diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc1309.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc1309.txt | 899 |
1 files changed, 899 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc1309.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc1309.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..123eb26 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc1309.txt @@ -0,0 +1,899 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group C. Weider +Request for Comments: 1309 ANS +FYI: 14 J. Reynolds + ISI + S. Heker + JvNC + March 1992 + + + Technical Overview of Directory Services + Using the X.500 Protocol + +Status of this Memo + + This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does + not specify an Internet standard. Distribution of this memo is + unlimited. + +Abstract + + This document is an overview of the X.500 standard for people not + familiar with the technology. It compares and contrasts Directory + Services based on X.500 with several of the other Directory services + currently in use in the Internet. This paper also describes the + status of the standard and provides references for further + information on X.500 implementations and technical information. + + A primary purpose of this paper is to illustrate the vast + functionality of the X.500 protocol and to show how it can be used to + provide a global directory for human use, and can support other + applications which would benefit from directory services, such as + main programs. + + This FYI RFC is a product of the Directory Information Services + (pilot) Infrastructure Working Group (DISI). A combined effort of + the User Services and the OSI Integration Areas of the Internet + Engineering Task Force (IETF). + +1. INTRODUCTION + + As the pace of industry, science, and technological development + quickened over the past century, it became increasingly probable that + someone in a geographically distant location would be trying to solve + the same problems you were trying to solve, or that someone in a + geographically distant location would have some vital information + which impinged on your research or business. The stupendous growth + in the telecommunications industry, from telegraphs to telephones to + computer networks, has alleviated the problem of being able to + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 1] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + + communicate with another person, PROVIDED THAT YOU KNOW HOW TO REACH + THEM. + + Thus, along with the expansion of the telecommunications + infrastructure came the development of Directory Services. In this + paper, we will discuss various models of directory services, the + limitations of current models, and some solutions provided by the + X.500 standard to these limitations. + +2 MODELS OF DIRECTORY SERVICES + +2.1 The telephone company's directory services. + + A model many people think of when they hear the words "Directory + Services" is the directory service provided by the local telephone + company. A local telephone company keeps an on-line list of the names + of people with phone service, along with their phone numbers and + their address. This information is available by calling up Directory + Assistance, giving the name and address of the party whose number you + are seeking, and waiting for the operator to search his database. It + is additionally available by looking in a phone book published yearly + on paper. + + The phone companies are able to offer this invaluable service because + they administer the pool of phone numbers. However, this service has + some limitations. For instance, you can find someone's number only if + you know their name and the city or location in which they live. If + two or more people have listings for the same name in the same + locality, there is no additional information which with to select the + correct number. In addition, the printed phone book can have + information which is as much as a year out of date, and the phone + company's internal directory can be as much as two weeks out of date. + A third problem is that one actually has to call Directory assistance + in a given area code to get information for that area; one cannot + call a single number consistently. + + For businesses which advertise in the Yellow Pages, there is some + additional information stored for each business; unfortunately, that + information is unavailable through Directory Assistance and must be + gleaned from the phone book. + +2.2 Some currently available directory services on the Internet. + + As the Internet is comprised of a vast conglomeration of different + people, computers, and computer networks, with none of the hierarchy + imposed by the phone system on the area codes and exchange prefixes, + any directory service must be able to deal with the fact that the + Internet is not structured; for example, the hosts foo.com and + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 2] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + + v2.foo.com may be on opposite sides of the world, the .edu domain + maps onto an enormous number of organizations, etc. Let's look at a + few of the services currently available on the Internet for directory + type services. + +2.2.1 The finger protocol. + + The finger protocol, which has been implemented for UNIX systems and + a small number of other machines, allows one to "finger" a specific + person or username to a host running the protocol. This is invoked by + typing, for example, "finger clw@mazatzal.merit.edu". A certain set + of information is returned, as this example from a UNIX system finger + operation shows, although the output format is not specified by the + protocol: + + Login name: clw In real life: Chris Weider + Directory: /usr/clw Shell: /bin/csh + On since Jul 25 09:43:42 4 hours 52 minutes Idle Time + Plan: + Home: 971-5581 + + where the first three lines of information are taken from the UNIX + operating systems information and the line(s) of information + following the "Plan:" line are taken from a file named .plan which + each user modifies. Limitations of the fingerd program include: a) + One must already know which host to finger to find a specific person, + b) since primarily UNIX machines run fingerd, people who reside on + other types of operating systems are not locateable by this method, + c) fingerd is often disabled on UNIX systems for security purposes, + d) if one wishes to be found on more than one system, one must make + sure that all the .plan files are consistent, and e) there is no way + to search the .plan files on a given host to (for example) find + everyone on mazatzal.merit.edu who works on X.500. Thus, fingerd has + a limited usefulness as a piece of the Internet Directory. + +2.2.2 whois + + The whois utility, which is available on a wide of variety of + systems, works by querying a centralized database maintained at the + DDN NIC, which was for many years located at SRI International in + Menlo Park, California, and is now located at GSI. This database + contains a large amount of information which primarily deals with + people and equipment which is used to build the Internet. SRI (and + now GSI) has been able to collect the information in the WHOIS + database as part of its role as the Network Information Center for + the TCP/IP portion of the Internet. + + The whois utility is ubiquitous, and has a very simple interface. A + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 3] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + + typical whois query look like: + + whois Reynolds + + and returns information like: + + Reynolds, John F. (JFR22) 532JFR@DOM1.NWAC.SEA06.NAVY.MIL + (702) 426-2604 (DSN) 830-2604 + Reynolds, John J. (JJR40) amsel-lg-pl-a@MONMOUTH-EMH3.ARMY.MIL + (908) 532-3817 (DSN) 992-3817 + Reynolds, John W. (JWR46) EAAV-AP@SEOUL-EMH1.ARMY.MIL + (DSN) 723-3358 + Reynolds, Joseph T. (JTR10) JREYNOLDS@PAXRV-NES.NAVY.MIL + 011-63-47-885-3194 (DSN) 885-3194 + Reynolds, Joyce K. (JKR1) JKREY@ISI.EDU (213) 822-1511 + Reynolds, Keith (KR35) keithr@SCO.CO (408) 425-7222 + Reynolds, Kenneth (KR94) (502) 454-2950 + Reynolds, Kevin A. (KR39) REYNOLDS@DUGWAY-EMH1.ARMY.MIL + (801) 831-5441 (DSN) 789-5441 + Reynolds, Lee B. (LBR9) reynolds@TECHNET.NM.ORG (505) 345-6555 + + a further lookup on Joyce Reynolds with this command line: + + whois JKR1 + + returns: + + Reynolds, Joyce K. (JKR1) JKREY@ISI.EDU + University of Southern California + Information Sciences Institute + 4676 Admiralty Way + Marina del Rey, CA 90292 + (310) 822-1511 + + Record last updated on 07-Jan-91. + + The whois database also contains information about Domain Name System + (DNS) and has some information about hosts, major regional networks, + and large parts of the MILNET system. + + The WHOIS database is large enough and comprehensive enough to + exhibit many of the flaws of a large centralized database: a) As the + database is maintained on one machine, a processor bottleneck forces + slow response during times of peak querying activity, even if many of + these queries are unrelated, b) as the database is maintained on one + machine, a storage bottleneck forces the database administrators to + severely limit the amount of information which can be kept on each + entry in the database, c) all changes to the database have to be + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 4] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + + mailed to a "hostmaster" and then physically reentered into the + database, increasing both the turnaround time and the likelihood for + a mistake in transcription. + +2.2.3 The Domain Name System + + The Domain Name System is used in the Internet to keep track of host + to IP address mapping. The basic mechanism is that each domain, such + as merit.edu or k-12.edu, is registered with the NIC, and at time of + registration, a primary and (perhaps) some secondary nameservers are + identified for that domain. Each of these nameservers must provide + host name to IP address mapping for each host in the domain. Thus, + the nameservice is supplied in a distributed fashion. It is also + possible to split a domain into subdomains, with a different + nameserver for each subdomain. + + Although in many cases one uses the DNS without being aware of it, + because humans prefer to remember names and not IP addresses, it is + possible to interactively query the DNS with the nslookup utility. A + sample session using the nslookup utility: + + home.merit.edu(1): nslookup + Default Server: merit.edu + Address: 35.42.1.42 + + > scanf.merit.edu + Server: merit.edu + Address: 35.42.1.42 + + Name: scanf.merit.edu + Address: 35.42.1.92 + + > 35.42.1.92 + Server: merit.edu + Address: 35.42.1.42 + + Name: [35.42.1.92] + Address: 35.42.1.92 + + Thus, we can explicitly determine the address associated with a given + host. Reverse name mapping is also possible with the DNS, as in this + example: + + + + + + + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 5] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + + home.merit.edu(2): traceroute ans.net + traceroute to ans.net (147.225.1.2), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets + 1 t3peer (35.1.1.33) 11 ms 5 ms 5 ms + 2 enss (35.1.1.1) 6 ms 6 ms 6 ms + ................. + 9 192.77.154.1 (192.77.154.1) 51 ms 43 ms 49 ms + 10 nis.ans.net (147.225.1.2) 53 ms 53 ms 46 ms + + At each hop of the traceroute, the program attempts to do a reverse + lookup through the DNS and displays the results when successful. + + Although the DNS has served superlatively for the purpose it was + developed, i.e. to allow maintenance of the namespace in a + distributed fashion, and to provide very rapid lookups in the + namespace, there are, of course, some limitations. Although there has + been some discussion of including other types of information in the + DNS, to find a given person at this time, assuming you know where she + works, you have to use a combination of the DNS and finger to even + make a stab at finding her. Also, the DNS has very limited search + capabilities right now. The lack of search capabilities alone shows + that we cannot provide a rich Directory Service through the DNS. + +3: THE X.500 MODEL OF DIRECTORY SERVICE + + X.500 is a CCITT protocol which is designed to build a distributed, + global directory. It offers the following features: + + * Decentralized Maintenance: + Each site running X.500 is responsible ONLY for its local part + of the Directory, so updates and maintenance can be done instantly. + + * Powerful Searching Capabilities: + X.500 provides powerful searching facilities that allow users to + construct arbitrarily complex queries. + + * Single Global Namespace: + Much like the DNS, X.500 provides a single homogeneous namespace + to users. The X.500 namespace is more flexible and expandable + than the DNS. + + * Structured Information Framework: + X.500 defines the information framework used in the directory, + allowing local extensions. + + + + + + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 6] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + + * Standards-Based Directory: + As X.500 can be used to build a standards-based directory, + applications which require directory information (e-mail, + automated resource locators, special-purpose directory tools) + can access a planet's worth of information in a uniform manner, + no matter where they are based or currently running. + +3.1 Acronym City, or How X.500 Works + + The '88 version of the X.500 standard talks about 3 models required + to build the X.500 Directory Service: the Directory Model, the + Information Model, and the Security Model. In this section, we will + provide a brief overview of the Directory and Information Models + sufficient to explain the vast functionality of X.500. + +3.1.1 The Information Model + + To illustrate the Information Model, we will first show how + information is held in the Directory, then we will show what types of + information can be held in the Directory, and then we will see how + the information is arranged so that we can retrieve the desired + pieces from the Directory. + +3.1.1.1 Entries + + The primary construct holding information in the Directory is the + "entry". Each Directory entry contains information about one object; + for example, a person, a computer network, or an organization. Each + entry is built from a collection of "attributes", each of which holds + a single piece of information about the object. Some attributes which + might be used to build an entry for a person would be "surname", + "telephonenumber", "postaladdress", etc. Each attribute has an + associated "attribute syntax", which describes the type of data that + attribute contains, for example, photo data, a time code, or a string + of letters and numbers. As an example, let's look at part of an entry + for a person. + + Entry for John Smith contains: + + attribute ---> surName= Smith <--- attribute value + |---> telephoneNumber= 999-9999 <--- attribute value + |---> title= Janitor <--- attribute value + ... + + The attribute syntax for the surName attribute would be + CaseIgnoreString, which would tell X.500 that surName could contain + any string, and case would not matter; the attribute syntax for the + telephoneNumber attribute would be TelephoneNumber, which would + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 7] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + + specify that telephoneNumber could contain a string composed of + digits, dashes, parenthesis, and a plus sign. The attribute syntax + for the title attribute would also be CaseIgnoreString. A good + analogy in database terms for what we've seen so far might be to + think of a Directory entry as a database record, an attribute as a + field in that record, and an attribute syntax as a field type + (decimal number, string) for a field in a record. + +3.1.1.2 Object Classes + + At this point in our description of the information model, we have no + way of knowing what type of object a given entry represents. X.500 + uses the concept of an "object class" to specify that information, + and an attribute named "objectClass" which each entry contains to + specify to which object class(es) the entry belongs. + + Each object class in X.500 has a definition which lists the set of + mandatory attributes, which must be present, and a set of optional + attributes, which may be present, in an entry of that class. An given + object class A may be a subclass of another class B, in which case + object class A inherits all the mandatory and optional attributes of + B in addition to its own. + + The object classes in X.500 are arranged in a hierarchical manner + according to class inheritance; the following diagram shows a part of + the object class hierarchy. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 8] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + + _____________ + | | "top" has one mandatory + | top | attribute "objectClass", + |_____________| and nooptional attributes. + | | | + | | | every other object class is a + ________________| | | subclass of "top"... + | | ... + ______|________ _____|_______ + | | | |"organization" inherits one + | country | | organization |mandatory attribute from + |_______________| |_______________|"top", "objectClass"; adds one + more mandatory attribute "O" + "country" inherits one (for organization), and has + mandatory attribute from "top", many optional attributes. Any + "objectClass", adds one more subclass of "organization" + mandatory attribute "c" (for would inherit all of the + country), and has two optional mandatory and optional + attributes, "description" and attributes from "organization" + "searchGuide". Any subclass of including the attribute which + "country" would inherit all of the "organization" inherited + mandatory and optional attributes from "top". + of the "country" class, including + the attribute which "country" + inherited from "top". + + Figure 1. + + One major benefit of the object class concept is that it is in many + cases very easy to create a new object class which is only a slight + modification or extension of a previous class. For example, if I have + already defined an object class for "person" which contains a + person's name, phone number, address, and fax number, I can easily + define an "Internet person" object class by defining "Internet + person" as a subclass of "person", with the additional optional + attribute of "e-mail address". Thus in my definition of the "Internet + Person" object class, all my "person" type attributes are inherited + from "person". There are other benefits which are beyond the scope of + this paper. + +3.1.1.3 X.500's namespace. + + X.500 hierarchically organizes the namespace in the Directory + Information Base (DIB); recall that this hierarchical organization is + called the Directory Information Tree (DIT). Each entry in the DIB + occupies a certain location in the DIT. An entry which has no + children is called a leaf entry, an entry which has children is + called a non-leaf node. Each entry in the DIT contains one or more + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 9] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + + attributes which together comprise the Relative Distinguished Name + (RDN) of that entry, there is a "root" entry (which has no + attributes, a special case) which forms the base node of the DIT. The + Distinguished Name of a specific entry is the sequence of RDNs of the + entries on the path from the root entry to the entry in question. A + diagram here will help to clarify this: + +Level of DIT Root RDN Distinguished Name + +root * nothing { } + / | \ +country (other / | \ +things at this / | \ c=us {c=us} +level) c=gb c=us c=ca + / | \ + / | \ + / | \ +organization o=SRI o=Merit o=DEC o=Merit {c=us, o=Merit} +(other things / | \ +at this level) / | \ + / | \ +Third level cn=Chris Weider cn=Chris Weider {c=us, o=Merit, + cn=Chris Weider} + + Figure 2: Building a DN from RDNs (adapted from a + diagram in the X.500 (88) Blue Book) + + Each entry in this tree contains more attributes than have been shown + here, but in each case only one attribute for each entry has been + used for that entry's RDN. As noted above, any entry in the tree + could use more than one attribute to build its RDN. X.500 also allows + the use of alias names, so that the entry {c=us, o=Merit, cn=Chris + Weider} could be also found through an alias entry such as {c=us, + o=SRI, ou=FOX Project, cn=Drone 1} which would point to the first + entry. + +3.1.2 The Directory Model + + Now that we've seen what kinds of information can be kept in the + Directory, we should look at how the Directory stores this + information and how a Directory users accesses the information. There + are two components of this model: a Directory User Agent (DUA), which + accesses the Directory on behalf of a user, and the Directory System + Agent, which can be viewed as holding a particular subset of the DIB, + and can also provide an access point to the Directory for a DUA. + + Now, the entire DIB is distributed through the world-wide collection + of DSAs which form the Directory, and the DSAs employ two techniques + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 10] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + + to allow this distribution to be transparent to the user, called + "chaining" and "referral". The details of these two techniques would + take up another page, so it suffices to say that to each user, it + appears that the entire global directory is on her desktop. (Of + course, if the information requested is on the other side of the + world, it may seem that the desktop directory is a bit slow for that + request...) + +3.2 The functionality of X.500 + + To describe the functionality of X.500, we will need to separate + three stages in the evolution of X.500: 1) the 1988 standard, 2) + X.500 as implemented in QUIPU, and 3) the (proposed) 1992 standard. + We will list some of the features described in the 1988 standard, + show how they were implemented in QUIPU, and discuss where the 1992 + standard will take us. The QUIPU implementation was chosen because + a) it is widely used in the U.S. and European Directory Services + Pilot projects, and b) it works well. For a survey of other X.500 + implementations and a catalogue of DUAs, see [Lang]. + +3.2.1 Functionality in X.500 (88) + + There are a number of advantages that the X.500 Directory accrues + simply by virtue of the fact that it is distributed, not limited to a + single machine. Among these are: + + * An enormously large potential namespace. + Since the Directory is not limited to a single machine, many + hundreds of machines can be used to store Directory entries. + + * The ability to allow local administration of local data. + An organization or group can run a local DSA to master their + information, facilitating much more accurate data throughout + the Directory. + + The functionality built into the X.500(88) standard includes: + + * Advanced searching capabilities. + The Directory supports arbitrarily complex searches at an + attribute level. As the object classes a specific entry + belongs to is maintained in the objectClass attribute, this + also allows Directory searches for specific types of objects. + Thus, one could search the c=US subtree for anyone with a last + name beginning with S, who also has either a fax number in the + (313) area code or an e-mail address ending in umich.edu. + This feature of X.500 also helps to provide the basic + functionality for a Yellow Pages service. + + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 11] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + + * A uniform namespace with local extensibility. + The Directory provides a uniform namespace, but local + specialized directories can also be implemented. Locally + defined extensions can include new object classes, new + attributes, and new attribute types. + + * Security issues. + The X.500 (88) standards define two types of security for + Directory data: Simple Authentication (which uses passwords), + and Strong Authentication (which uses cryptographic keys). + Simple authentication has been widely implemented, strong + authentication has been less widely implemented. Each of + these authentication techniques are invoked when a user or + process attempts a Directory operation through a DUA. + + In addition to the global benefits of the X.500 standard, there are + many local benefits. One can use their local DSA for company or + campus wide directory services; for example, the University of + Michigan is providing all the campus directory services through + X.500. The DUAs are available for a wide range of platforms, + including X-Windows systems and Macintoshes. + +3.2.2 Functionality added by QUIPU. + + Functionality beyond the X.500 (88) standard implemented by QUIPU + includes: + + * Access control lists. + An access control list is a way to provide security for each + attribute of an entry. For example, each attribute in a given + entry can be permitted for detect, compare, read, and modify + permissions based on the reader's membership in various groups. + For example, one can specify that some information in a given + entry is public, some can be read only by members of the + organization, and some can only be modified by the owner of + the entry. + + * Replication. + Replication provides a method whereby frequently accessed + information in a DSA other than the local one can be kept by + the local DSA on a "slave" basis, with updates of the "slave" + data provided automatically by QUIPU from the "master" data + residing on the foreign DSA. This provides alternate access + points to that data, and can make searches and retrievals + more rapid as there is much less overhead in the form or + network transport. + + + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 12] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + +3.3 Current limitations of the X.500 standard and implementations. + + As flexible and forward looking as X.500 is, it certainly was not + designed to solve everyone's needs for all time to come. X.500 is not + a general purpose database, nor is it a Data Base Management System + (DBMS). X.500 defines no standards for output formats, and it + certainly doesn't have a report generation capability. The technical + mechanisms are not yet in place for the Directory to contain + information about itself, thus new attributes and new attribute types + are rather slowly distributed (by hand). + + Searches can be slow, for two reasons: a) searches across a widely + distributed portion of the namespace (c=US, for example) has a delay + which is partially caused by network transmission times, and can be + compounded by implementations that cache the partial search returns + until everyone has reported back, and b) some implementations are + slow at searching anyway, and this is very sensitive to such things + as processor speed and available swap space. Another implementation + "problem" is a tradeoff with security for the Directory: most + implementations have an administrative limit on the amount of + information which can be returned for a specific search. For + example, if a search returns 1000 hits, 20 of those might be + displayed, with the rest lost. Thus a person performing a large + search might have to perform a number of small searches. This was + implemented because an organization might want to make it hard to + "troll" for the organization's entire database. + + Also, there is at the moment no clear consensus on the ideal shape of + the DIT, or on the idea structure of the object tree. This can make + it hard to add to the current corpus of X.500 work, and the number of + RFCs on various aspects of the X.500 deployment is growing monthly. + + Despite this, however, X.500 is very good at what it was designed to + do; i.e., to provide primary directory services and "resource + location" for a wide band oftypes of information. + +3.4 Things to be added in X.500 (92). + + The 1988 version of the X.500 standard proved to be quite sufficient + to start building a Directory Service. However, many of the new + functions implemented in QUIPU were necessary if the Directory were + to function in a reasonable manner. X.500 (92) will include + formalized and standardized versions of those advances, including + + * A formalized replication procedure. + + * Enhanced searching capacities. + + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 13] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + + * Formalization of access control mechanisms, including access + control lists. + + Each of these will provide a richer Directory, but you don't have to + wait for them! You can become part of the Directory today! + +4: WHAT X.500 CAN DO FOR YOU TODAY + +4.1 Current applications of X.500 + + X.500 is filling Directory Services needs in a large number of + countries. As a directory to locate people, it is provided in the + U.S. as the White Pages Pilot Project, run by PSI, and in Europe + under the PARADISE Project as a series of nation-wide pilots. It is + also being used by the FOX Project in the United States to provide + WHOIS services for people and networks, and to provide directories of + objects as disparate as NIC Profiles and a pilot K-12 Educators + directory. It is also being investigated for its ability to provide + resource location facilities and to provide source location for WAIS + servers. In fact, in almost every area where one could imagine + needing a directory service (particularly for distributed directory + services), X.500 is either providing those services or being expanded + to provide those services. + + In particular, X.500 was envisioned by its creators as providing + directory services for electronic mail, specifically for X.400. It is + being used in this fashion today at the University of Michigan: + everyone at the University has a unified mail address, e.g. + Chris.Weider@umich.edu. An X.500 server then reroutes that mail to + the appropriate user's real mail address in a transparent fashion. + Similarly, Sprint is using X.500 to administrate the address space + for its internal X.400 mail systems. + + Those of us working on X.500 feel that X.500's strengths lie in + providing directory services for people and objects, and for + providing primary resource location for a large number of online + services. We think that X.500 is a major component (though not the + only one) of a global Yellow Pages service. We would also like to + encourage each of you to join your national pilot projects; the more + coverage we can get, the easier you will be able to find the people + you need to contact. + + + + + + + + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 14] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + +5. For Further Information + + For further information, the authors recommend the following + documents: + + Weider, C., and J. Reynolds, "Executive Introduction to Directory + Services Using the X.500 Protocol", FYI 13, RFC 1308, ANS, ISI, + March 1992. + + Lang, R., and R. Wright, Editors, "A Catalog of Available X.500 + Implementations", FYI 11, RFC 1292, SRI International, Lawrence + Berkeley Laboratory, January 1992. + + Barker, P., and S. Hardcastle-Kille, "The COSINE and Internet + X.500 Schema", RFC 1274, University College London, November 1991. + + Hardcastle-Kille, S., "Replication Requirements to provide an + Internet Directory using X.500", RFC 1275, University College + London, November, 1991. + + Hardcastle-Kille, S., "Replication and Distributed Operations + extensions to provide an Internet Directory using X.500", RFC + 1276, University College London, November 1991. + + Hardcastle-Kille, S., "Encoding Network Addresses to support + operation over non-OSI lower layers", RFC 1277, University College + London, November 1991. + + Hardcastle-Kille, S., " A string encoding of Presentation + Address", RFC 1278, University College London, November 1991. + + Hardcastle-Kille, S., "X.500 and Domains", RFC 1279, University + College London, November 1991. + +6. Security Considerations + + Security issues are discussed in section 3. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 15] + +RFC 1309 Technical Overview of X.500 March 1992 + + +7. Authors' Addresses + + Chris Weider + Advanced Network and Services, Inc. + 2901 Hubbard G-1 + Ann Arbor, MI 48105-2437 + + Phone (313) 663-2482 + E-mail: weider@ans.net + + + Joyce K. Reynolds + Information Sciences Institute + University of Southern California + 4676 Admirality Way + Marina del Rey, CA 90292 + + Phone: (310) 822-1511 + EMail: jkrey@isi.edu + + + Sergio Heker + JvNCnet + Princeton University + 6 von Neumann Hall + Princeton, NJ 08544 + + Phone: (609) 258-2400 + Email: heker@nisc.jvnc.net + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +DISI Working Group [Page 16] +
\ No newline at end of file |