diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc1943.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc1943.txt | 1235 |
1 files changed, 1235 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc1943.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc1943.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..504411b --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc1943.txt @@ -0,0 +1,1235 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group B. Jennings +Request for Comments: 1943 Sandia National Laboratory +Category: Informational May 1996 + + + Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US + +Status of this Memo + + This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo + does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of + this memo is unlimited. + +Abstract + + This document provides definition and recommends considerations that + must be undertaken to operate a X.500 Directory Service in the United + States. This project is the work performed for the Integrated + Directory Services Working Group within the Internet Engineering Task + Force, for establishing an electronic White Pages Directory Service + within an organization in the US and for connecting it to a wide-area + Directory infrastructure. + + Establishing a successful White Pages Directory Service within an + organization requires a collaborative effort between the technical, + legal and data management components of an organization. It also + helps if there is a strong commitment from the higher management to + participate in a wide-area Directory Service. + + The recommendations presented in the document are the result of + experience from participating in the Internet White Pages project. + +Table of Contents + + 1.0 Introduction 2 + 1.1 Purpose of this Document 2 + 1.2 Introduction to Directory Services 2 + 2.0 The X.500 Protocol 4 + 2.1 Introduction 4 + 2.2 Directory Model 4 + 2.3 Information Model 5 + 2.4 Benefits and Uses for X.500 Directory Service 6 + 2.5 Other Applications of X.500 7 + 3.0 Legal Issues 8 + 3.1 Introduction 8 + 3.2 Purpose of the Directory 8 + 3.3 User Rights 9 + 3.4 Data Integrity 9 + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 1] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + 3.5 Protection of the Data 10 + 3.6 Conclusions 10 + 4.0 Infrastructure 11 + 4.1 Introduction 11 + 4.2 A Well Maintained Infrastructure 11 + 4.3 DUA Interfaces for End Users 12 + 5.0 Datamanagement & Pilot Projects 13 + 5.1 Simple Internet White Pages Service 13 + 5.2 InterNIC 13 + 5.3 ESnet 14 + 6.0 Recommendations 14 + 6.1 General 14 + 6.2 Getting Started 14 + 6.3 Who are the Customers 14 + 6.4 What are the Contents of the Directory 15 + 6.5 What are the Rights of the Individuals 15 + 6.6 Data Integrity 16 + 6.7 Data Security 16 + 6.8 Data Administration 17 + 6.9 Conclusion 17 + 7.0 References 18 + 8.0 Glossary 19 + 9.0 Security Considerations 22 + 10.0 Author's Address 22 + +1.0 Introduction + +1.1 Purpose of this Document + + This document provides an introduction for individuals planning to + build a directory service for an organization in the US. It presents + an introduction to the technical, legal, and organizational aspects + of a directory service. It describes various options to organizations + who want to operate an X.500 Directory service and illustrates these + with examples of current X.500 service providers. + +1.2 Introduction to Directory Services + + An electronic directory server is an electronic process that provides + a list of information provided via electronic access. This + information is variable in content, however it should be explicitly + defined by the directory purpose. Information about people, + organizations, services, network hardware are just a few examples of + data content that a directory service can provide. The aim of an + X.500 Directory service is to make using the directory intuitive and + as easy to use as calling for directory assistance. The X.500 + Directory service is an international standard ratified by the + International organization for Standardization (IS) and the ITU-T + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 2] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + International Telecommunication Union formerly (CCITT) in 1988 [1]. + + The Directory is intended to be global service comprised of + independently operated and distributed Directory Service Agents + (DSAs), that provide information in the form of a White Pages Phone + Directory. + + Electronic mail communication benefits from the existence of a global + electronic White Pages to allow network users to retrieve addressing + information in an intuitive fashion. Manual searching for names and + addresses, specifically electronic addresses, can take a great deal + of time. A White Pages directory service can enable network users to + retrieve the addresses of communication partners in a user friendly + way, using known variables such as common name, surname, and + organization to facilitate various levels of searches. + + In order to make global communication over computer networks work + efficiently, a global electronic White Pages service is + indispensable. Such a directory service could also contain telephone + and fax numbers, postal addresses as well as platform type to + facilitate in translation of documents between users on different + systems. An electronic White Pages may prove to be useful for + specific local purposes; replacing paper directories or improving + quality of personnel administration for example. An electronic + directory is much easier to produce and more timely than paper + directories which are often out of date as soon as they are printed. + + The Internet White Pages Project provides many companies in the US + with an opportunity to pilot X.500 in their organizations. + Operating as a globally distributed directory service, this project + allows organizations in a wide variety of industry type to make + themselves known on the Internet and to provide access to their staff + as desired. + + Some organizations, such as ESnet agreed to manage directory + information for other organizations. ESnet maintains data at their + site for all the national laboratories. They provide assistance to + organizations in defining their directory information tree (DIT) + structure. They also provide free access to the X.500 Directory via + Gopher, WWW, DUAs, whois and finger protocols. + + The InterNIC is another directory services provider on the Internet. + To date [June 1995] they hold X.500 directory data for 52 + organizations and provide free access to this data via various + protocols: X.500 DUA, E-Mail, whois, Gopher and WWW. + + To find the most current listing of X.500 providers see RFC 1632 - + Catalog of Available X.500 Implementations [2]. + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 3] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + +2.0 The X.500 Protocol + +2.1 Introduction + + This chapter provides the basic technical information necessary for + an organization to begin deploying an X.500 Directory Service. It + provides a brief introduction to the X.500 protocol and the + possibilities that X.500 offers. + +2.2 The Directory Model + + X.500 Directory Model is a distributed collection of independent + systems which cooperate to provide a logical data base of information + to provide a global Directory Service. Directory information about a + particular organization is maintained locally in a Directory System + Agent (DSA). This information is structured within specified + standards. Adherence to these standards makes the distributed model + possible. It is possible for one organization to keep information + about other organizations, and it is possible for an organization to + operate independently from the global model as a stand alone system. + DSAs that operate within the global model have the ability to + exchange information with other DSAs by means of the X.500 protocol. + + DSAs that are interconnected form the Directory Information Tree + (DIT). The DIT is a virtual hierarchical data structure. An X.500 + pilot using QUIPU software introduced the concept of a "root" DSA + which represents the world; below which "countries" are defined. + Defined under the countries are "organizations". The organizations + further define "organizational units" and/ or "people". This DIT + identifies the DIT for the White Pages X.500 services. + + Each DSA provides information for the global directory. Directories + are able to locate in the hierarchical structure discussed above, + which DSA holds a certain portion of the directory. Each directory + manages information through a defined set of attributes and in a + structure defined as the Directory Information Base (DIB). + + A DSA is accessed by means of a Directory User Agent (DUA). A DUA + interacts with the Directory by communicating with one or more DSAs + as necessary to respond to a specific query. DUAs can be an IP + protocol such as whois or finger, or a more sophisticated application + which may provide Graphical User Interface (GUI) access to the DSA. + Access to a DSA can be accomplished by an individual or automated by + computer application. + + + + + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 4] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + +2.3 The Information Model + + In addition to the Directory Model, the X.500 standard defines the + information model used in the Directory Service. All information in + the Directory is stored in "entries", each of which belong to at + least one "object class". In the White Pages application of X.500 + object classes are defined as country, organization, organizational + unit and person. + + The object classes to which an entry belongs defines the attributes + associated with a particular entry. Some attributes are mandatory + others are optional. System administrators may define their own + attributes and register these with regulating authorities, which will + in turn make these attributes available on a large scale. + + Every entry has a Relative Distinguished Name (RDN), which uniquely + identifies the entry. A RDN is made up of the DIT information and the + actual entry. + + The Directory operates under a set of rules know as the Directory + schema. This defines correct utilization of attributes, and ensures + an element of sameness throughout the global Directory Service. + + Under the White Pages object class "Person" there are three mandatory + attributes: + + objectClass commonName surName + + These attributes along with the DIT structure above, define the RDN. + + An example of an entry under Sandia National Laboratory is shown + here: @c=US@o=Sandia National Laboratory@ou=Employees@cn=Barbara + Jennings + + root + / \ + / \ + c=US c=CA + / \ + / \ + o=Sandia National o=ESnet + Laboratory + / \ + / \ + ou=Employees ou=Guests + / \ + / \ + cn=Barbara Jennings cn=Paul Brooks + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 5] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + Organizations may define the best structure suited for their DIT. + Typically an organizations DIT will look very much like the + organizations structure itself. A DIT structure is determined by + naming rules and as such, becomes the elements unique Relative + Distinguished Name (RDN). The DIT structure may also be dependent on + whether the DSA information is administered by a flat file or a + database. Extra consideration to designing of the DIT structure + should be taken when using flat files versus a database, as it takes + longer to search through a flat file if the tree structure becomes + too complex or intricate. To obtain information on recommended schema + for DIT structuring see RFC1274 [3]. + +2.4 Benefits and Uses for X.500 Directory Service + + The nature of the X.500 Directory makes it suitable for independently + operated segments that can be expanded to global distribution. The + benefits for local directory use are: + + - with the distributed nature of the service, an organization may + separate the responsibility for management of many DSAs and still + retain the overall structure; + + - the robustness of this service allows it to provide information to a + wide range of applications. Whereas globally integrated projects must + conform to a specific DIT, independent X.500 operations may define + unique DITs, object classes and attributes as per their specific + needs; + + - X.500 is a good alternative for paper directories, offering the + ability to update and modify in an interactive mode. This allows a + company to provide the most current information with less cost and + effort; + + - because of the electronic base of X.500, other electronic + applications may interact with the application without human + intervention. + + The benefits for global directory use are: + + - the distributed nature of X.500 is well suited for large global + applications such as the White Pages Directory. Maintenance can be + performed in a distributed manner; + + - X.500 offers good searching capabilities from any level in the DIT. + Also with "User Friendly Naming" in place, searches are very + intuitive; + + + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 6] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + - there are DUA interfaces for the White Pages service available for + all types of workstations. For an overview of X.500 software reference + RFC1632. + + - X.500 is an international standard. Using such a standard ensures + interoperability within the worldwide base. + +2.5 Other Applications of X.500 + + In addition to the White Pages, X.500 can be used as a source for any + type of information that needs a distributed storage base. + + The University of Michigan is using X.500 for electronic mail + routing. Any mail coming to the university domain, umich.edu; gets + expanded out to a local address that is stored in the rfc822Mailbox + attribute. The University also operates a standard X.500 name server + which provides name lookup service of over 200,000 names. They use + the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) [11]. + + An implementation of the X.500 Standard directory service has been + incorporated into the Open Software Foundation (OSF) Distributed + Computing Environment (DCE). This component, known as the Global + Directory Service (GDS), provides an area where distributed + application clients can find their application servers. The GDS, in + response to requests made by other clients, provides the unique + network address for a particular DCE resource. Because it is based + on a international standard, GDS can offer access to resources among + users and organizations worldwide. This scalable service can be + performed in DCE environments that range in size from the very small + to the very large. + + Lookup services can be implemented into a variety of applications. + Cambridge University in Great Britain implemented the X.500 directory + service into an employee locator application. Based on badge sensors + at strategic locations, this application can determine the + whereabouts of an employee on the campus. As the individual moves + about, the sensors register their location in an X.500 Directory. + + Digital Signature Service (DSS) and Privacy Enhanced Mail (PEM) work + on the principal of a directory key server which generates and + provide users with "public" codes that match previously registered + "private" codes. Only the recipient can decipher messages sent in + this fashion. The X.509 [4] standard for key certificates easily fits + within the structure of the X.500 Directory Service. + + + + + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 7] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + +3.0 Legal Issues + +3.1 Introduction + + Currently in the United States, there are no specific legal rules for + the information that is provided via an electronic directory service. + Various organizations and groups associated with usage of the + Internet, noting a need to address privacy and data integrity issues, + have prepared directives to address this issue. Two such areas + addressed are those of the rights of registrants included in the + directory and the responsibility of administrators to guarantee the + integrity of such data. + + Registries containing information that is related to an individual is + freely transferred and unregulated in the US, unless the provider of + the data is an agency or an holder of sensitive information as + defined by federal legislation and further may differ for each state. + An agency is defined as: any executive department, military + department, Government corporation, Government controlled + corporation, or other establishment in the executive branch of the + Government (including the Executive Office of the President), or any + independent regulatory agency. Sensitive data can be financial + records, medical records, and certain legal documents. As previously + noted, each state has their own legislation on sensitive or private + data.The registered persons have little recourse to control list + information short of filing a lawsuit against the information + provider. + + For individuals who transfer data across country boundaries, it is + important to understand that other countries may have legislation to + regulate data. Prior to requesting list information from these + countries, an administrator should review applicable legislation and + have some mechanism in place to ensure how data will be handled once + it is crosses the border. Policy Statements for some countries have + been prepared and are provided for via Code of Conduct papers. + +3.2 Purpose of the Directory + + The operational intent including presentation data and list + registrants and access rights must be clearly defined and stated. + Initially this provides the skeleton of the DIT. Eventually a + statement such as this may provide a basis legally justifying the + directory. + + All data presented must be defined in the purpose. If for example, a + directory is for the sole purpose of providing professional + addressing information - an entry would include name, postal address, + office telephone, facsimile number, electronic mail address and + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 8] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + company name. Private address information listing the home address + or phone would be prohibited as would any other information not + directly related to addressing. + +3.3 User Rights + + The North American Directory Forum (NADF) has published a document + that defines the User Bill of Rights [5]. This document defines an + individuals rights regarding the public release of personal or + private information. Among other issues stated, the user has the + right to be notified regarding the inclusion of their information in + a data registry as well as the right to examine and have incorrect + information changed. + + This paper is specifically written for the North American Directory + Forum and recommends compliance with US or Canadian laws regulating + privacy and access information. + + Although current US legislation does not include all the suggestions + in this document, it is the responsibility of the controller of the + data to respect the rights of the individuals. These recommended + rules can be seen as respect for the individual and the considerate + controller will follow these guidelines within any boundaries that + they may be mandated by. + +3.4 Data Integrity + + An information provider has the responsibility to guarantee the data + that they make available to users. The integrity of a data source is + heavily weighted by the accuracy and timeliness of the contents. + Interoperable data sources must have concurrence of these factors as + well. The degree to which an information provider can guarantee the + validity of the data that they present, reflects on the validity of + the provider in general. RFC 1355 [6], suggests that a data source + enable accuracy statements describing the process that the individual + NIC will use to maintain accuracy in the database. + + In the European community, it is a legal requirement that the + information provider guarantee accurate data. + + The controller of the information needs to be certain of the primary + source of data. When possible, the controller should develop routines + of random checks to validate the registry data for correctness. + + + + + + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 9] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + +3.5 Data Security + + A Directory Service with non-authenticated access from the Internet + is difficult to protect from unauthorized use. Unauthorized use being + defined by each organization within the directory purpose statement. + Typical misuse being by individuals who attempt to duplicate the + directory for unauthorized purposes. Other security measures include: + Access Control Lists (ACLs), limitations on number of entries + returned to a query, and time to search flags. The result of such + controls will affect the legitimate user as well as the user they are + intended to block. + + An alternative that may provide protection from misuse is to create + and display an attribute with each entry stating non-approved usage. + This feature will also provide evidence of restricted use in the + event that a legal case is necessary to stop unauthorized access. + + The responsibility again falls on the data provider/implementor of + the directory service. Astute programmers will create or make use of + existing tools to protect against data destruction, falsification, + and misuse. + +3.6 Conclusions + + User Rights, Data Integrity and Protection of data should not be + considered merely in an effort to abide by legal rulings; they should + be the intention of a good data source. A successful Directory + Service must be aware of the requirements of those individuals + inclusive in the list as well as those of the directory users. + + In general, at the minimum the following conditions should be + observed: + + 1. Define the purpose of the Directory. + 2. Initially inform all registrants of their inclusion in + a Directory. + 3. Prevent the use of data beyond the stated purpose. + 4. Limit the attributes associated to an entry within + boundaries of the purpose. + 5. Work towards a suitable level of security. + 6. Develop a mechanism to correct/remove faulty data + or information that should not be in the Directory. + + + + + + + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 10] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + +4.0 Infrastructure + +4.1 Introduction + + The White Pages Project, currently operated by Performance Systems + International (PSI) provides a reliable QUIPU infrastructure for + sites wishing to provide their own X.500 directory. Started in 1989 + as the NYSERNet White Pages Pilot Project it was the first + production-quality field test of the Open Systems Interconnection + (OSI) technology running on top of TCP/IP suite of protocols [7]. + This pilot X.500 Directory, provided a real-time testbed for a + variety of administrative and usage issues that arise. Today, more + than 30 countries participate in the globally distributed project + with over 1 million entries. The White Pages pilot is one of 37 other + pilots cooperating to provide information in the Nameflow-PARADISE + directory; an European project. + + Initially the software was public domain, QUIPU X.500 [8]. This + "shareware" application in conjunction with administrative services + provided free of charge by PSI, allowed for a truly distributed X.500 + Directory Service to operate. + + In keeping with the Internet rules of operation, the lack of the US + regulations, the suggestions of North American Directory Forum and + the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), the complications that + arise from multi-distributed data as a service can be overwhelming. + PSI took on the challenge to provide such a service, and continues to + ensure operations today. + +4.2 A Well Maintained Infrastructure + + This distributed information service involves the cohesive effort of + all of the participating organizations. The ISO Development + Environment (ISODE) implementation of the OSI Directory, provided the + attributes and uniformity to facilitate this effort. + + The primary DSA for the PSI Project is named Alpaca. Operating on a + Sun Sparc 10 with 120 megabytes of memory, this host serves as the + Master for the DSAs of 117 organizations under c=US. Redundancy for + Alpaca is provided by two sources, Fruit Bat operated by PSI and Pied + Tamarin operated by the InterNIC. Slave updates to this host are + provided on a nightly basis from the individual DSAs. + + The data presentation is hierarchical in nature and emulates the + common white pages telephone book. The information provided contains + at minimum: a common name, voice phone listing, and electronic mail + addressing. Each entry has a uniqueness associates with it; the + relative distinguished name which is comprised of the entire + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 11] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + directory information tree. The DITs may vary slightly, but each must + contain an organization, and a person. The nature of the directory + and the structure of the actual organization for whom the directory + is being provided contribute to the overall DIT structure. The + following is a list of commonly used attributes: + +commonName physicalDeliveryOfficeName stateOrProvinceName +description photo streetAddress +userid postOfficeBox surname +favouriteDrink postalAddress telephoneNumber +title rfc822Mailbox facsimileTelephoneNumber + +4.3 DUA Interfaces for End Users + + There are a variety of user interfaces on the market today that will + provide Directory User Agent access to the X.500 Directory. Standard + protocols such as fred, whois, whois++, finger, are used widely. + Interfaces are also available via World-wide Web browsers and + electronic mail. + + Vendors providing DUAs include ISODE Consortium, NeXor, and Control + Data Corporation. These applications operate in conjunction with the + vendor provided DSAs. + + Historically DUA interfaces were difficult to implement and required + the entire OSI stack. Implementing such a product on a PC or Apple + platform required skillful programming. The executable for these + platforms were usually very large. The IETF has since defined and + standardized the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) [11]; a + protocol for accessing on-line Directory services which offers + comparable functionality to the Directory Access Protocol (DAP). It + runs directly over TCP and is used by nearly all X.500 clients. LDAP + does not have the overhead of the various OSI layers and runs on top + of TCP/IP. + + The functionality varies by specific DUA. Each offers access to the + X.500 Directory. Most offer the ability to make modifications to + entries. There are a few that offer Kerberos authentication. + + Further information on LDAP clients for specific platforms can be + found on the University of Michigan WWW server: + http://www.umich.edu/~rsug/ldap. + + Another interface that has been tested and recommended for users by + our Dutch (Surfnet) colleagues is Directory Enquiry (DE). Originally + developed by University College London for the Paradise project in + Europe, the engineers at Surfnet have selected DE as the best + interface for "dumb" terminals. They have also translated the + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 12] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + interface into Dutch for their local users [12]. + + Ideally, users should be able to access X.500 directly from their + electronic mail applications. Vendors (other than the ones mentioned + above) have been slow to incorporate the X.500 Standards into their + electronic mail applications. + +5.0 Datamanagement & Pilot Projects + +5.1 Simple Internet White Pages Service + + A wide variety of directory services retrieval protocols has emerged + in the time since the original Internet White Pages was begun in + 1989. To ensure that decentralized implementations will have + interoperability with other providers, the IETF Integrated Directory + Services Working Group, is working to create a draft focusing on the + common information and operational modeling issues to which all + Internet White Pages Services (IWPS) must conform to. + + Utilizing current information servers, the conceptual model described + includes issues regarding naming, schema, query and response issues + for a narrowly defined subset of directory services. The goal of this + paper is to establish a simple set of information objects, coupled + with a basic set of process requirements that will form a basis which + can lead to ubiquitous IWPS. With this goal in mind, it will be + easier to proved a consistent User view of the various directory + services. + +5.2 InterNIC + + The InterNIC [9] is a collaborative project of two organizations + working together to offer the Internet community a full scope of + network information services. Established in January 1993 by the + National Science Foundation, the InterNIC provides registration + services and directory and database services to the Internet. + (Internet a global network of more than 13,000 computers networks, + connecting over 1.7 million computers and used by an estimated 13 + million people.) In keeping up with the exponential growth of the + Internet, the InterNIC provides a guide to navigate the maze of + available resources. + + InterNIC provides two types of services; InterNIC directory and + database services and registration services. AT&T provides the + directory and database services, acting as the pointer to numerous + resources on the network offering X.500 to help users easily locate + other users and organizations on the Internet. + + + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 13] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + +5.3 ESnet + + The Energy Sciences Network [10], is a nationwide computer data + communications network whose primary purpose is support multiple + program, open scientific research. As part of this support, ESnet + offers networking services including information access and + retrieval, directory services, group communications series, remote + file access services and infrastructure services. As a early member + of the White-Pages Pilot Project, ESnet continues to be a part of the + worldwide distributed directory service based on the ISO/OSI X.500 + standard. There are over nineteen ESnet organization represented in + the directory, comprising over 120,000 entries. ESnet provides access + to seven other sites via the X.500 DSAs. + +6.0 Recommendations + +6.1 General + + The X.500 Directory technology is available through several options. + Vendors can provide consultation for schema design as well as supply, + install, and support the software to perform the operations required. + For smaller organizations or companies who do not want to administer + their own DSA, there are providers available who will maintain the + DSAs remotely and provide this service to the Internet. Those with + network and management expertise, can either operate independently or + join one of several white pages directory projects. Careful + consideration must be given to the initial investment required and + the required maintenance process. + +6.2 Getting Started + + Successful initialization of a directory service requires a + systematic approach. The complexity of offering this type of service + becomes more apparent as implementation progresses. Several aspects + must be considered as this service becomes a cooperative effort among + the technical, administrative, organizational, and legal disciplines. + Procedures must be defined and agreed to at the initial phase of + implementing an X.500 Directory service [13]. The following are + issues that should be addressed in these procedures. + +6.3 Who are the Customers? + + Defining the customer and the customer requirements will determine + the scope of service to offer. What is the primary purpose for the + directory service? A company may find it desirable to do away with a + paper directory while simultaneously providing the current directory + information. The directory may be for internal use only or expanded + to any users with Internet access. Will the customer use the + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 14] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + directory for e-mail address only or is other locational information + such as postal address and telephone number a requirement? + + The directory may provide information to electronic customers such as + distributed computing applications as well. In this case, the data + must be provided in machine readable format. + + Will the customers extend across country boundaries? Information may + be considered private by one country and not by another. It is + necessary to be aware of the legalities and restrictions for the + locality using the data. Some counties have published a Code of + Conduct with the IETF, explicitly stating the legal restrictions on + directory and list data. Check the archives to determine if the + country with whom information will be shared has presented such + information. + +6.4 What are the contents of the Directory? + + The information presented in the directory is tightly coupled with + the purpose. If the purpose is to provide addressing information for + individuals, then customary information would include: Name, address, + phone, e-mail address, facsimile number, pager, etc. If the use of + the directory is to facilitate electronic mail routing then the + destination mail address needs to be included for each user. No other + information should be presented in the directory if it is not + directly related to the purpose. + + If the directory is internal only, it may be desirable to include the + registrants title as well. Remember that information available on the + Internet is generally open to anyone who wants to access it. + Individuals wishing to target a specific market may access + directories to create customer mailing lists. + + The structure or schema of the X.500 Directory must be an initial + consideration. Will the hierarchy follow the company structure or is + a different approach more practical? How many entries will there be + in the directory five or 50,000? A complex hierarchyfor thousands of + users may affect the efficiency of queries. + +6.5 What are the rights of the individuals? + + The subjects included in the directory shall have well defined + rights. These may be mandated by company policy, legal restrictions, + and the ultimate use of the directory. For a basic Internet White + Pages Service these rights may include: + + + + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 15] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + 1. the option of inclusion in the directory + 2. the right of access to the information + 3. the right to have inaccurate entries corrected + + The terms and conditions for employees of an organization may affect + these rights. On becoming an employee of any organization, an + individual inevitably agrees to forego certain personal privacies and + to accept restrictions. + + Every organization should develop and publish the "rights" that can + be expected by the list registrants. + +6.6 Data Integrity + + Information that needs to be included in the directory may come from + various sources. Demographic information may originate from the human + resources department. Electronic mail addresses may be provided by + the computer network department. To guarantee data integrity, it is + advised that the data be identified and maintained as corporate + information. + + The required timeliness of the data is unique for each DSA. Updates + to the data may be a frequent as once a day or once a month. Updates + to the data must be provided on a regular basis. In cases where data + is time sensitive, an attribute should be included to display the + most recent maintenance date. + + A regular check for data accuracy should be included in the directory + administration. Faulty information may put an organization in breach + of any data protection laws and possibly render the company as + unreliable. + +6.7 Data Security + + Securing networked information resources is inherently complex. + Attempts must be made to preserve the security of the data. These may + include access control lists (ACLs), limiting the number or responses + allowed to queries, or internal/external access to the directory. + + The 1993 recommendations have added a complex access control model + that is designed to tightly restrict the access that users may have + to the information in the Directory. Local protection is configured + by the implementor. A secure X.500 Directory should provide tools to + protect against destruction, falsification, and loss of data. + + There is not a tool yet that will protect against the misuse of data. + There are flags and limits that can be set from within the + application that will serve somewhat as a barrier to such unwanted + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 16] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + use. Any restrictions however, also will affect the legitimate users. + One suggestion is to post a notice of illegitimate use within each + entry. This of course will only serve as a deterrent and as an asset + should legal action be required. + + Again, caution must be taken when transferring data between country + and state borders. In the US data regulations differ from state to + state. + +6.8 Data Administration + + The decentralized nature of the X.500 Directory service means that + each organization has complete control over the data. As part of a + global service however, it is important that the operation of the DSA + be monitored and maintained in a consistent manner. Authorization + must be given to the local manager of the information and in some + cases, the subjects included in the directory may also have + modification privileges. + + Once the service is running, the importance of guaranteed operation + can not be overstated. Maintenance of the local Directory will be an + integral part of normal administrative procedures within the + organization and must be defined and agreed upon in the initial + stages of development. + +6.9 Conclusion + + Establishing a Directory service within an organization will involve + a great deal of cooperative effort. It is essential to get commitment + from the integral parties of an organization at the onset. This + includes the technical, legal, and data managements components of the + organization. Executive level commitment will make it much easier to + get the cooperation necessary. + + Operational procedures must be clearly defined, as the inclusion in a + globally distributed service has wide visibility. Adherence to these + procedures must be maintained to the highest degree possible as + misinformation may result in unintentional legal violations and + unreliable access or data can adversely affect on a companys + reputation. + + An X.500 Directory can be extremely useful for an organization if it + operates as designed. It may serve as the "hub" of the information + routing and the basis for several everyday activities. A successful + service will be one of the most important tools for communication in + the computer network environment. For people to make use of the + service, they must be able to rely on consistent and accurate + information. + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 17] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + +References + + 1. CCITT Blue Book, Volume VIII - Fascicle VIII.8, November 1988. + + 2. RFC 1632; A Revised Catalog of Available X.500 + Implementations. A. Getchell; ESnet, S. + Sataluri; AT&T. + + 3. RFC 1274; The COSINE and Internet X.500 Schema. P. Barker & + S. Kille. + + 4. CCITT Blue Book, Volume VIII - Fascicle VIII - Rec. X.509, + November 1988. + + 5. RFC 1295; User Bill of Rights for entries and listing in the + Public Directory. Networking Working Group; IETF, January + 1992. + + 6. STD 35, RFC 1355; Privacy and Accuracy Issues in Network + Information Center Databases. Curran, Marine, August 1992. + + 7. RFC 1006, ISO Transport Class 2 Non-use of Explicit Flow + Control over TCP RFC 1006 extension. Y. Pouffary, June 1995. + + 8. Colin Robbins, NEXOR Ltd., Nottingham, London. + c.robbins@nexor.co.uk + + 9. InterNIC; Collaborative effort of AT&T and + Network Solutions; info@internic.net + + 10. ESnet; Managed and funded by the US Department of Energys + Energy Research Office in Scientific Computing (DOE/ER/OSC). + + 11. RFC 1777; Lightweight Directory Access Protocol, W. Yeong, + T. Howes, S. Kille, March 1995. + + 12. Building a Directory Service, Final Report test phase SURFnet + X.500 pilot project, June 1995. + + 13. The X.500 Directory Services: a discussion of the concerns + raised by the existence of a global Directory, Julia M. Hill, + Vol.2/No.1 Electronic Networking, Spring 1992. + + 14. Directory Services and Privacy Issues, E. Jeunik and E. + Huizer. + + + + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 18] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + 15. The Little Black Book; Mail Bonding with OSI Directory + Services, Marshall T. Rose, Simon & Schuster Company, + 1992. + + 16. NYSERNet White Pages Pilot Project: Status Report; NYSERNet + Technical Report #89-12-31-1, Marshall T. Rose, December 1989. + + 17. RFC 1798, Connection-less Lightweight Directory Access + Protocol, A. Young, June 1995. + + 18. RFC 1781; Using the OSI Directory to Achieve User Friendly + Naming, S. Kille, March 1995. + + 19. draft-ietf-pds-iwps-design-spec-01.txt, Tony Genovese; + Microsoft, Work in Progress, July 1995. + + 20. draft-ietf-ids-privacy-00.txt, B. Jennings; Sandia National + Laboratories, S. Sataluri; AT&T, Work in Progress, November + 1994. + +Glossary + + ACL Access Control List; a mechanism to restrict access to data + stored in an X.500 Directory Service + + Attribute A collection of attributes belong to an entry in the + Directory Service, and contain information belonging + to that entry. + + c= countryName; Object class definition, specifies a country. + When used as part of the directory name, it identifies the + country in which the named object is physically located. + + cn= commonName; Attribute defining common name for individuals + included in a directory. In 1988 standards can be up to 64 + characters. + + CCITT The International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative + Committee. + + DAP Directory Access Protocol; the protocol between a DUA and a + DSA. + + DIB Directory Information Base; a collection of information + objects in the Directory. + + DIT Directory Information Tree; the hierarchy of the distributed + database that makes up an X.500 service. + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 19] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + DSA Directory System Agent; an application that offers the + Directory service, this is the database for the Directory. + + DUA Directory User Agent; an application that facilitates User + access to a DSA. + + E-Mail Electronic Mail. Entry A Directory Service contains entries + on people, organizations, countries, etc. Entries belong to a + certain class, and information on entries is stored in + attributes. + + ESnet Energy Sciences Network; nationwide computer data + communications network. + + GUI Graphical User Interface. + + IETF Internet Engineering Task Force; an internationally + represented task force charged with solving the short-term + needs of the Internet + + Internet A collection of connected networks, international, + running the Internet suite of protocols. + + InterNIC Directory of Directories, a collaborative project + between AT&T, and Network Solutions, Inc. + + IP Internet Protocol; the network protocol offering a + conectionless-mode network service in the Internet suite of + protocols. + + ISODE ISO Development Environment, a research tool developed to + study the upper-layers of OSI and deploy network applications + according to the ISO OSI standards and ITU X series of + recommendations. + + ITU International Telecommunication Union; formerly the CCITT. + + LDAP Lightweight Directory Access Protocol, an Internet Standard + for a lightweight version of DAP running over TCP/IP. + + Object Entries in a Directory Service belong to an Object Class to + Class indicate the type and characteristic; e.g. Object Class + "person". + + OSI Open Standards Interconnection, An international + standardization program, facilitated by ISO and ITU to develop + standards for data networking. + + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 20] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + + o= organization; An attribute defining the company or + organization that the person works for. + + ou= organizational unit; An attribute found under organization. + Denotes the department, division, or other such sub-unit of + the organization that the person works in. + + PEM Privacy Enhanced Mail; and Internet Standard for sending + secure Electronic mail. + + PSI Performance Systems International, Inc.; operator of the + Internet White Pages Project + + QUIPU X.500 Directory implementation developed by Colin Robbins + while at the University College of London. + + RDN Relative Distinguished Name; a unique identifier for each list + subject, defined by the hierarchy of the DSA. + + RFC Request For Comments; Internet series publications + + sn= surname; Attribute defining the surname of the person in the + directory. + + TCP/IP Transmission Control Protocol and Internet Protocol; two + internet protocols. + + White-Pages Electronic directory, accessible via Internet suite of + protocols. + + Whois An Internet standard protocol. + + Whois++ An Internet Directory Services protocol; a possible + alternative for X.500 WPS + + White Pages Service a Directory Service that contains information on + people and organizations. + + X.500 A series of recommendations as defined by the ITU, that + specify a Directory Services protocol. + + + + + + + + + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 21] + +RFC 1943 Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US May 1996 + + +9.0 Security Considerations + + Security issues are not discussed in this memo. + +Author's Address + + Barbara Jennings + Sandia National Laboratories + Scientific Computing Systems + P.O. Box 5800 + M/S 0807 + Albuquerque, NM 87106 + USA + + Phone: 505-845-8554 + Fax: 505-844-2067 + EMail: jennings@sandia.gov + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Jennings Informational [Page 22] + |