--- 1/draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-10.txt 2006-02-05 00:11:55.000000000 +0100 +++ 2/draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-11.txt 2006-02-05 00:11:55.000000000 +0100 @@ -1,14 +1,14 @@ Internet-Draft Editor: J. Sermersheim Intended Category: Standard Track Novell, Inc -Document: draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-10.txt Oct 2002 +Document: draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-11.txt Nov 2002 Obsoletes: RFC 2251 LDAP: The Protocol Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering @@ -43,80 +43,82 @@ 1. Introduction.....................................................2 2. Conventions......................................................3 3. Protocol Model...................................................3 4. Elements of Protocol.............................................3 4.1. Common Elements................................................4 4.1.1. Message Envelope.............................................4 4.1.2. String Types.................................................5 4.1.3. Distinguished Name and Relative Distinguished Name...........6 -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 1 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 1 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 4.1.4. Attribute Descriptions.......................................6 4.1.5. Attribute Value..............................................7 4.1.6. Attribute Value Assertion....................................7 - 4.1.7. Attribute....................................................8 + 4.1.7. Attribute....................................................7 4.1.8. Matching Rule Identifier.....................................8 4.1.9. Result Message...............................................8 4.1.10. Referral...................................................10 4.1.11. Controls...................................................11 4.2. Bind Operation................................................12 4.3. Unbind Operation..............................................15 4.4. Unsolicited Notification......................................15 4.5. Search Operation..............................................16 4.6. Modify Operation..............................................23 4.7. Add Operation.................................................25 4.8. Delete Operation..............................................26 4.9. Modify DN Operation...........................................26 4.10. Compare Operation............................................27 4.11. Abandon Operation............................................28 4.12. Extended Operation...........................................29 - 5. Protocol Element Encodings and Transfer.........................29 - 5.1. Protocol Encoding.............................................29 - 5.2. Transfer Protocols............................................30 - 6. Implementation Guidelines.......................................30 - 6.1. Server Implementations........................................30 - 6.2. Client Implementations........................................30 - 7. Security Considerations.........................................31 - 8. Acknowledgements................................................31 - 9. Normative References............................................31 - 10. Editor's Address...............................................32 - Appendix A - LDAP Result Codes.....................................33 - A.1 Non-Error Result Codes.........................................33 - A.2 Error Result Codes.............................................33 - A.3 Classes and Precedence of Error Result Codes...................33 - Appendix C - Change History........................................44 - C.1 Changes made to RFC 2251:......................................44 - C.2 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-00.txt:............44 - C.3 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-01.txt:............45 - C.4 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-02.txt:............45 - C.5 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-03.txt:............47 - C.6 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-04.txt:............49 - C.7 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-05.txt:............49 - C.8 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-06.txt:............50 - C.9 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-07.txt:............53 - C.10 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-08.txt:...........53 - C.11 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-09.txt:...........53 - Appendix D - Outstanding Work Items................................53 + 4.13. Start TLS Operation..........................................29 + 5. Protocol Element Encodings and Transfer.........................31 + 5.1. Protocol Encoding.............................................31 + 5.2. Transfer Protocols............................................32 + 6. Implementation Guidelines.......................................32 + 6.1. Server Implementations........................................32 + 6.2. Client Implementations........................................32 + 7. Security Considerations.........................................33 + 8. Acknowledgements................................................33 + 9. Normative References............................................33 + 10. Editor's Address...............................................34 + Appendix A - LDAP Result Codes.....................................35 + A.1 Non-Error Result Codes.........................................35 + A.2 Error Result Codes.............................................35 + A.3 Classes and Precedence of Error Result Codes...................35 + Appendix C - Change History........................................46 + C.1 Changes made to RFC 2251:......................................46 + C.2 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-00.txt:............46 + C.3 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-01.txt:............47 + C.4 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-02.txt:............47 + C.5 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-03.txt:............49 + C.6 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-04.txt:............51 + C.7 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-05.txt:............51 + C.8 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-06.txt:............52 + C.9 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-07.txt:............55 + C.10 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-08.txt:...........55 + C.11 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-09.txt:...........55 + C.12 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-10.txt:...........55 + Appendix D - Outstanding Work Items................................56 1. Introduction The Directory is "a collection of open systems cooperating to provide directory services" [X.500]. A Directory user, which may be a human - or other entity, accesses the Directory through a client (or - Directory User Agent (DUA)). The client, on behalf of the directory -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 2 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 2 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + or other entity, accesses the Directory through a client (or + Directory User Agent (DUA)). The client, on behalf of the directory user, interacts with one or more servers (or Directory System Agents (DSA)). Clients interact with servers using a directory access protocol. This document details the protocol elements of Lightweight Directory Access Protocol, along with their semantic meanings. Following the description of protocol elements, it describes the way in which the protocol is encoded and transferred. This document is an integral part of the LDAP Technical Specification @@ -152,26 +154,27 @@ Note that the core protocol operations defined in this document can be mapped to a subset of the X.500(1997) directory abstract service. However there is not a one-to-one mapping between LDAP protocol operations and DAP operations. Server implementations acting as a gateway to X.500 directories may need to make multiple DAP requests. 4. Elements of Protocol The LDAP protocol is described using Abstract Syntax Notation 1 (ASN.1) [X.680], and is transferred using a subset of ASN.1 Basic - Encoding Rules [X.690]. Section 5.1 specifies how the protocol is - encoded and transferred. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 3 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 3 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + Encoding Rules [X.690]. Section 5.1 specifies how the protocol is + encoded and transferred. + In order to support future Standards Track extensions to this protocol, extensibility is implied where it is allowed (per ASN.1). In addition, ellipses (...) have been supplied in ASN.1 types that are explicitly extensible as discussed in [LDAPIANA]. Because of the implied extensibility, clients and servers MUST ignore trailing SEQUENCE elements whose tags they do not recognize. Changes to the LDAP protocol other than those described in [LDAPIANA] require a different version number. A client indicates the version it is using as part of the bind request, described in section 4.2. If a @@ -207,26 +210,26 @@ searchResRef SearchResultReference, modifyRequest ModifyRequest, modifyResponse ModifyResponse, addRequest AddRequest, addResponse AddResponse, delRequest DelRequest, delResponse DelResponse, modDNRequest ModifyDNRequest, modDNResponse ModifyDNResponse, compareRequest CompareRequest, - compareResponse CompareResponse, - abandonRequest AbandonRequest, -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 4 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 4 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + compareResponse CompareResponse, + abandonRequest AbandonRequest, extendedReq ExtendedRequest, extendedResp ExtendedResponse, ... }, controls [0] Controls OPTIONAL } MessageID ::= INTEGER (0 .. maxInt) maxInt INTEGER ::= 2147483647 -- (2^^31 - 1) -- The function of the LDAPMessage is to provide an envelope containing @@ -264,21 +267,21 @@ A client MUST NOT send a request with the same message ID as an earlier request on the same connection unless it can be determined that the server is no longer servicing the earlier request. Otherwise the behavior is undefined. For operations that do not return responses (unbind, abandon, and abandoned operations), the client SHOULD assumes the operation is in progress until a subsequent bind request completes. 4.1.2. String Types -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 5 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 5 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 The LDAPString is a notational convenience to indicate that, although strings of LDAPString type encode as OCTET STRING types, the [ISO10646] character set (a superset of Unicode) is used, encoded following the UTF-8 algorithm [RFC2044]. Note that in the UTF-8 algorithm characters which are the same as ASCII (0x0000 through 0x007F) are represented as that same ASCII character in a single byte. The other byte values are used to form a variable-length encoding of an arbitrary character. @@ -313,36 +316,29 @@ 4.1.4. Attribute Descriptions The definition and encoding rules for attribute descriptions are defined in Section 2.5 of [Models]. Briefly, an attribute description is an attribute type and zero or more options. AttributeDescription ::= LDAPString -- Constrained to attributedescription -- [Models] - Not all options can be associated with attributes held in the - directory. A server will treat an AttributeDescription with any - options it does not implement or support as unrecognized. The order - in which options appear in the list MUST NOT be used to impart any - -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 6 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - - semantic meaning. Servers MUST treat any two AttributeDescription - with the same attribute type and options as equivalent. - - AttributeDescriptionList describes a list of 0 or more attribute + An AttributeDescriptionList describes a list of 0 or more attribute descriptions. (A list of zero elements has special significance in the Search request.) AttributeDescriptionList ::= SEQUENCE OF + +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 6 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + AttributeDescription 4.1.5. Attribute Value A field of type AttributeValue is an OCTET STRING containing an encoded attribute value data type. The value is encoded according to its LDAP-specific encoding definition. The LDAP-specific encoding definitions for different syntaxes and attribute types may be found in other documents, and in particular [Syntaxes]. @@ -374,29 +370,30 @@ AssertionValue ::= OCTET STRING The syntax of the AssertionValue depends on the context of the LDAP operation being performed. For example, the syntax of the EQUALITY matching rule for an attribute is used when performing a Compare operation. Often this is the same syntax used for values of the attribute type, but in some cases the assertion syntax differs from the value syntax. See objectIdentiferFirstComponentMatch in [Syntaxes] for an example. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 7 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - 4.1.7. Attribute An attribute consists of an attribute description and one or more values of that attribute description. (Though attributes MUST have at least one value when stored, due to access control restrictions the set may be empty when transferred from the server to the client. This + +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 7 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + is described in section 4.5.2, concerning the PartialAttributeList type.) Attribute ::= SEQUENCE { type AttributeDescription, vals SET OF AttributeValue } Each attribute value is distinct in the set (no duplicates). The set of attribute values is unordered. Implementations MUST NOT reply upon any apparent ordering being repeatable. @@ -427,32 +424,32 @@ LDAPResult ::= SEQUENCE { resultCode ENUMERATED { success (0), operationsError (1), protocolError (2), timeLimitExceeded (3), sizeLimitExceeded (4), compareFalse (5), compareTrue (6), - -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 8 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - authMethodNotSupported (7), strongAuthRequired (8), -- 9 reserved -- referral (10), adminLimitExceeded (11), unavailableCriticalExtension (12), confidentialityRequired (13), saslBindInProgress (14), + +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 8 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + noSuchAttribute (16), undefinedAttributeType (17), inappropriateMatching (18), constraintViolation (19), attributeOrValueExists (20), invalidAttributeSyntax (21), -- 22-31 unused -- noSuchObject (32), aliasProblem (33), invalidDNSyntax (34), @@ -485,32 +482,32 @@ The result codes enumeration is extensible as defined in Section 3.5 of [LDAPIANA]. The meanings of the result codes are given in Appendix A. The errorMessage field of this construct may, at the server's option, be used to return a string containing a textual, human-readable (terminal control and page formatting characters should be avoided) error diagnostic. As this error diagnostic is not standardized, implementations MUST NOT rely on the values returned. If the server - -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 9 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - chooses not to return a textual diagnostic, the errorMessage field of the LDAPResult type MUST contain a zero length string. For result codes of noSuchObject, aliasProblem, invalidDNSyntax and aliasDereferencingProblem, the matchedDN field is set to the name of the lowest entry (object or alias) in the directory that was matched. If no aliases were dereferenced while attempting to locate the entry, this will be a truncated form of the name provided, or if aliases + +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 9 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + were dereferenced, of the resulting name, as defined in section 12.5 of [X.511]. The matchedDN field contains a zero length string with all other result codes. 4.1.10. Referral The referral result code indicates that the contacted server does not hold the target entry of the request. The referral field is present in an LDAPResult if the LDAPResult.resultCode field value is referral, and absent with all other result codes. It contains one or @@ -541,34 +538,33 @@ to [LDAPDN]. If an alias was dereferenced, the part of the URL MUST be present, with the new target object name. If the part is present, the client MUST use this name in its next request to progress the operation, and if it is not present the client will use the same name as in the original request. Some servers (e.g. participating in distributed indexing) may provide a different filter in a referral for a search operation. If the filter part of the URL is present in an LDAPURL, the client MUST use this filter in its next request to progress this search, and if it is not present the client MUST use the same filter as it used for that search. Other aspects of - -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 10 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - the new request may be the same or different as the request which generated the referral. Note that UTF-8 characters appearing in a DN or search filter may not be legal for URLs (e.g. spaces) and MUST be escaped using the % method in [RFC2396]. Other kinds of URLs may be returned, so long as the operation could be performed using that protocol. +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 10 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + 4.1.11. Controls A control is a way to specify extension information for an LDAP message. A control only alters the semantics of the message it is attached to. Controls ::= SEQUENCE OF Control Control ::= SEQUENCE { controlType LDAPOID, @@ -599,32 +595,32 @@ The controlValue contains any information associated with the control, and its format is defined for the control. Implementations MUST be prepared to handle arbitrary contents of the controlValue octet string, including zero bytes. It is absent only if there is no value information which is associated with a control of its type. This document does not specify any controls. Controls may be specified in other documents. The specification of a control consists of: -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 11 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - - the OBJECT IDENTIFIER assigned to the control, - whether the control is always noncritical, always critical, or critical at the client's option, - the format of the controlValue contents of the control, - the semantics of the control, +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 11 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + - and optionally, semantics regarding the combination of the control with other controls. Servers list the controlType of all controls they recognize in the supportedControl attribute [Models] in the root DSE. Controls should not be combined unless the semantics of the combination has been specified. The semantics of control combinations, if specified, are generally found in the control specification most recently published. In the absence of combination @@ -653,33 +649,34 @@ -- 1 and 2 reserved sasl [3] SaslCredentials, ... } SaslCredentials ::= SEQUENCE { mechanism LDAPString, credentials OCTET STRING OPTIONAL } Parameters of the Bind Request are: -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 12 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - - version: A version number indicating the version of the protocol to be used in this protocol session. This document describes version 3 of the LDAP protocol. Note that there is no version negotiation, and the client just sets this parameter to the version it desires. If the server does not support the specified version, it responds with protocolError in the resultCode field of the BindResponse. - name: The name of the directory object that the client wishes to bind as. This field may take on a null value (a zero length + +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 12 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + string) for the purposes of anonymous binds, when authentication has been performed at a lower layer, or when using SASL credentials with a mechanism that includes the name in the credentials. Server behavior is undefined when the name is a null value, simple authentication is used, and a password is specified. The server SHOULD NOT perform any alias dereferencing in determining the object to bind as. - authentication: information used to authenticate the name, if any, provided in the Bind Request. This type is extensible as defined @@ -708,30 +705,41 @@ A client may abort a SASL bind negotiation by sending a BindRequest with a different value in the mechanism field of SaslCredentials, or an AuthenticationChoice other than sasl. If the client sends a BindRequest with the sasl mechanism field as an empty string, the server MUST return a BindResponse with authMethodNotSupported as the resultCode. This will allow clients to abort a negotiation if it wishes to try again with the same SASL mechanism. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 13 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - If the client did not bind before sending a request and receives an operationsError, it may then send a Bind Request. If this also fails or the client chooses not to bind on the existing connection, it will close the connection, reopen it and begin again by first sending a PDU with a Bind Request. This will aid in interoperating with servers implementing other versions of LDAP. + Clients MAY send multiple bind requests on a connection to change + their credentials. A subsequent bind process has the effect of + abandoning all operations outstanding on the connection. (This + simplifies server implementation.) Authentication from earlier binds + +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 13 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + + are subsequently ignored, and so if the bind fails, the connection + will be treated as anonymous. If a SASL transfer encryption or + integrity mechanism has been negotiated, and that mechanism does not + support the changing of credentials from one identity to another, + then the client MUST instead establish a new connection. + 4.2.2. Bind Response The Bind Response is defined as follows. BindResponse ::= [APPLICATION 1] SEQUENCE { COMPONENTS OF LDAPResult, serverSaslCreds [7] OCTET STRING OPTIONAL } BindResponse consists simply of an indication from the server of the status of the client's request for authentication. @@ -764,27 +772,26 @@ credentials could not be processed. - unavailable: the server is shutting down. If the server does not support the client's requested protocol version, it MUST set the resultCode to protocolError. If the client receives a BindResponse response where the resultCode was protocolError, it MUST close the connection as the server will be unwilling to accept further operations. (This is for compatibility - -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 14 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - with earlier versions of LDAP, in which the bind was always the first operation, and there was no negotiation.) +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 14 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + The serverSaslCreds are used as part of a SASL-defined bind mechanism to allow the client to authenticate the server to which it is communicating, or to perform "challenge-response" authentication. If the client bound with the simple choice, or the SASL mechanism does not require the server to return information to the client, then this field is not to be included in the result. 4.3. Unbind Operation The function of the Unbind Operation is to terminate a protocol @@ -819,27 +826,26 @@ 4.4.1. Notice of Disconnection This notification may be used by the server to advise the client that the server is about to close the connection due to an error condition. Note that this notification is NOT a response to an unbind requested by the client: the server MUST follow the procedures of section 4.3. This notification is intended to assist clients in distinguishing between an error condition and a transient network failure. As with a connection close due to network failure, the - -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 15 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - client MUST NOT assume that any outstanding requests which modified the directory have succeeded or failed. +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 15 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + The responseName is 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.20036, the response field is absent, and the resultCode is used to indicate the reason for the disconnection. The following resultCode values are to be used in this notification: - protocolError: The server has received data from the client in which the LDAPMessage structure could not be parsed. - strongAuthRequired: The server has detected that an established @@ -876,24 +882,25 @@ neverDerefAliases (0), derefInSearching (1), derefFindingBaseObj (2), derefAlways (3) }, sizeLimit INTEGER (0 .. maxInt), timeLimit INTEGER (0 .. maxInt), typesOnly BOOLEAN, filter Filter, attributes AttributeDescriptionList } -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 16 + Filter ::= CHOICE { + +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 16 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - Filter ::= CHOICE { and [0] SET SIZE (1..MAX) OF Filter, or [1] SET SIZE (1..MAX) OF Filter, not [2] Filter, equalityMatch [3] AttributeValueAssertion, substrings [4] SubstringFilter, greaterOrEqual [5] AttributeValueAssertion, lessOrEqual [6] AttributeValueAssertion, present [7] AttributeDescription, approxMatch [8] AttributeValueAssertion, extensibleMatch [9] MatchingRuleAssertion } @@ -933,21 +940,21 @@ the base object in searching, but not in locating the base object of the search; derefFindingBaseObj: dereference aliases in locating the base object of the search, but not when searching subordinates of the base object; derefAlways: dereference aliases both in searching and in locating the base object of the search. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 17 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 17 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - sizeLimit: A size limit that restricts the maximum number of entries to be returned as a result of the search. A value of 0 in this field indicates that no client-requested size limit restrictions are in effect for the search. Servers may enforce a maximum number of entries to return. - timeLimit: A time limit that restricts the maximum time (in seconds) allowed for a search. A value of 0 in this field @@ -989,21 +996,21 @@ The present match evaluates to TRUE where there is an attribute or subtype of the specified attribute description present in an entry, and FALSE otherwise (including a presence test with an unrecognized attribute description.) The matching rule and assertion syntax for equalityMatch filter items is defined by the EQUALITY matching rule for the attribute type. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 18 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 18 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 The matching rule and assertion syntax for AssertionValues in a substrings filter item is defined by the SUBSTR matching rule for the attribute type. The matching rule and assertion syntax for greaterOrEqual and lessOrEqual filter items is defined by the ORDERING matching rule for the attribute type. @@ -1045,21 +1052,21 @@ server did not recognize the attribute type shoeSize, a filter of (shoeSize=*) would evaluate to FALSE, and the filters (shoeSize=12), (shoeSize>=12) and (shoeSize<=12) would evaluate to Undefined. Servers MUST NOT return errors if attribute descriptions or matching rule ids are not recognized, or assertion values cannot be parsed. More details of filter processing are given in section 7.8 of [X.511]. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 19 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 19 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - attributes: A list of the attributes to be returned from each entry which matches the search filter. There are two special values which may be used: an empty list with no attributes, and the attribute description string "*". Both of these signify that all user attributes are to be returned. (The "*" allows the client to request all user attributes in addition to any specified operational attributes). @@ -1102,21 +1109,21 @@ objectName LDAPDN, attributes PartialAttributeList } PartialAttributeList ::= SEQUENCE OF SEQUENCE { type AttributeDescription, vals SET OF AttributeValue } -- implementors should note that the PartialAttributeList may -- have zero elements (if none of the attributes of that entry -- were requested, or could be returned), and that the vals set -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 20 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 20 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 -- may also have zero elements (if types only was requested, or -- all values were excluded from the result.) SearchResultReference ::= [APPLICATION 19] SEQUENCE OF LDAPURL -- at least one LDAPURL element must be present SearchResultDone ::= [APPLICATION 5] LDAPResult @@ -1158,21 +1165,21 @@ If the server was able to locate the entry referred to by the baseObject but was unable to search all the entries in the scope at and under the baseObject, the server may return one or more SearchResultReference entries, each containing a reference to another set of servers for continuing the operation. A server MUST NOT return any SearchResultReference if it has not located the baseObject and thus has not searched any entries; in this case it would return a SearchResultDone containing a referral resultCode. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 21 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 21 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 In the absence of indexing information provided to a server from servers holding subordinate naming contexts, SearchResultReference responses are not affected by search filters and are always returned when in scope. The SearchResultReference is of the same data type as the Referral. URLs for servers implementing the LDAP protocol are written according to [LDAPDN]. The part MUST be present in the URL, with the new @@ -1214,21 +1221,21 @@ SearchResultEntry for CN=Manager,DC=Example,DC=NET SearchResultReference { ldap://hostb/OU=People,DC=Example,DC=NET ldap://hostc/OU=People,DC=Example,DC=NET } SearchResultReference { ldap://hostd/OU=Roles,DC=Example,DC=NET } SearchResultDone (success) -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 22 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 22 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 Client implementors should note that when following a SearchResultReference, additional SearchResultReference may be generated. Continuing the example, if the client contacted the server (hostb) and issued the search for the subtree "OU=People,DC=Example,DC=NET", the server might respond as follows: SearchResultEntry for OU=People,DC=Example,DC=NET SearchResultReference { @@ -1271,21 +1278,21 @@ - object: The object to be modified. The value of this field contains the DN of the entry to be modified. The server will not perform any alias dereferencing in determining the object to be modified. - modification: A list of modifications to be performed on the entry. The entire list of entry modifications MUST be performed in the order they are listed, as a single atomic operation. While -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 23 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 23 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 individual modifications may violate the directory schema, the resulting entry after the entire list of modifications is performed MUST conform to the requirements of the directory schema. The values that may be taken on by the 'operation' field in each modification construct have the following semantics respectively: add: add values listed to the given attribute, creating the @@ -1329,21 +1336,21 @@ described in section 4.9 is used to rename an entry. If an EQUALITY matching rule has not been defined for an attribute type, clients MUST NOT attempt to add or delete individual values of that attribute from an entry using the "add" or "delete" form of a modification, and MUST instead use the "replace" form. Note that due to the simplifications made in LDAP, there is not a direct mapping of the modifications in an LDAP ModifyRequest onto the -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 24 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 24 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 EntryModifications of a DAP ModifyEntry operation, and different implementations of LDAP-DAP gateways may use different means of representing the change. If successful, the final effect of the operations on the entry MUST be identical. 4.7. Add Operation The Add Operation allows a client to request the addition of an entry @@ -1385,21 +1392,21 @@ located in the directory unless DIT structure rules are in place. Some servers MAY allow the administrator to restrict the classes of entries which can be added to the directory. Upon receipt of an Add Request, a server will attempt to perform the add requested. The result of the add attempt will be returned to the client in the Add Response, defined as follows: AddResponse ::= [APPLICATION 9] LDAPResult -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 25 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 25 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 A response of success indicates that the new entry is present in the directory. 4.8. Delete Operation The Delete Operation allows a client to request the removal of an entry from the directory. The Delete Request is defined as follows: @@ -1441,21 +1448,21 @@ server will not dereference any aliases in locating the entry to be changed. - newrdn: the RDN that will form the leftmost component of the new name of the entry. - deleteoldrdn: a boolean parameter that controls whether the old RDN attribute values are to be retained as attributes of the entry, or deleted from the entry. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 26 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 26 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - newSuperior: if present, this is the Distinguished Name of the entry which becomes the immediate superior of the existing entry. The result of the name change attempted by the server upon receipt of a Modify DN Request is returned in the Modify DN Response, defined as follows: ModifyDNResponse ::= [APPLICATION 13] LDAPResult @@ -1497,21 +1504,21 @@ Parameters of the Compare Request are: - entry: the name of the entry to be compared with. Note that the server SHOULD NOT dereference any aliases in locating the entry to be compared with. - ava: the assertion with which an attribute in the entry is to be compared. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 27 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 27 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 The result of the compare attempted by the server upon receipt of a Compare Request is returned in the Compare Response, defined as follows: CompareResponse ::= [APPLICATION 15] LDAPResult Upon receipt of a Compare Request, a server will attempt to perform the requested comparison using the EQUALITY matching rule for the @@ -1552,21 +1559,21 @@ server MUST cease transmitting entry responses to the abandoned request immediately, and MUST NOT send the SearchResponseDone. Of course, the server MUST ensure that only properly encoded LDAPMessage PDUs are transmitted. Clients MUST NOT send abandon requests for the same operation multiple times, and MUST also be prepared to receive results from operations it has abandoned (since these may have been in transit when the abandon was requested, or are not able to be abandoned). -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 28 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 28 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 Servers MUST discard abandon requests for message IDs they do not recognize, for operations which cannot be abandoned, and for operations which have already been abandoned. 4.12. Extended Operation An extension mechanism has been added in this version of LDAP, in order to allow additional operations to be defined for services not @@ -1592,40 +1599,148 @@ ExtendedResponse ::= [APPLICATION 24] SEQUENCE { COMPONENTS OF LDAPResult, responseName [10] LDAPOID OPTIONAL, response [11] OCTET STRING OPTIONAL } If the server does not recognize the request name, it MUST return only the response fields from LDAPResult, containing the protocolError result code. +4.13. Start TLS Operation + + The Start Transport Layer Security (StartTLS) operation provides the + ability to establish Transport Layer Security [RFC2246] on an LDAP + connection. + +4.13.1. Start TLS Request + + A client requests TLS establishment by transmitting a Start TLS + request PDU to the server. The Start TLS request is defined in terms + of an ExtendedRequest. The requestName is "1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.20037", + and the requestValue field is absent. + + The client MUST NOT send any PDUs on this connection following this + request until it receives a Start TLS extended response. + +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 29 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + +4.13.2. Start TLS Response + + When a Start TLS request is made, servers supporting the operation + MUST return a Start TLS response PDU to the requestor. The Start TLS + response responseName is also "1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.20037", and the + response field is absent. + + The server MUST set the resultCode field to either success or one of + the other values outlined in section 4.13.2.2. + +4.13.2.1. "Success" Response + + If the Start TLS Response contains a resultCode of success, this + indicates that the server is willing and able to negotiate TLS. Refer + to section 5.3 of [AuthMeth] for details. + +4.13.2.2. Response other than "success" + + If the ExtendedResponse contains a resultCode other than success, + this indicates that the server is unwilling or unable to negotiate + TLS. + + If the Start TLS extended request was not successful, the resultCode + will be one of: + + operationsError (operations sequencing incorrect; e.g. TLS already + established) + + protocolError (TLS not supported or incorrect PDU structure) + + referral (this server doesn't do TLS, try this one) + + unavailable (e.g. some major problem with TLS, or server is + shutting down) + + The server MUST return operationsError if the client violates any of + the Start TLS extended operation sequencing requirements described in + section 5.3 of [AuthMeth]. + + If the server does not support TLS (whether by design or by current + configuration), it MUST set the resultCode to protocolError, or to + referral. The server MUST include an actual referral value in the + LDAP Result if it returns a resultCode of referral. The client's + current session is unaffected if the server does not support TLS. The + client MAY proceed with any LDAP operation, or it MAY close the + connection. + + The server MUST return unavailable if it supports TLS but cannot + establish a TLS connection for some reason, e.g. the certificate + server not responding, it cannot contact its TLS implementation, or + if the server is in process of shutting down. The client MAY retry + +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 30 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + + the StartTLS operation, or it MAY proceed with any other LDAP + operation, or it MAY close the connection. + +4.13.3. Closing a TLS Connection + + Two forms of TLS connection closure--graceful and abrupt--are + supported. + +4.13.3.1. Graceful Closure + + Either the client or server MAY terminate the TLS connection on an + LDAP association by sending a TLS closure alert. + + Before closing a TLS connection, the client MUST either wait for any + outstanding LDAP operations to complete, or explicitly abandon them. + + After the initiator of a close has sent a TLS closure alert, it MUST + discard any TLS messages until it has received a TLS closure alert + from the other party. It will cease to send TLS Record Protocol + PDUs, and following the receipt of the alert, MAY send and receive + LDAP PDUs. + + The other party, if it receives a TLS closure alert, MUST immediately + transmit a TLS closure alert. It will subsequently cease to send TLS + Record Protocol PDUs, and MAY send and receive LDAP PDUs. + +4.13.3.2. Abrupt Closure + + Either the client or server MAY abruptly close the entire LDAP + association and any TLS connection established on it by dropping the + underlying TCP connection. In this circumstance, a server MAY send + the client a Notice of Disconnection before dropping the TCP + connection. + 5. Protocol Element Encodings and Transfer One underlying service is defined here. Clients and servers SHOULD implement the mapping of LDAP over TCP described in 5.2.1. 5.1. Protocol Encoding The protocol elements of LDAP are encoded for exchange using the Basic Encoding Rules (BER) [X.690] of ASN.1 [X.680]. However, due to the high overhead involved in using certain elements of the BER, the following additional restrictions are placed on BER-encodings of LDAP protocol elements: (1) Only the definite form of length encoding will be used. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 29 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - (2) OCTET STRING values will be encoded in the primitive form only. +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 31 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + (3) If the value of a BOOLEAN type is true, the encoding MUST have its contents octets set to hex "FF". (4) If a value of a type is its default value, it MUST be absent. Only some BOOLEAN and INTEGER types have default values in this protocol definition. These restrictions do not apply to ASN.1 types encapsulated inside of OCTET STRING values, such as attribute values, unless otherwise noted. @@ -1658,26 +1773,27 @@ 6.2. Client Implementations Clients which request referrals MUST ensure that they do not loop between servers. They MUST NOT repeatedly contact the same server for the same request with the same target entry name, scope and filter. Some clients may be using a counter that is incremented each time referral handling occurs for an operation, and these kinds of clients MUST be able to handle a DIT with at least ten layers of naming contexts between the root and a leaf entry. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 30 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - In the absence of prior agreements with servers, clients SHOULD NOT assume that servers support any particular schemas beyond those referenced in section 6.1. Different schemas can have different + +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 32 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + attribute types with the same names. The client can retrieve the subschema entries referenced by the subschemaSubentry attribute in the server's root DSE or in entries held by the server. 7. Security Considerations When used with a connection-oriented transport, this version of the protocol provides facilities for simple authentication using a cleartext password, as well as any SASL mechanism [RFC2222]. SASL allows for integrity and privacy services to be negotiated. @@ -1712,26 +1828,26 @@ 9. Normative References [X.500] ITU-T Rec. X.500, "The Directory: Overview of Concepts, Models and Service", 1993. [Roadmap] K. Zeilenga (editor), "LDAP: Technical Specification Road Map", draft-ietf-ldapbis-roadmap-xx.txt (a work in progress). -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 31 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997. +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 33 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + [X.680] ITU-T Recommendation X.680 (1997) | ISO/IEC 8824-1:1998 Information Technology - Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1): Specification of basic notation [X.690] ITU-T Rec. X.690, "Specification of ASN.1 encoding rules: Basic, Canonical, and Distinguished Encoding Rules", 1994. [LDAPIANA] K. Zeilenga, "IANA Considerations for LDAP", draft-ietf- ldapbis-xx.txt (a work in progress). @@ -1769,21 +1885,21 @@ 10. Editor's Address Jim Sermersheim Novell, Inc. 1800 South Novell Place Provo, Utah 84606, USA jimse@novell.com +1 801 861-3088 -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 32 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 34 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 Appendix A - LDAP Result Codes This normative appendix details additional considerations regarding LDAP result codes and provides a brief, general description of each LDAP result code enumerated in Section 4.1.10. Additional result codes MAY be defined for use with extensions. Client implementations SHALL treat any result code which they do not @@ -1826,21 +1942,21 @@ 6) Protocol Problem (codes 1, 2) - a problem related to protocol structure or semantics. Server implementations SHALL NOT continue processing an operation after it has determined that an error is to be reported. If the server detects multiple errors simultaneously, the server SHOULD report the error with the highest precedence. Existing LDAP result codes are described as follows: -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 33 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 35 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 success (0) Indicates successful completion of an operation. This result code is normally not returned by the compare operation, see compareFalse (5) and compareTrue (6). operationsError (1) @@ -1876,21 +1992,21 @@ compareFalse (5) Indicates that the operation successfully completes and the assertion has evaluated to TRUE. This result code is normally only returned by the compare operation. compareTrue (6) -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 34 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 36 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 Indicates that the operation successfully completes and the assertion has evaluated to FALSE. This result code is normally only returned by the compare operation. authMethodNotSupported (7) @@ -1925,21 +2041,21 @@ Indicates the server requires the client to send a new bind request, with the same sasl mechanism, to continue the authentication process (see section 4.2). noSuchAttribute (16) Indicates that the named entry does not contain the specified attribute or attribute value. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 35 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 37 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 undefinedAttributeType (17) Indicates that a request field contains an undefined attribute type. inappropriateMatching (18) Indicates that a request cannot be completed due to an @@ -1974,21 +2090,21 @@ Indicates that an alias problem has occurred. invalidDNSyntax (34) Indicates that a LDAPDN or RelativeLDAPDN field (e.g. search base, target entry, ModifyDN newrdn, etc.) of a request does not conform to the required syntax or contains attribute values which do not conform to the syntax of the attribute's type. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 36 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 38 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 aliasDereferencingProblem (36) Indicates that a problem in dereferencing an alias. inappropriateAuthentication (48) Indicates the server requires the client which had attempted to bind anonymously or without supplying credentials to @@ -2022,21 +2138,21 @@ Indicates that the server has detected an internal loop. namingViolation (64) Indicates that the entry name violates naming restrictions. objectClassViolation (65) Indicates that the entry violates object class restrictions. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 37 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 39 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 notAllowedOnNonLeaf (66) Indicates that operation is inappropriately acting upon a non-leaf entry. notAllowedOnRDN (67) Indicates that the operation is inappropriately attempting to @@ -2058,21 +2174,21 @@ affectsMultipleDSAs (71) Indicates that the operation cannot be completed as it affects multiple servers (DSAs). other (80) Indicates the server has encountered an internal error. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 38 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 40 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 Appendix B - Complete ASN.1 Definition This appendix is normative. Lightweight-Directory-Access-Protocol-V3 DEFINITIONS IMPLICIT TAGS EXTENSIBILITY IMPLIED ::= @@ -2116,21 +2232,21 @@ LDAPDN ::= LDAPString RelativeLDAPDN ::= LDAPString AttributeDescription ::= LDAPString -- Constrained to attributedescription -- [Models] AttributeDescriptionList ::= SEQUENCE OF -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 39 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 41 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 AttributeDescription AttributeValue ::= OCTET STRING AttributeValueAssertion ::= SEQUENCE { attributeDesc AttributeDescription, assertionValue AssertionValue } @@ -2174,21 +2290,21 @@ -- 37-47 unused -- inappropriateAuthentication (48), invalidCredentials (49), insufficientAccessRights (50), busy (51), unavailable (52), unwillingToPerform (53), loopDetect (54), -- 55-63 unused -- -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 40 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 42 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 namingViolation (64), objectClassViolation (65), notAllowedOnNonLeaf (66), notAllowedOnRDN (67), entryAlreadyExists (68), objectClassModsProhibited (69), -- 70 reserved for CLDAP -- affectsMultipleDSAs (71), @@ -2232,21 +2348,21 @@ serverSaslCreds [7] OCTET STRING OPTIONAL } UnbindRequest ::= [APPLICATION 2] NULL SearchRequest ::= [APPLICATION 3] SEQUENCE { baseObject LDAPDN, scope ENUMERATED { baseObject (0), singleLevel (1), -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 41 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 43 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 wholeSubtree (2) }, derefAliases ENUMERATED { neverDerefAliases (0), derefInSearching (1), derefFindingBaseObj (2), derefAlways (3) }, sizeLimit INTEGER (0 .. maxInt), timeLimit INTEGER (0 .. maxInt), @@ -2290,21 +2406,21 @@ vals SET OF AttributeValue } SearchResultReference ::= [APPLICATION 19] SEQUENCE OF LDAPURL SearchResultDone ::= [APPLICATION 5] LDAPResult ModifyRequest ::= [APPLICATION 6] SEQUENCE { object LDAPDN, modification SEQUENCE OF SEQUENCE { -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 42 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 44 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 operation ENUMERATED { add (0), delete (1), replace (2) }, modification AttributeTypeAndValues } } AttributeTypeAndValues ::= SEQUENCE { type AttributeDescription, @@ -2346,21 +2462,21 @@ requestName [0] LDAPOID, requestValue [1] OCTET STRING OPTIONAL } ExtendedResponse ::= [APPLICATION 24] SEQUENCE { COMPONENTS OF LDAPResult, responseName [10] LDAPOID OPTIONAL, response [11] OCTET STRING OPTIONAL } END -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 43 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 45 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 Appendix C - Change History C.1 Changes made to RFC 2251: C.1.1 Editorial @@ -2403,21 +2519,21 @@ the transfer encoding is present in attributeDesc, the AssertionValue is encoded as specified by the option...". Previously, only the ;binary option was mentioned. C.2.3 Sections 4.2, 4.9, 4.10 - Added alias dereferencing specifications. In the case of modDN, followed precedent set on other update operations (... alias is not dereferenced...) In the case of bind and compare stated that -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 44 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 46 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 servers SHOULD NOT dereference aliases. Specifications were added because they were missing from the previous version and caused interoperability problems. Concessions were made for bind and compare (neither should have ever allowed alias dereferencing) by using SHOULD NOT language, due to the behavior of some existing implementations. C.2.4 Sections 4.5 and Appendix A @@ -2459,21 +2575,21 @@ by a lower layer" to "the underlying transport service cannot guarantee confidentiality" C.3.6 Section 4.5.2 - Removed all mention of ExtendedResponse due to lack of implementation. C.4 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-02.txt: -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 45 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 47 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 C.4.1 Section 4 - Removed "typically" from "and is typically transferred" in the first paragraph. We know of no (and can conceive of no) case where this isn't true. - Added "Section 5.1 specifies how the LDAP protocol is encoded." To the first paragraph. Added this cross reference for readability. - Changed "version 3 " to "version 3 or later" in the second @@ -2515,21 +2631,21 @@ controls). C.4.6 Section 4.4 - Changed "One unsolicited notification is defined" to "One unsolicited notification (Notice of Disconnection) is defined" in the third paragraph. For clarity and readability. C.4.7 Section 4.5.1 -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 46 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 48 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - Changed "checking for the existence of the objectClass attribute" to "checking for the presence of the objectClass attribute" in the last paragraph. This was done as a measure of consistency (we use the terms present and presence rather than exists and existence in search filters). C.4.8 Section 4.5.3 @@ -2571,21 +2687,21 @@ whether there can be more than one value of an attribute of that type in an entry, the syntax to which the values must conform, the kinds of matching which can be performed on values of that attribute, and other functions." to " An attribute is a description (a type and zero or more options) with one or more associated values. The attribute type governs whether the attribute can have multiple values, the syntax and matching rules used to construct and compare values of that attribute, and other functions. Options indicate modes of transfer and other -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 47 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 49 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 functions.". This points out that an attribute consists of both the type and options. C.5.2 Section 4 - Changed "Section 5.1 specifies the encoding rules for the LDAP protocol" to "Section 5.1 specifies how the protocol is encoded and transferred." @@ -2628,21 +2744,21 @@ - Changed the wording regarding 'equally capable' referrals to "If multiple URLs are present, the client assumes that any URL may be used to progress the operation.". The previous language implied that the server MUST enforce rules that it was practically incapable of. The new language highlights the original intent-- that is, that any of the referrals may be used to progress the operation, there is no inherent 'weighting' mechanism. C.5.7 Section 4.5.1 and Appendix A -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 48 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 50 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - Added the comment "-- initial and final can occur at most once", to clarify this restriction. C.5.8 Section 5.1 - Changed heading from "Mapping Onto BER-based Transport Services" to "Protocol Encoding". @@ -2684,21 +2800,21 @@ doc now specifies a difference between transfer and tagging options and describes the semantics of each, and how and when subtyping rules apply. Now allow options to be transmitted in any order but disallow any ordering semantics to be implied. These changes are the result of ongoing input from an engineering team designed to deal with ambiguity issues surrounding attribute options. C.7.3 Sections 4.1.5.1 and 4.1.6 -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 49 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 51 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - Refer to non "binary" transfer encodings as "native encoding" rather than "string" encoding to clarify and avoid confusion. C.8 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-06.txt: C.8.1 Title - Changed to "LDAP: The Protocol" to be consisted with other working @@ -2740,21 +2856,21 @@ C.8.7 Relationship to X.500 - Removed section. It has been moved to [Roadmap] C.8.8 Server Specific Data Requirements - Removed section. It has been moved to [Models] C.8.9 Elements of Protocol -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 50 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 52 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - Added "Section 5.1 specifies how the protocol is encoded and transferred." to the end of the first paragraph for reference. - Reworded notes about extensibility, and now talk about implied extensibility and the use of ellipses in the ASN.1 - Removed references to LDAPv2 in third and fourth paragraphs. @@ -2797,21 +2913,21 @@ - Clarified intent regarding exactly what is to be BER encoded. - Clarified that clients must not expect ;binary when not asking for it (;binary, as opposed to ber encoded data). C.8.17 Attribute - Use the term "attribute description" in lieu of "type" -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 51 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 53 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - Clarified the fact that clients cannot rely on any apparent ordering of attribute values. C.8.18 LDAPResult - To resultCode, added ellipses "..." to the enumeration to indicate extensibility. and added a note, pointing to [LDAPIANA] @@ -2854,21 +2970,21 @@ - Added as normative appendix A C.8.25 ASN.1 - Added EXTENSIBILITY IMPLIED - Added a number of comments holding referenced to [Models] and [ISO10646]. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 52 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 54 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - Removed AttributeType. It is not used. C.9 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-07.txt: - Removed all mention of transfer encodings and the binary attribute option - Further alignment with [Models]. @@ -2901,31 +3017,47 @@ C.10.3 Section 4.11: - Explained that Abandon and Unbind cannot be abandoned, and illustrated how to determine whether an operation has been abandoned. C.11 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-09.txt: - Fixed formatting +C.12 Changes made to draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-10.txt: + +C.12.1 Section 4.1.4: + + - Removed second paragraph as this language exists in MODELS + +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 55 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + +C.12.2 Section 4.2.1: + + - Replaced fourth paragraph. It was accidentally removed in an + earlier edit. + +C.12.2 Section 4.13: + + - Added section describing the StartTLS operation (moved from + authmeth) + Appendix D - Outstanding Work Items D.0 Integrate notational consistency agreements - WG will discuss notation consistency. Once agreement happens, reconcile draft. D.1 Integrate result codes draft. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 53 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - - The result codes draft should be reconciled with this draft. Operation-specific instructions will reside with operations while the error-specific sections will be added as an appendix. Note that there is a result codes appendix now. Still need to reconcile with each operation. D.2 Verify references. - Many referenced documents have changed. Ensure references and section numbers are correct. @@ -2944,41 +3076,41 @@ - Change "operationsError" to "other" as a bind result code. D.21 Section 4.5.1 - Make sure the use of "subordinates" in the derefInSearching definition is correct. See "derefInSearching" on list. D.23 Section 4.5.3 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 56 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + - Add "Similarly, a server MUST NOT return a SearchResultReference when the scope of the search is baseObject. If a client receives such a SearchResultReference it MUST interpret is as a protocol error and MUST NOT follow it." to the first paragraph. - Add "If the scope part of the LDAP URL is present, the client MUST use the new scope in its next request to progress the search. If the scope part is absent the client MUST use subtree scope to complete subtree searches and base scope to complete one level searches." to the third paragraph. D.25 Section 4.6 - Resolve the meaning of "and is ignored if the attribute does not exist". See "modify: "non-existent attribute"" on the list. D.27 Section 4.10 -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 54 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 - - Specify what happens when the attr is missing vs. attr isn't in schema. Also what happens if there's no equality matching rule. D.30 Section 5.1 - Add "control and extended operation values" to last paragraph. See "LBER (BER Restrictions)" on list. D.32 Section 6.1 @@ -3001,23 +3133,27 @@ - Add "This document provides a mechanism which clients may use to discover operational attributes. Those relying on security by obscurity should implement appropriate access controls to restricts access to operational attributes per local policy." as an eighth paragraph. - Add "This document provides a mechanism which clients may use to discover operational attributes. Those relying on security by obscurity should implement appropriate access controls to restricts access to operational attributes per local policy." as an eighth paragraph. + +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 57 + Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 + - Add notes regarding DoS attack found by CERT advisories. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 55 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 58 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol Version 3 Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any @@ -3034,11 +3170,11 @@ The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. -Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires Apr 2003 Page 56 +Sermersheim Internet-Draft - Expires May 2003 Page 59