
||
objectClass: device
|
||
objectClass: ipHost
|
||
objectClass: bootableDevice
|
||
objectClass: ieee802Device
|
||
cn: josie.aja.com
|
||
cn: www.aja.com
|
||
ipHostNumber: 10.0.0.1
|
||
macAddress: 00:00:92:90:ee:e2
|
||
bootFile: mach
|
||
bootParameter: root=dan.aja.com:/nfsroot/peg
|
||
bootParameter: swap=dan.aja.com:/nfsswap/peg
|
||
bootParameter: dump=dan.aja.com:/nfsdump/peg
|
||
|
||
This entry represents the host canonically josie.aja.com, also known
|
||
as www.aja.com. The Ethernet address and four boot parameters are
|
||
also specified.
|
||
|
||
An example of the nisNetgroup class:
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 28]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
dn: cn=nightfly,ou=netgroup,dc=aja,dc=com
|
||
objectClass: top
|
||
objectClass: nisNetgroup
|
||
cn: nightfly
|
||
nisNetgroupTriple: (charlemagne,peg,dunes.aja.com)
|
||
nisNetgroupTriple: (lester,-,)
|
||
memberNisNetgroup: kamakiriad
|
||
|
||
This entry represents the netgroup nightfly, which contains two
|
||
triples (the user charlemagne, the host peg, and the domain
|
||
dunes.aja.com; and, the user lester, no host, and any domain) and one
|
||
netgroup (kamakiriad).
|
||
|
||
Finally, an example of the nisObject class:
|
||
|
||
dn: nisMapName=tracks,dc=dunes,dc=aja,dc=com
|
||
objectClass: top
|
||
objectClass: nisMap
|
||
nisMapName: tracks
|
||
|
||
dn: cn=Maxine,nisMapName=tracks,dc=dunes,dc=aja,dc=com
|
||
objectClass: top
|
||
objectClass: nisObject
|
||
cn: Maxine
|
||
nisMapName: tracks
|
||
nisMapEntry: Nightfly$4
|
||
|
||
This represents the NIS map tracks, and a single map entry.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 29]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
Appendix B. Affected Library Functions
|
||
|
||
The following functions are typically found in the C libraries of
|
||
most UNIX and POSIX compliant systems [UNIX]. An LDAP search filter
|
||
string [RFC4515] which may be used to satisfy the function call is
|
||
included alongside each function name. Parameters are denoted by %s
|
||
and %d for string and integer arguments, respectively. Long lines
|
||
are broken:
|
||
|
||
getpwnam() (&(objectClass=posixAccount)(uid=%s))
|
||
getpwuid() (&(objectClass=posixAccount)(uidNumber=%d))
|
||
getpwent() (objectClass=posixAccount)
|
||
getspnam() (&(objectClass=shadowAccount)(uid=%s))
|
||
getspent() (objectClass=shadowAccount)
|
||
|
||
getgrnam() (&(objectClass=posixGroup)(cn=%s))
|
||
getgrgid() (&(objectClass=posixGroup)(gidNumber=%d))
|
||
getgrent() (objectClass=posixGroup)
|
||
|
||
getservbyname() (&(objectClass=ipService)(cn=%s)
|
||
(ipServiceProtocol=%s))
|
||
getservbyport() (&(objectClass=ipService)(ipServicePort=%d)
|
||
(ipServiceProtocol=%s))
|
||
getservent() (objectClass=ipService)
|
||
|
||
getrpcbyname() (&(objectClass=oncRpc)(cn=%s))
|
||
getrpcbynumber() (&(objectClass=oncRpc)(oncRpcNumber=%d))
|
||
getrpcent() (objectClass=oncRpc)
|
||
|
||
getprotobyname() (&(objectClass=ipProtocol)(cn=%s))
|
||
getprotobynumber() (&(objectClass=ipProtocol)
|
||
(ipProtocolNumber=%d))
|
||
getprotoent() (objectClass=ipProtocol)
|
||
|
||
gethostbyname() (&(objectClass=ipHost)(cn=%s))
|
||
gethostbyaddr() (&(objectClass=ipHost)(ipHostNumber=%s))
|
||
gethostent() (objectClass=ipHost)
|
||
|
||
getnetbyname() (&(objectClass=ipNetwork)(cn=%s))
|
||
getnetbyaddr() (&(objectClass=ipNetwork)(ipNetworkNumber=%s))
|
||
getnetent() (objectClass=ipNetwork)
|
||
|
||
setnetgrent() (&(objectClass=nisNetgroup)(cn=%s))
|
||
getpublickey() (&(objectClass=nisKeyObject)(...))
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 30]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
Appendix C. Suggested DIT structure
|
||
|
||
The cn attribute is typically used to name entities. The
|
||
ipHostNumber, ipNetworkNumber, and ipServiceProtocol attributes are
|
||
also naming attributes, such that multi-valued RDNs may be used to
|
||
distinguish between, for example, different interfaces of a
|
||
multihomed host.
|
||
|
||
The following DIT structure MAY be used for deploying this schema.
|
||
It is not required that DC-naming be used, but it is encouraged:
|
||
|
||
Naming context ObjectClass
|
||
============================================================
|
||
ou=people,dc=... posixAccount
|
||
shadowAcount
|
||
ou=group,dc=... posixGroup
|
||
ou=services,dc=... ipService
|
||
ou=protocols,dc=... ipProtocol
|
||
ou=rpc,dc=... oncRpc
|
||
ou=hosts,dc=... ipHost
|
||
ou=ethers,dc=... ieee802Device
|
||
bootableDevice
|
||
ou=networks,dc=... ipNetwork
|
||
ou=netgroup,dc=... nisNetgroup
|
||
nisMapName=...,dc=... nisObject
|
||
automountMapName=...,dc=... automountMap
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 31]
|
||
|
||
Internet-Draft LDAP NameService Schema August 2009
|
||
|
||
|
||
Authors' Addresses
|
||
|
||
Luke Howard
|
||
PADL Software Pty. Ltd.
|
||
PO Box 59
|
||
Central Park, Vic 3145
|
||
AU
|
||
|
||
Email: lukeh@padl.com
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard Chu (editor)
|
||
Symas Corp.
|
||
18740 Oxnard Street, Suite 313A
|
||
Tarzana, California 91356
|
||
US
|
||
|
||
Phone: +1 818 757-7087
|
||
Email: hyc@symas.com
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Howard & Chu Expires February 10, 2010 [Page 32]
|
||
|