[Search] [txt|pdf|bibtex] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 rfc4520                               
INTERNET-DRAFT                                Kurt D. Zeilenga
Intended Category: BCP                        OpenLDAP Foundation
Expires in six months                         20 June 2003 Obsoletes:
RFC 3383


                      IANA Considerations for LDAP
                   <draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt>


Status of Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

   This document is intended to be, after appropriate review and
   revision, submitted to the RFC Editor as a Best Current Practice
   document.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.  Technical
   discussion of this document will take place on the IETF LDAP Revision
   Working Group (LDAPBIS) mailing list <ietf-ldapbis@openldap.org>.
   Please send editorial comments directly to the document editor
   <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as
   Internet-Drafts.  Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a
   maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by
   other documents at any time.  It is inappropriate to use
   Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as
   ``work in progress.''

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   <http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt>. The list of
   Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   <http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html>.

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003).  All Rights Reserved.

   Please see the Full Copyright section near the end of this document
   for more information.


Abstract

   This document provides procedures for registering extensible elements
   of Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP).  The document also
   provides guidelines to Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)



Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP              [Page 1]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


   describing conditions under which new values can be assigned.


1. Introduction

   The Lightweight Directory Access Protocol [Roadmap] (LDAP) is an
   extensible protocol.  LDAP supports:

      - addition of new operations,
      - extension of existing operations, and
      - extensible schema.

   This document details procedures for registering values of used to
   unambiguously identify extensible elements of the protocol including:

      - LDAP message types;
      - LDAP extended operations and controls;
      - LDAP result codes;
      - LDAP authentication methods;
      - LDAP attribute description options; and
      - Object Identifier descriptors.

   These registries are maintained by the Internet Assigned Numbers
   Authority (IANA).

   In addition, this document provides guidelines to IANA describing the
   conditions under which new values can be assigned.

   This document replaces RFC 3383.


2. Terminology and Conventions

   This section details terms and conventions used in this document.


2.1. Policy Terminology

   The terms "IESG Approval", "Standards Action", "IETF Consensus",
   "Specification Required", "First Come First Served", "Expert Review",
   and "Private Use" are used as defined in BCP 26 [RFC2434].


2.2. Requirement Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119].  In



Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP              [Page 2]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


   this case, "the specification" as used by BCP 14 refers to the
   processing of protocols being submitted to the IETF standards
   process.


2.3. Common ABNF Productions

   A number of syntaxes in this document are described using ABNF
   [RFC2234].  These syntaxes rely on the following common productions:

        ALPHA = %x41-5A / %x61-7A    ; A-Z / a-z

        LDIGIT = %x31-39             ; 1-9

        DIGIT = %x30 / LDIGIT        ; 0-9

        HYPHEN = %x2D                ; "-"

        DOT = %x2E                   ; "."

        number = DIGIT / ( LDIGIT 1*DIGIT )

        keychar = ALPHA / DIGIT / HYPHEN

        leadkeychar = ALPHA

        keystring = leadkeychar *keychar

   A keyword is a case-insensitive string of UTF-8 [UTF-8] encoded
   characters from the Universal Character Set (UCS) [ISO10646]
   restricted to the <keystring> production.


3.  IANA Considerations for LDAP

   This section details each kind of protocol value which can be
   registered and provides IANA guidelines on how to assign new values.

   IANA may reject obviously bogus registrations described.


3.1. Object Identifiers

   Numerous LDAP schema and protocol elements are identified by Object
   Identifiers (OIDs).  Specifications which assign OIDs to elements
   SHOULD state who delegated the OIDs for its use.

   For IETF developed elements, specifications SHOULD use OIDs under



Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP              [Page 3]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


   "Internet Directory Numbers" (1.3.6.1.1.x).  Numbers under this OID
   arc will be assigned upon Expert Review with Specification Required.
   Only one OID per specification will be assigned.  The specification
   MAY then assign any number of OIDs within this arc without further
   coordination with IANA.

   For elements developed by others, any properly delegated OID can be
   used, including those under "Internet Private Enterprise Numbers"
   (1.3.6.1.4.1.x) assigned by IANA
   <http://www.iana.org/cgi-bin/enterprise.pl>.

   To avoid interoperability problems between early implementations of a
   "work in progress" and implementations of the published specification
   (e.g., the RFC), experimental OIDs SHOULD be used in "works in
   progress" and early implementations.  OIDs under the Internet
   Experimental OID arc (1.3.6.1.3.x) may be used for this purpose.

   Experimental OIDs SHALL NOT be used in published specifications (e.g.
   RFCs).

   Practices for IANA assignment of Internet Enterprise and Experimental
   OIDs are detailed in STD 16 [RFC1155].


3.2 Protocol Mechanisms

   LDAP provides a number of Root DSE attributes for discovery of
   protocol mechanisms identified by OIDs, including:
      - supportedControl [Models],
      - supportedExtension [Models], and
      - supportedFeatures [Features],

   A registry of OIDs used for discover of protocol mechanisms is
   provided to allow implementors and others to locate the technical
   specification for these protocol mechanisms.  Future specifications
   of additional Root DSE attributes holding values identifying protocol
   mechanisms MAY extend this registry for their values.

   OIDs associated with discoverable protocol mechanisms SHOULD be
   registered.  These are be considered on a First Come First Served
   with Specification Required basis.

   OIDs associated with Standard Track mechanisms MUST be registered and
   require Standards Action.


3.3. Object Identifier Descriptors




Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP              [Page 4]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


   LDAP allows short descriptive names (or descriptors) to be used
   instead of a numeric Object Identifier to identify protocol
   extensions [Protocol], schema elements [Models], LDAP URL [LDAPURL]
   extensions, and other objects.

   Descriptors SHOULD be registered unless in private-use name space
   (e.g., they begin with "x-").  Descriptors defined in RFCs MUST be
   registered.

   While the protocol allows the same descriptor to refer to different
   object identifiers in certain cases and the registry supports
   multiple registrations of the same descriptor (each indicating a
   different kind of schema element and different object identifier),
   multiple registrations of the same descriptor are to be avoided.  All
   such registration requests require Expert Review.

   Descriptors are restricted to strings of UTF-8 encoded UCS characters
   restricted by the following ABNF:

        name = keystring

   Descriptors are case-insensitive.

   Multiple names may be assigned to a given OID.  For purposes of
   registration, an OID is to be represented in numeric OID form
   conforming to the ABNF:

        numericoid = number *( DOT number ) ; e.g. 1.1.0.23.40

   While the protocol places no maximum length restriction upon
   descriptors, they should be short.  Descriptors longer than 48
   characters may be viewed as too long to register.

   A values ending with a hyphen ("-") reserve all descriptors which
   start with the value.  For example, the registration of the option
   "descrFamily-" reserves all options which start with "descrFamily-"
   for some related purpose.

   Descriptors beginning with "x-" are for Private Use and cannot be
   registered.

   Descriptors beginning with "e-" are reserved for experiments and will
   be registered on a First Come First Served basis.

   All other descriptors require Expert Review to be registered.

   The registrant need not "own" the OID being named.




Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP              [Page 5]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


   The OID name space is managed by The ISO/IEC Joint Technical
   Committee 1 - Subcommittee 6.


3.4. AttributeDescription Options

   An AttributeDescription [Models] can contain zero or more options
   specifying additional semantics.  An option SHALL be restricted to a
   string UTF-8 encoded UCS characters limited by the following ABNF:

        option = keystring

   Options are case-insensitive.

   While the protocol places no maximum length restriction upon option
   strings, they should be short.  Options longer than 24 characters may
   be viewed as too long to register.

   Values ending with a hyphen ("-") reserve all option names which
   start with the name.  For example, the registration of the option
   "optionFamily-" reserves all options which start with "optionFamily-"
   for some related purpose.

   Options beginning with "x-" are for Private Use and cannot be
   registered.

   Options beginning with "e-" are reserved for experiments and will be
   registered on a First Come First Served basis.

   All other options require Standards Action or Expert Review with
   Specification Required to be registered.


3.5. LDAP Message Types

   Each protocol message is encapsulated in an LDAPMessage envelope
   [Protocol].  The protocolOp CHOICE indicates the type of message
   encapsulated.  Each message type consists of a keyword and a
   non-negative choice number is combined with the class (APPLICATION)
   and data type (CONSTRUCTED or PRIMITIVE) to construct the BER tag in
   the message's encoding.  The choice numbers for existing protocol
   messages are implicit in the protocol's ASN.1 defined in [Protocol].

   New values will be registered upon Standards Action.

   Note: LDAP provides extensible messages which reduces, but does not
         eliminate, the need to add new message types.




Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP              [Page 6]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


3.6. LDAP Result Codes

   LDAP result messages carry an resultCode enumerated value to indicate
   the outcome of the operation [Protocol].  Each result code consists
   of a keyword and a non-negative integer.

   New resultCodes integers in the range 0-1023 require Standards Action
   to be registered.  New resultCode integers in the range 1024-4095
   require Expert Review with Specification Required.  New resultCode
   integers in the range 4096-16383 will be registered on a First Come
   First Served basis.  Keywords associated with integers in the range
   0-4095 SHALL NOT start with "e-" or "x-".  Keywords associated with
   integers in the range 4096-16383 SHALL start with "e-".  Values
   greater than or equal to 16384 and keywords starting with "x-" are
   for Private Use and cannot be registered.


3.7. LDAP Authentication Method

   The LDAP Bind operation supports multiple authentication methods
   [Protocol].  Each authentication choice consists of a keyword and a
   non-negative integer.

   The registrant SHALL classify the authentication method usage using
   one of the following terms:

      COMMON      - method is appropriate for common use on the
                     Internet,
      LIMITED USE - method is appropriate for limited use,
      OBSOLETE    - method has been deprecated or otherwise found to be
                     inappropriate for any use.

   Methods without publicly available specifications SHALL NOT be
   classified as COMMON.  New registrations of class OBSOLETE cannot be
   registered.

   New authentication method integers in the range 0-1023 require
   Standards Action to be registered.  New authentication method
   integers in the range 1024-4095 require Expert Review with
   Specification Required.  New authentication method integers in the
   range 4096-16383 will be registered on a First Come First Served
   basis.  Keywords associated with integers in the range 0-4095 SHALL
   NOT start with "e-" or "x-".  Keywords associated with integers in
   the range 4096-16383 SHALL start with "e-".  Values greater than or
   equal to 16384 and keywords starting with "x-" are for Private Use
   and cannot be registered.

   Note: LDAP supports SASL [RFC2222] as an Authentication CHOICE.  SASL



Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP              [Page 7]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


         is an extensible LDAP authentication method.


3.8. Directory Systems Names

   The IANA-maintained "Directory Systems Names" registry [IANADSN] of
   valid keywords for well known attributes used in the LDAPv2 string
   representation of a distinguished name [RFC1779], now Historic
   [RFC3494].

   Directory systems names are not known to be used in any other
   context.  LDAPv3 uses Object Identifier Descriptors [Section 3.2]
   (which have a different syntax than directory system names).

   New Directory System Names will no longer be accepted.  For
   historical purposes, the current list of registered names should
   remain publicly available.


4. Registration Procedure

   The procedure given here MUST be used by anyone who wishes to use a
   new value of a type described in Section 3 of this document.

   The first step is for the requester to fill out the appropriate form.
   Templates are provided in Appendix A.

   If the policy is Standards Action, the completed form SHOULD be
   provided to the IESG with the request for Standards Action.  Upon
   approval of the Standards Action, the IESG SHALL forward the request
   (possibly revised) to IANA.  The IESG SHALL be viewed as the owner of
   all values requiring Standards Action.

   If the policy is Expert Review, the requester SHALL post the
   completed form to the <directory@apps.ietf.org> mailing list for
   public review.  The review period is two (2) weeks.  If a revised
   form is later submitted, the review period is restarted.  Anyone may
   subscribe to this list by sending a request to
   <directory-request@apps.ietf.org>.  During the review, objections may
   be raised by anyone (including the Expert) on the list.  After
   completion of the review, the Expert, based upon public comments,
   SHALL either approve the request and forward it to the IESG OR deny
   the request.  In either case, the Expert SHALL promptly notify the
   requester of the action.  Actions of the Expert may be appealed
   [RFC2026].  The Expert is appointed by Applications Area Director(s).
   The requester is viewed as the owner of values registered under
   Expert Review.




Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP              [Page 8]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


   If the policy is First Come First Served, the requester SHALL submit
   the completed form directly to the IANA: <iana@iana.org>.  The
   requester is viewed as the owner of values registered under First
   Come First Served.

   Neither the Expert nor IANA will take position on the claims of
   copyright or trademarks issues regarding completed forms.

   Prior to submission of the Internet Draft (I-D) to the RFC Editor but
   after IESG review and tentative approval, the document editor SHOULD
   revise the I-D to use registered values.


5. Registration Maintenance

   This section discusses maintenance of registrations.


5.1. Lists of Registered Values

   IANA makes lists of registered values readily available to the
   Internet community on their web site: <http://www.iana.org/>.


5.2. Change Control

   The registration owner MAY update the registration subject to the
   same constraints and review as with new registrations.  In cases
   where the owner is not unable or unwilling to make necessary updates,
   the IESG MAY assert ownership in order to update the registration.


5.3. Comments

   For cases where others (anyone other than the owner) have significant
   objections to the claims in a registration and the owner does not
   agree to change the registration, comments MAY be attached to a
   registration upon Expert Review.  For registrations owned by the
   IESG, the objections SHOULD be addressed by initiating a request for
   Expert Review.

   The form to these requests is ad hoc, but MUST include the specific
   objections to be reviewed and SHOULD contain (directly or by
   reference) materials supporting the objections.


6. Security Considerations




Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP              [Page 9]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


   The security considerations detailed in BCP 26 [RFC2434] are
   generally applicable to this document.  Additional security
   considerations specific to each name space are discussed in Section 3
   where appropriate.

   Security considerations for LDAP are discussed in documents
   comprising the technical specification [Roadmap].


7. Acknowledgment

   This document is a product of the IETF LDAP Revision (LDAPBIS)
   Working Group (WG).  This document is a revision of RFC 3383, also a
   product of the LDAPBIS WG.

   This document includes text borrowed from "Guidelines for Writing an
   IANA Considerations Section in RFCs" [RFC2434] by Thomas Narten and
   Harald Alvestrand.


8. Author's Address

   Kurt D. Zeilenga
   OpenLDAP Foundation

   Email: Kurt@OpenLDAP.org


9. Normative References

  [RFC1155]     Rose, M. and K. McCloghrie, "Structure and
                Identification of Management Information for TCP/IP-
                based Internets", STD 16 (also RFC 1155), May 1990.

  [RFC2026]     Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
                3", BCP 9 (also RFC 2026), October 1996.

  [RFC2119]     Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
                Requirement Levels", BCP 14 (also RFC 2119), March 1997.

  [RFC2234]     Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
                Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997.

  [Roadmap]     Zeilenga, K. (editor), "LDAP: Technical Specification
                Road Map", draft-ietf-ldapbis-roadmap-xx.txt, a work in
                progress.

  [Protocol]    Sermersheim, J. (editor), "LDAP: The Protocol",



Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP             [Page 10]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


                draft-ietf-ldapbis-protocol-xx.txt, a work in progress.

  [Models]      Zeilenga, K. (editor), "LDAP: Directory Information
                Models", draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-xx.txt, a work in
                progress.

  [LDAPURL]     Smith, M. (editor), "LDAP: Uniform Resource Locator",
                draft-ietf-ldapbis-url-xx.txt, a work in progress.

                [UTF-8]       Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation
                format of ISO 10646", draft-yergeau-rfc2279bis, a work
                in progress.

  [RFC2434]     Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
                IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26 (also RFC
                2434), October 1998.

  [RFC3377]     Hodges, J. and R. Morgan, "Lightweight Directory Access
                Protocol (v3): Technical Specification", RFC 3377,
                September 2002.

  [ISO10646]    International Organization for Standardization,
                "Universal Multiple-Octet Coded Character Set (UCS) -
                Architecture and Basic Multilingual Plane", ISO/IEC
                10646-1 : 1993.


10. Informative References

  [RFC1779]     Kille, S., "A String Representation of Distinguished
                Names", RFC 1779, March 1995.

  [RFC3494]     Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
                version 2 (LDAPv2) to Historic Status", RFC 3494, March
                2003.

  [RFC2222]     Myers, J., "Simple Authentication and Security Layer
                (SASL)", RFC 2222, October 1997.


Appendix A.  Registration Templates

   This appendix provides registration templates for registering new
   LDAP values.

A.1.  LDAP Object Identifier Registration Template

   Subject: Request for LDAP OID Registration



Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP             [Page 11]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


   Person & email address to contact for further information:

   Specification: (I-D)

   Author/Change Controller:

   Comments:

   (Any comments that the requester deems relevant to the request)


A.2.  LDAP Protocol Mechanism Registration Template

   Subject: Request for LDAP Protocol Mechanism Registration

   Object Identifier:

   Description:

   Person & email address to contact for further information:

   Usage: (One of Control or Extension or Feature)

   Specification: (I-D)

   Author/Change Controller:

   Comments:

   (Any comments that the requester deems relevant to the request)


A.3.  LDAP Descriptor Registration Template

   Subject: Request for LDAP Descriptor Registration

   Descriptor (short name):

   Object Identifier:

   Person & email address to contact for further information:

   Usage: (One of attribute type, URL extension,
             object class, or other)

   Specification: (RFC, I-D, URI)

   Author/Change Controller:



Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP             [Page 12]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


   Comments:

   (Any comments that the requester deems relevant to the request)


A.4.  LDAP Attribute Description Option Registration Template

   Subject: Request for LDAP Attribute Description Option Registration

   Option Name:

   Family of Options: (YES or NO)

   Person & email address to contact for further information:

   Specification: (RFC, I-D, URI)

   Author/Change Controller:

   Comments:

   (Any comments that the requester deems relevant to the request)


A.5.  LDAP Message Type Registration Template

   Subject: Request for LDAP Message Type Registration

   LDAP Message Name:

   Person & email address to contact for further information:

   Specification: (Approved I-D)

   Comments:

   (Any comments that the requester deems relevant to the request)


A.6.  LDAP Result Code Registration Template

   Subject: Request for LDAP Result Code Registration

   Result Code Name:

   Person & email address to contact for further information:

   Specification: (RFC, I-D, URI)



Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP             [Page 13]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


   Author/Change Controller:

   Comments:

   (Any comments that the requester deems relevant to the request)


A.7.  LDAP Authentication Method Registration Template

   Subject: Request for LDAP Authentication Method Registration

   Authentication Method Name:

   Person & email address to contact for further information:

   Specification: (RFC, I-D, URI)

   Intended Usage: (One of COMMON, LIMITED-USE, OBSOLETE)

   Author/Change Controller:

   Comments:

   (Any comments that the requester deems relevant to the request)


Appendix B.  Changes since RFC 3383

  This informative appendix provides a summary of changes made since RFC
  3383.

      - Object Identifier Descriptors practices were updated to require
        all descriptors defined in RFCs to be registered and
        recommending all other descriptors (excepting those in
        private-use name space) be registered.  Additionally, all
        requests for multiple registrations of the same descriptor are
        now subject to Expert Review.

      - Protocol Mechanisms practices were updated to include values of
        the 'supportedFeatures' attribute type.

      - References to RFCs comprising the LDAP technical specifications
        have been updated to latest revisions.

      - The "Assigned Values" appendix providing initial registry values
        was removed.

      - Numerous editorial changes were made.



Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP             [Page 14]


INTERNET-DRAFT       draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-00.txt        20 June 2003


Full Copyright

  Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). 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 implmentation may be prepared, copied, published and
  distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind,
  provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
  included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
  document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
  the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
  Internet organizations, except as needed for the  purpose of
  developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
  copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed,
  or as required to translate it into languages other than English.



































Zeilenga              IANA Considerations for LDAP             [Page 15]