One document matched: draft-ietf-schema-rqmts-list-00.txt
INTERNET-DRAFT C. Apple
<draft-ietf-schema-rqmts-list-00.txt> AT&T Labs
Expires: July 31, 1998 31 January 1998
Requirements for the Initial Release of a Directory Schema Listing Service
<draft-ietf-schema-rqmts-list-00.txt>
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft. 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.''
To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the
``1id-abstracts.txt'' listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow
Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), nic.nordu.net (Europe),
munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim), ds.internic.net (US East Coast), or
ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast).
Abstract
This memo documents requirements for listing directory services
schema in a centrally operated, administered, and maintained
repository. This repository will be available as a resource to
directory protocol and service implementors to facilitate schema
discovery.
Apple [Page 1]
INTERNET-DRAFT Directory Schema Listing Requirements 31 January 1998
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1 Scope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Terms and Definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3 Usage Scenarios. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3.1 Location/Retrieval of the vCard Schema for LDAPv3. . 5
1.3.2 Submission of a New Schema Listing via SMTP. . . . . 5
2.0 Listing Service Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1 Functional Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.2 Operational Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3 Repository Access Functionality. . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.0 Listing Service Namespace Requirements . . . . . . . . 8
4.0 Listing Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.0 Listing Storage Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.0 Security Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.1 Compromisable Assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.2 Attack Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.2.1 Denial-of-Service Attack Scenarios . . . . . . . . . 10
6.2.2 Confuse-the-User Attack Scenarios. . . . . . . . . . 10
6.3 Security Requirements on Schema Listing Procedures . . 10
7.0 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8.0 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
9.0 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Apple [Page 2]
INTERNET-DRAFT Directory Schema Listing Requirements 31 January 1998
1.0 Introduction
The fastest route to interoperable directory services is through
standard object classes and attribute types. There is a growing
number of places where schema for Internet Directory Services and
Internet Operations are being defined, with varying degrees of
documentation. This plethora of schema is unavoidable in the light
of the needs of different service communities, but it makes it
difficult for directory service builders to find and make use of an
existing schema that will serve their needs and increase
interoperability with other systems. A listing service providing a
single point of discovery for directory service schema will promote
schema reuse, reduce duplication of effort, and thus promote
directory service interoperability.
The intent is to offer a schema listing service with public read
access and restricted, moderated write access. Many hard-coded
choices and constraints have been reflected in this requirements
document for the purpose of expediting deployment. Future releases of
the service may require an update of this document.
Initially, such a listing service will be centrally operated,
administered, and maintained. The schema listing repository database
may also be mirrored to ensure some level of redundancy for read
access in the event of service interruption. Eventually, the
operations, administration, and maintenance of such a listing service
may evolve to use a more distributed deployment scenario.
The schema listing service is also intended to be largely automated,
with minimal human involvement. Human involvement is likely to be
limited to the following types of activities:
+ handling repository access problems
+ trouble resolution for computing and communications facilities
+ dealing with reasonable requests that fall outside
of the scope of normal schema listing repository operations
+ reviewing schema listing requests on a mailing list
prior to publishing in the listing repository
Future releases of the service may automate some of these tasks.
1.1 Scope
Requirements for the initial release of a directory schema listing
service are inside the scope of this document.
Specifications for syntaxes and grammars to be used in the initial
release of the directory schema listing service are outside the scope
Apple [Page 3]
INTERNET-DRAFT Directory Schema Listing Requirements 31 January 1998
of this document.
Documentation of schema listing procedures is outside the scope of
this document.
1.2 Terms and Definitions
Information Object - a descriptive abstraction of some real-world
object
Object Attribute - a descriptive property of an information object;
typically, object attributes are defined in terms of semantic and
syntactic definitions
Schema - a collection of definitions for related information objects
Schema Unit - a related or grouped set of object attributes that form
a discrete unit within the context of a schema for a particular
protocol; examples include an LDAP object class or a WHOIS++ template
Schema Pak - a related or grouped set of schema units that
collectively specify a schema associated with a particular protocol;
an example of a schema pak is the set of LDAP object classes
specified in [RFC225X]
Metadata - characteristics that differentiate one schema unit or
schema pak from another; used to catalog listing service content;
structured using a profile of [MIMEDIR]; also contains references to
files stored within and outside of a listing repository
Schema Unit Content - a formal specification of a schema unit using a
profile of [MIMEDIR]
Schema Unit Listing - the combination of a single schema unit content
file intended for use within the context of a particular protocol and
a file containing metadata describing the schema unit specified
within that schema unit content file
Schema Pak Listing - a single metadata file containing information
describing and referring to a set of related or grouped schema unit
content files
Repository - a database in which listings are stored
Listing Request - a proposed schema unit listing or schema pak
listing formatted using [MIME] constructs that is submitted for
consideration as a listing to be published in a repository
Apple [Page 4]
INTERNET-DRAFT Directory Schema Listing Requirements 31 January 1998
Operator - an organization that administers and maintains a
repository
Primary Repository - the repository that masters the schema listings
database
Shadow Repository - a repository that mirrors the primary repository
Contact Person - the name of the individual who holds the authority
to update a listing and who should be contacted if questions or
concerns arise related to a listing or listing request
Listing Authority Contact - the name of the individual who holds
authority to replace a contact person; can be either the contact
person for a listing or an alternate contact within the organization
to which the contact person belongs (this allows one person
organizations to list schema)
The terms for specifying requirement level defined in [RFC2119] are
used in this document.
1.3 Usage Scenarios
1.3.1 Location/Retrieval of the vCard Schema for LDAPv3
A user of the schema listing service wants to locate a copy of the
vCard schema for LDAPv3 [RFC2251] so that they can use it in a
prototyping project. First, they point their web browser at a schema
listing repository web site and download the list of available
schema. Next, they use the search command on their browser to locate
occurances of the string "vCard". The browser automatically scrolls
down to the appropriate place in the list of available schema and the
user clicks on a link to view the listing metadata to verify that
this is indeed the vCard schema for use with version 3 of the LDAP
protocol. Included in the web-based representation of the listing
metadata are ftp URLs pointing to available profiles containing
listing content for this schema. The user clicks on the link for the
profile that they can use.
1.3.2 Submission of a New Schema Listing via SMTP
A schema writer wishes to list a schema they have created and
prepares the listing metadata and listing content according to one or
more appropriate [MIMEDIR] profiles. The schema writer will obtain a
permanent, unique schema listing name for the request.
The schema writer sends an SMTP message including the listing meta
data and all available listing content in multipart-related [MIME]
Apple [Page 5]
INTERNET-DRAFT Directory Schema Listing Requirements 31 January 1998
format to a listing request review mailing list. After a short review
period, the listing repository operator validates the request, and if
properly formed, publishes the listing according to the listing
procedures. An announcement of the newly published schema listing is
sent to a mailing list reserved for this purpose.
2.0 Listing Service Requirements
2.1 Functional Requirements
Listed schema MAY be published as an RFC.
A list of available listings MUST be maintained.
Listings MUST be named according to the namespace requirements
defined in section 3.
The listing service SHALL maintain information about schema units,
beyond their definition. This information is referred to as metadata
and will consist of information used for cataloging listings in the
repositories. The particular set of metadata elements used during
the initial deployment of the listing service will be defined in
other documents.
Listing metadata and listing content MUST be parsable.
2.2 Operational Requirements
The process of listing schema MUST be centralized for the initial
deployment.
All versions of all listings MUST be retained. A simple method for
getting the most recent version of a particular listing MUST be
provided.
The contact person for a listing MAY give an earlier listing a higher
version number, or MAY request that the listing get a new name.
The listing repository MUST be centrally administered.
The listing repository MAY be mirrored.
The primary repository operator MUST obtain an OID subtree for which
they hold sub-allocation authority for use in the schema listing
service.
Listing requests MAY be signed using PGP/MIME as described in
[RFC2015]. The primary listing repository operator MUST be able to
Apple [Page 6]
INTERNET-DRAFT Directory Schema Listing Requirements 31 January 1998
accept schema listing requests in PGP/MIME messages, although they
are NOT REQUIRED to validate the signatures. The method for
validating and determining trust of signatures is outside the scope
of this document and is determined by the parties in the exchange.
The method for determining and validating trust in an unsigned
request is outside the scope of this document, as is the method for
determining trust in schema listing repository or its content.
A mailing list MUST be created for the purpose of submitting listing
requests for review prior to publishing in the schema listing
repository. The schema listing repository publication process MUST be
moderated via this mailing list. Listing requests MUST be subjected
to community review on this mailing list for a period of at least 2
weeks. If no comments are received, properly formed schema listing
requests SHALL be published as listings; otherwise, the request MAY
either denied or the listing MAY published subject to incorporation
of comments.
A mailing list MUST be created for announcing new and updated
listings.
A mailbox MUST be created for the purpose of receiving service
trouble requests from users.
Listing repository operators (of primary and shadow sites) MUST
provide a free means of accessing the listing service consistent with
the functionality documented in paragraph 2.3.
2.3 Repository Access Functionality
The following schema listing repository access protocols MUST be
supported: FTP [RFC959], HTTP 1.1 [RFC2068], and SMTP [RFC821].
The following access functions are REQUIRED:
a) browse and retrieve schema unit content,
metadata, and a list of available listings:
+ via HTTP requests
+ via FTP clients
+ via requests through an SMTP server
b) search a list of available listings:
+ via HTTP, retrieving either HTML or text listings
that can then be searched by the requestor
Apple [Page 7]
INTERNET-DRAFT Directory Schema Listing Requirements 31 January 1998
+ via HTTP by accessing repository-based searching
facilities such as keyword searching; this can
return listing names, schema unit listings,
schema pak listings, metadata, or other useful
information
c) add and update listings by submitting a formatted
request to a mailing list for community review:
+ via SMTP using appropriate MIME constructs
as described in section 4.0
Other access functions, including the following, MAY be supported,
but will be defined in other documents in the future:
a) search schema unit content
b) search metadata
3.0 Listing Service Namespace Requirements
The listing service namespace MUST be protocol-independent.
The listing service namespace SHALL be based on OIDs.
Listing names:
+ MUST be permanent
+ MUST be globally unique
+ MUST be publicly available
+ MUST NOT be recycled or re-used
+ MUST be created within the OID subtree reserved for use
in the schema listing service and administered by the
primary listing repository operator
4.0 Listing Requirements
Schema unit content SHALL be limited to the information actually
required to specify and encode the schema for storage and transfer.
Metadata SHALL be composed of information used to catalog listings.
Metadata element syntax SHALL be defined based on the concept of
tagged attribute type-value pairs.
Apple [Page 8]
INTERNET-DRAFT Directory Schema Listing Requirements 31 January 1998
Language tags as specified in [RFC1766] MUST be used in all listings.
Metadata element values MUST be encoded using the UCS Transformation
Format - 8 bit form [RFC2044].
For the purposes of submitting a listing request, schema unit content
and metadata SHOULD be structured according to appropriate profiles
of [MIMEDIR] defined in other documents.
Content associated with a listing, but not stored in the schema
listing repository (such as large copyright notices and vendor logo
images) MAY be included by reference in the metadata. If such
external references are included in a particular schema listing, a
fingerprint of the external content generated prior to schema listing
request creation MUST be included along with these references in the
request. Details associated with the creation of these external
content references, including the algorithm to be used for generation
of a content fingerprint and the syntax of the reference, will be
defined in the [MIMEDIR] profile used to format and encode listing
metadata for storage and transfer.
5.0 Listing Storage Requirements
Listing repository file names MUST be permanent, globally unique, and
publicly available.
Listing repository file names SHOULD be constructed in a manner that
allows human and machine users to determine the nature of file
content by inspecting the file names.
Schema unit content and metadata MUST be stored in separate files.
6.0 Security Considerations
6.1 Compromisable Assets
One or more of the following assets could be compromised if the
service is attacked:
+ Metadata
+ Schema unit content
+ Repository Hardware & Software
+ Networking Facilities Connecting Repository to the Internet
+ Repository Mirror Sites
6.2 Attack Scenarios
Allowable methods for submitting listing requests are:
Apple [Page 9]
INTERNET-DRAFT Directory Schema Listing Requirements 31 January 1998
a) sending an e-mail message to a mail box
b) submitting requests using web-based forms
Based on these request submission methods, there are a number of known
repository attack scenarios that must be considered during the
implementation of schema listing procedures and the software and
operational processes required to support them.
6.2.1 Denial-of-Service Attack Scenarios
Scenario A: someone could send in a large number of improperly formed
requests
Scenario B: someone could send in a large number of properly formed, but
frivolous, useless, or trivial requests
6.2.2 Confuse-the-User Attack Scenarios
Scenario A: someone could send in a large number of valid, but
frivolous, useless, or trivial requests and some or all of these
requests actually become listings in the repository
Scenario B: someone could maliciously submit one or more slightly
modified versions of existing listings which are popular or widely used
6.3 Security Requirements on Schema Listing Procedures
The following contextual definitions apply to the requirements listed in
the remainder of this paragraph:
Verification - a process of determining authenticity of facts implied or
explicitly specified by a contact person during the process of
submitting a schema listing request; the methods used to implement such
a process MAY or MAY NOT be based on an IETF-sanctioned security
protocol; specification of the methods used to implement such a process
as well as the trust relationships relevant to the process are outside
the scope of this document.
High-Quality Directory Schema - a directory schema that serves some
useful purpose (e.g., a related set of attribute and object class
definitions for holding information about people in a LDAP directory); a
schema that is _not_ merely trivial or frivolous (e.g., a trivial schema
might consist of a related set of attribute and object class definitions
for holding information about the two possible binary bit values in a
directory).
The schema listing procedures SHOULD be designed to enable:
Apple [Page 10]
INTERNET-DRAFT Directory Schema Listing Requirements 31 January 1998
a) verification that all properly formed schema
listing requests are submitted by the contact
person claiming to originate them
b) methods of ensuring that only properly-formed,
high-quality directory schema are published
in the schema listing repository
c) verifcation that requests to change the identity
of the contact person for a listing originate
from the listing authority contact or the contact
person
d) coping with the situation in which the contact
person and/or listing authority contact for
a schema is no longer available or is unable
to submit updates to the listing
for which they hold update authority
For the initial release of the service, there is NO REQUIREMENT on
any participant, user, or application to retain signature information
as it applies to an entire schema listing request.
Fingerprints included with external content reference metadata
elements MUST be retained and included in published listing request.
Users of the schema listing service SHOULD verify that fingerprints
of referenced content match corresponding fingerprints included with
external references as a part of the published schema listing. If
purported (included in the listing) and actual (computed by the user)
fingerprints are different, users of the service SHOULD consider the
possibility that the referenced content has changed since publication
of the schema listing and that such a change could affect the way in
which associated content can be used.
Referenced content is outside of the control of the schema listing
service. A caveat explaining this concept MUST be included in the
metadata of all published listings if external references are
included in corresponding listing requests.
7.0 Acknowledgements
Leslie Daigle of Bunyip Information Systems and Chris Weider of
Microsoft provided valuable comments on multiple versions of this
document.
The engineering team for listing service requirements:
Chris Apple - AT&T Labs
Apple [Page 11]
INTERNET-DRAFT Directory Schema Listing Requirements 31 January 1998
Sanjay Jain - Oracle
Michael Mealling - NSI
John Strassner - Cisco
Sam Sun - CNRI
Mark Wahl - Critical Angle
Chris Weider - Microsoft
Paul Hoffman, for review and comment during his effort to implement
the primary directory schema listing service platform.
The members of the ietf-schema-reg@imc.org mailing list.
8.0 References
[CHARSET] Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, "CHARACTER SETS",
<URL:ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/character-sets>.
[MIME] [RFC2045], [RFC2046], and [RFC2047].
[MIMEDIR] T. Howes, M. Smith, "A MIME Content-Type for Directory
Information", INTERNET-DRAFT <draft-ietf-asid-mime-direct-04.txt>,
July 1997.
[RFC821] J. Postel, "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", RFC 821, August
1982.
[RFC959] J. Postel, J.K. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol", RFC 959,
October 1985.
[RFC1766] H. Alvestrand, "Tags for the Identification of Languages",
RFC 1766, March 1995.
[RFC2015] M. Elkins, "MIME Security with Pretty Good Privacy (PGP)",
RFC 2015, October 1996.
[RFC2044] F. Yergeau, "UTF-8, a transformation format of Unicode and
ISO 10646", RFC 2044, October 1996.
[RFC2045] N. Freed, N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail
Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies", RFC
2045, November 1996.
[RFC2046] N. Freed & N. Borenstein, "Multipurpose Internet Mail
Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types", RFC 2046, November 1996.
[RFC2047] K. Moore, "MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions)
Part Three: Message Header Extensions for Non-ASCII Text", RFC 2047,
November 1996.
Apple [Page 12]
INTERNET-DRAFT Directory Schema Listing Requirements 31 January 1998
[RFC2068] R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H. Frystyk, T. Berners-
Lee, "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2068, January
1997.
[RFC2119] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Level", March 1997.
[RFC2251] M. Wahl, T. Howes, S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory Access
Protocol (Version 3)", RFC 2251, December 1997.
9.0 Author's Address
Chris Apple
AT&T Labs
600 - 700 Mountain Ave., Room 2F-165
Murray Hill, NJ 07974-0636
USA
E-Mail: capple@att.com
Phone: +1 908 582 2409
FAX: +1 908 582 3296
This INTERNET-DRAFT expires on July 31, 1998.
Apple [Page 13]
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-22 17:05:34 |