One document matched: draft-legg-ldap-transfer-06.txt
Differences from draft-legg-ldap-transfer-05.txt
INTERNET-DRAFT S. Legg
draft-legg-ldap-transfer-06.txt eB2Bcom
Intended status: Experimental 21 September 2007
Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP):
Transfer Encoding Options
Status of This Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of 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/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Technical discussion of this document should take place on the LDAP
extensions mailing list <ldapext@ietf.org>. Please send editorial
comments directly to the editor <steven.legg@eb2bcom.com>.
This Internet-Draft expires on 21 March 2008.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
Abstract
Each attribute stored in a Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
(LDAP) directory has a defined syntax (i.e., data type). A syntax
definition specifies how attribute values conforming to the syntax
are normally represented when transferred in LDAP operations. This
representation is referred to as the LDAP-specific encoding to
Legg Expires 21 March 2008 [Page 1]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP: Transfer Encoding Options September 21, 2007
distinguish it from other methods of encoding attribute values. This
document introduces a new category of attribute options, called
transfer encoding options, that can be used to specify that the
associated attribute values are encoded according to one of these
other methods.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................2
2. Conventions .....................................................2
3. Transfer Encoding Options .......................................3
4. Defined Transfer Encoding Options ...............................4
5. Attributes Returned in a Search .................................5
6. Syntaxes Requiring Binary Transfer ..............................7
7. Security Considerations .........................................7
8. IANA Considerations .............................................7
9. References ......................................................9
9.1. Normative References .......................................9
9.2. Informative References ....................................10
1. Introduction
Each attribute stored in a Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
(LDAP) directory [LDAP] has a defined syntax (i.e., data type) that
constrains the structure and format of its values.
The description of each syntax [SYNTAX] specifies how attribute or
assertion values [MODELS] conforming to the syntax are normally
represented when transferred in LDAP operations [PROT]. This
representation is referred to as the LDAP-specific encoding to
distinguish it from other methods of encoding attribute values.
This document introduces a new category of attribute options
[MODELS], called transfer encoding options, that allow attribute and
assertion values to be transferred using an alternative method of
encoding. This document defines several transfer encoding options
that can be used in an attribute description [MODELS] in an LDAP
operation to specify that the associated attribute values or
assertion value are, or are requested to be, encoded according to
specific Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1) [X.680] encoding rules,
instead of the usual LDAP-specific encoding. One option in
particular allows Extensible Markup Language (XML) [XML10] [XML11]
encodings.
2. Conventions
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
Legg Expires 21 March 2008 [Page 2]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP: Transfer Encoding Options September 21, 2007
document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119
[BCP14].
This specification makes use of definitions from the XML Information
Set (Infoset) [INFOSET]. In particular, information item property
names follow the Infoset convention of being shown in square
brackets, e.g., [local name].
3. Transfer Encoding Options
Transfer encoding options enable attribute and assertion values to be
transferred using an alternative method of encoding to the default
LDAP-specific encoding. In fact, some attribute and assertion
syntaxes do not have a defined LDAP-specific encoding, in which case
the only way values of those syntaxes can be transferred is by using
an alternative encoding.
The binary option [BINARY] is not formally regarded as a transfer
encoding option, though it has much in common with transfer encoding
options. The requirements governing the use of transfer encoding
options do not apply to the binary option. The requirements
governing the use of the binary option are described elsewhere
[BINARY].
In terms of the protocol [PROT], a transfer encoding option specifies
that the contents octets of an associated AttributeValue or
AssertionValue OCTET STRING are a complete encoding of the relevant
value according to the encoding method specified by the option.
Where a transfer encoding option is present in an attribute
description, the associated attribute values or assertion value MUST
be encoded according to the encoding method corresponding to the
option. In the absence of a transfer encoding option, the usual
encoding for LDAP applies, i.e., the LDAP-specific encoding, or a
Basic Encoding Rules (BER) [X.690] encoding if the binary option is
present. Note that it is possible for a syntax to be defined such
that its LDAP-specific encoding is exactly the same as its encoding
according to some transfer encoding option (e.g., the LDAP-specific
encoding might be defined to be the same as the Generic String
Encoding Rules (GSER) [GSER] encoding).
Transfer encoding options are mutually exclusive. An attribute
description SHALL NOT contain more than one transfer encoding option,
and SHALL NOT contain both a transfer encoding option and the binary
option.
Transfer encoding options are not tagging options [MODELS], so the
presence of a transfer encoding option does not specify an attribute
Legg Expires 21 March 2008 [Page 3]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP: Transfer Encoding Options September 21, 2007
subtype. An attribute description containing a transfer encoding
option references exactly the same attribute as the attribute
description with the transfer encoding option removed. The
supertype/subtype relationships of attributes with tagging options
are not altered in any way by the presence or absence of transfer
encoding options.
An attribute description SHALL be treated as unrecognized if it
contains a transfer encoding option and the syntax of the attribute
does not have an associated ASN.1 type [SYNTAX], or if the nominated
encoding is not supported for that ASN.1 type.
The presence or absence of a transfer encoding option only affects
the transfer of attribute and assertion values in the protocol;
servers store any particular attribute value in a format of their
choosing.
4. Defined Transfer Encoding Options
The attribute option string "transfer-ber" specifies that the
associated attribute values or assertion value are, or are requested
to be, encoded according to BER [X.690]. This option is similar to
the binary option [BINARY], however servers are more restricted in
when they can use "transfer-ber", which leads to more predictability
in the results returned to clients that request "transfer-ber".
The attribute option string "transfer-der" specifies that the
associated attribute values or assertion value are, or are requested
to be, encoded according to the Distinguished Encoding Rules (DER)
[X.690].
The attribute option string "transfer-gser" specifies that the
associated attribute values or assertion value are, or are requested
to be, encoded according to GSER [GSER] [GSEREI].
The attribute option string "transfer-rxer" specifies that the
associated attribute values or assertion value are, or are requested
to be, encoded according to the Robust XML Encoding Rules (RXER)
[RXER] [RXEREI] as a Standalone RXER Encoding with the
DirectoryString ASN.1 type amended by the inclusion of an RXER UNION
encoding instruction as described in the specification for the XML-
Enabled Directory (XED) [XED] protocols [XLDAP].
Aside: The Standalone RXER Encoding of an attribute or assertion
value is an XML document [XML10] [XML11] where the root element
(i.e., the [document element] of the document information item)
has the [local name] "value", and no value for the
[namespace name] or [prefix]. The RXER encoding of the attribute
Legg Expires 21 March 2008 [Page 4]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP: Transfer Encoding Options September 21, 2007
or assertion value, an ASN.1 abstract value, is not the root
element as such, but rather the content of that root element.
When the abstract value appears in an XML Lightweight Directory
Access Protocol (XLDAP) [XLDAP] operation, the [local name] of the
encapsulating element is determined from the surrounding context.
A directory attribute value in an XLDAP operation is also
encapsulated in an element information item with the [local name]
"value"; however, this is coincidental. An assertion value in an
AttributeValueAssertion is encapsulated in an element information
item with the [local name] "assertionValue". An assertion value
in a SubstringFilter is encapsulated in an element information
item with the [local name] "initial", "any" or "final", as
appropriate. An assertion value in a MatchingRuleAssertion is
encapsulated in an element information item with the [local name]
"matchValue".
The attribute option string "transfer-crxer" specifies that the
associated attribute values or assertion value are, or are requested
to be, encoded according to Canonical RXER (CRXER) [RXER] as a
Standalone CRXER Encoding with the DirectoryString ASN.1 type amended
as described in the specification for the XED protocols [XLDAP].
Note that, like all attribute options, the strings representing
transfer encoding options are case insensitive.
All future registrations of option strings for transfer encoding
options should use the "transfer-" prefix so that LDAP clients and
servers can recognize that an option is a transfer encoding option
even though the particular encoding rules may be unrecognized.
5. Attributes Returned in a Search
An LDAP search request [PROT] contains a list of the attributes (here
called the requested attributes list) to be returned from each entry
matching the search filter. An attribute description in the
requested attributes list also implicitly requests all subtypes of
the attribute type in the attribute description, whether through
attribute subtyping or attribute tagging option subtyping [MODELS].
The requested attributes list MAY contain attribute descriptions with
a transfer encoding option, but MUST NOT contain two attribute
descriptions with the same attribute type and the same tagging
options (even if only one of them has a transfer encoding option). A
transfer encoding option in an attribute description in the requested
attributes list implicitly applies to the subtypes of the attribute
type in the attribute description.
Note that if the list of attributes in a search request is empty, or
Legg Expires 21 March 2008 [Page 5]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP: Transfer Encoding Options September 21, 2007
contains the special attribute description string "*" [PROT], then
all user attributes are requested to be returned.
In general, it is possible for a particular attribute to be
explicitly requested by an attribute description and/or implicitly
requested by the attribute descriptions of one or more of its
supertypes and/or the special attribute description string "*". In
such cases, the effective transfer encoding option for a particular
requested attribute is determined by the transfer encoding option (or
absence thereof) in the most specific attribute description (in the
requested attributes list) that applies to the attribute. The most
specific attribute description is determined by the following cases:
(1) An applicable attribute description with an actual attribute type
is more specific than the special attribute description string
"*".
(2) If the attribute type of one applicable attribute description is
a direct or indirect subtype of the attribute type in another
applicable attribute description, then the former attribute
description is more specific than the latter attribute
description.
(3) If two applicable attribute descriptions have the same attribute
type, and the tagging options of one attribute description are a
superset of the tagging options of the other attribute
description, then the former attribute description is more
specific than the latter attribute description.
If an attribute is requested with a particular effective transfer
encoding option, then the attribute SHALL NOT be returned with a
different transfer encoding option, or with no transfer encoding
option, in its attribute description. Recall from Section 3 that
when a transfer encoding option is present in an attribute
description, the associated attribute values must be encoded
according to the encoding method corresponding to the option. If for
any reason an attribute value cannot be encoded according to the
requested transfer encoding, then the value MUST be omitted from the
result.
If an attribute is requested with no effective transfer encoding
option, then the attribute SHALL NOT be returned with a transfer
encoding option in its attribute description. This does not preclude
the attribute being returned with the binary option in its attribute
description.
Regardless of the encoding chosen, a particular attribute value is
returned at most once.
Legg Expires 21 March 2008 [Page 6]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP: Transfer Encoding Options September 21, 2007
6. Syntaxes Requiring Binary Transfer
Certain syntaxes are defined without an LDAP-specific encoding, and
are required to be transferred in the BER encoded form. These
syntaxes are said to have a binary transfer requirement. The
certificate, certificate list, certificate pair, and supported
algorithm syntaxes [PKI] are examples of syntaxes with a binary
transfer requirement. These syntaxes also have an additional
requirement that the exact BER encoding must be preserved. Note that
this is a property of the syntaxes themselves, and not a property of
the binary option or any of the transfer encoding options.
Transfer encoding options SHALL take precedence over the requirement
for binary transfer. For example, if the effective transfer encoding
option is "transfer-gser", then attribute values of a syntax with a
binary transfer requirement will be GSER encoded instead (if they
appear at all). In the absence of a transfer encoding option, the
normal rules on binary transfer and the use of the binary option
SHALL apply.
7. Security Considerations
There is a requirement on some attribute syntaxes [PKI] that the
exact BER encoding of values of those syntaxes must be preserved. In
general, a transformation from the BER encoding into some other
encoding (e.g., GSER) and back into the BER encoding will not
necessarily reproduce exactly the octets of the original BER
encoding. Applications needing the original BER encoding, e.g., for
the verification of digital signatures, MUST NOT request attributes
of such syntaxes using an explicit or implicit transfer encoding
option. Directory servers MUST NOT use a transfer encoding option
when exporting attributes of such syntaxes (e.g., into an LDIF file
[LDIF]) if those attributes might later be imported into the same or
another directory server.
When interpreting security-sensitive fields, and in particular fields
used to grant or deny access, implementations MUST ensure that any
matching rule comparisons are done on the underlying abstract value,
regardless of the particular encoding used.
8. IANA Considerations
The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) is requested to update
the LDAP attribute description option registry [BCP64] as indicated
by the following templates:
Subject: Request for
LDAP Attribute Description Option Registration
Legg Expires 21 March 2008 [Page 7]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP: Transfer Encoding Options September 21, 2007
Option Name: transfer-ber
Family of Options: NO
Person & email address to contact for further information:
Steven Legg <steven.legg@eb2bcom.com>
Specification: RFC XXXX
Author/Change Controller: IESG
Comments:
Subject: Request for
LDAP Attribute Description Option Registration
Option Name: transfer-der
Family of Options: NO
Person & email address to contact for further information:
Steven Legg <steven.legg@eb2bcom.com>
Specification: RFC XXXX
Author/Change Controller: IESG
Comments:
Subject: Request for
LDAP Attribute Description Option Registration
Option Name: transfer-gser
Family of Options: NO
Person & email address to contact for further information:
Steven Legg <steven.legg@eb2bcom.com>
Specification: RFC XXXX
Author/Change Controller: IESG
Comments:
Subject: Request for
LDAP Attribute Description Option Registration
Option Name: transfer-rxer
Family of Options: NO
Person & email address to contact for further information:
Steven Legg <steven.legg@eb2bcom.com>
Specification: RFC XXXX
Author/Change Controller: IESG
Comments:
Subject: Request for
LDAP Attribute Description Option Registration
Option Name: transfer-crxer
Family of Options: NO
Person & email address to contact for further information:
Steven Legg <steven.legg@eb2bcom.com>
Specification: RFC XXXX
Author/Change Controller: IESG
Comments:
Legg Expires 21 March 2008 [Page 8]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP: Transfer Encoding Options September 21, 2007
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[BCP14] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[GSER] Legg, S., "Generic String Encoding Rules (GSER) for ASN.1
Types", RFC 3641, October 2003.
[LDAP] Zeilenga, K., Ed., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
(LDAP): Technical Specification Road Map", RFC 4510, June
2006.
[PROT] Sermersheim, J., Ed., "Lightweight Directory Access
Protocol (LDAP): The Protocol", RFC 4511, June 2006.
[MODELS] Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
(LDAP): Directory Information Models", RFC 4512, June
2006.
[SYNTAX] Legg, S., Ed., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
(LDAP): Syntaxes and Matching Rules", RFC 4517, June 2006.
[BCP64] Zeilenga, K., "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
Considerations for the Lightweight Directory Access
Protocol (LDAP)", BCP 64, RFC 4520, June 2006.
[BINARY] Legg, S., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP):
The Binary Encoding Option", RFC 4522, June 2006.
[PKI] Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
(LDAP) Schema Definitions for X.509 Certificates", RFC
4523, June 2006.
[GSEREI] Legg, S., "Encoding Instructions for the Generic String
Encoding Rules (GSER)", RFC 4792, January 2007.
[RXER] Legg, S. and D. Prager, "Robust XML Encoding Rules (RXER)
for Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1)", RFC 4910, July
2007.
[RXEREI] Legg, S., "Encoding Instructions for the Robust XML
Encoding Rules (RXER)", RFC 4911, July 2007.
[XLDAP] Legg, S. and D. Prager, "The XML-Enabled Directory:
Protocols", draft-legg-xed-protocols-05.txt, a work in
progress, August 2007.
Legg Expires 21 March 2008 [Page 9]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP: Transfer Encoding Options September 21, 2007
[X.680] ITU-T Recommendation X.680 (07/02) | ISO/IEC 8824-1,
Information technology - Abstract Syntax Notation One
(ASN.1): Specification of basic notation.
[X.690] ITU-T Recommendation X.690 (07/02) | ISO/IEC 8825-1,
Information technology - ASN.1 encoding rules:
Specification of Basic Encoding Rules (BER), Canonical
Encoding Rules (CER) and Distinguished Encoding Rules
(DER).
[XML10] Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C., Maler, E. and
F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fourth
Edition)", W3C Recommendation,
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816, August 2006.
[XML11] Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C., Maler, E.,
Yergeau, F., and J. Cowan, "Extensible Markup Language
(XML) 1.1 (Second Edition)", W3C Recommendation,
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml11-20060816, August 2006.
[INFOSET] Cowan, J. and R. Tobin, "XML Information Set (Second
Edition)", W3C Recommendation,
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-infoset-20040204,
February 2004.
9.2. Informative References
[LDIF] Good, G., "The LDAP Data Interchange Format (LDIF) -
Technical Specification", RFC 2849, June 2000.
[XED] Legg, S. and D. Prager, "The XML-Enabled Directory",
draft-legg-xed-roadmap-06.txt, a work in progress, August
2007.
Author's Address
Steven Legg
eB2Bcom
Suite 1, 85-87 Charles Street
Kew, Victoria 3101
AUSTRALIA
Phone: +61 3 9851 8630
Fax: +61 3 9851 8601
Email: steven.legg@eb2bcom.com
Full Copyright Statement
Legg Expires 21 March 2008 [Page 10]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP: Transfer Encoding Options September 21, 2007
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Note to the RFC Editor: the remainder of this document is to be removed
before final publication.
Changes in Draft 01
A transfer encoding option for RXER has been added.
Changes in Draft 02
The local name of the root element of the XML document representing
Legg Expires 21 March 2008 [Page 11]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP: Transfer Encoding Options September 21, 2007
an attribute value encoded according to the transfer-rxer encoding
option has been changed from "item" to "value" to align with
revisions to the LDAP protocol specification [PROT].
The Directory XML Encoding Rules (DXER) have been renamed to the
Robust XML Encoding Rules (RXER).
Changes in Draft 03
The special attribute description strings that consist of the
asterisk character followed by a transfer encoding option, e.g.,
"*;transfer-ber", "*;transfer-gser", have been removed from this
specification. An LDAP control will be defined in a separate
document to provide equivalent functionality.
Changes in Draft 04
The [local name] of the root element for RXER encoded assertion
values has been changed to "value" in all cases, for the sake of
simplicity.
A transfer encoding option for Canonical RXER has been defined.
Changes in Draft 05
The references have been updated to the new LDAPv3 technical
specification.
Changes in Draft 06
This specification has been downgraded from an intended category of
Proposed Standard to Experimental because the RXER specification on
which it depends is in the Experimental category.
XED's application of the RXER UNION encoding instruction to the
DirectoryString ASN.1 type has been acknowledged.
Legg Expires 21 March 2008 [Page 12]
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-24 04:29:38 |