[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
New draft-ietf-ldapext-ldap-taxonomy-01
I-D editor:
please replace draft-ietf-ldapext-ldap-taxonomy00 with the
following draft-ietf-ldapext-ldap-taxonomy-01. My apologies
if you see this twice, I have no confirmation that it arrived.
LDAPEXT:
Here's the updated taxonomy. Once I see the I-D announcement,
we'll ask Mark and Tim to start a WG last call. Apologies
to those who see it twice, I never saw the first copy from the
mailing list.
Ryan
=======
Internet-Draft Ryan Moats
draft-ietf-ldapext-ldap-taxonomy-01 AT&T
Expires in six months Roland Hedberg
Track: Informational Catalogix
December 1999
A Taxonomy of Methods for LDAP Clients Finding Servers
Filename: draft-ietf-ldapext-ldap-taxonomy-01.txt
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are working
documents of the Internet Engineering 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.
Abstract
There are several different methods for a LDAP client to find a LDAP
server. This draft discusses these methods and provides pointers for
interested parties to learn more about implementing a particular
method.
1. Introduction
The Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) [1] can be used to
build "islands" of servers that are not a priori tied into a single
Directory Information Tree (DIT.) Here, it is necessary to determine
how a client can discover LDAP servers. This documents discusses the
currently available methods and provides pointers for interested
parties to learn more about implementing a particular method.
This draft documents only those methods that are currently being
pursued in the IETF. Other methods have been considered for this
Expires 6/30/2000 [Page 1]
INTERNET DRAFT LDAP Taxonomy December 1999
problem and the history of these other methods are presented in the
Appendix.
2. Methods
2.1 Client Configuration
The simplest method of enabling a LDAP client to discover LDAP
servers is for the client administrator to configure the client with
a list of known LDAP servers (and associated base objects) to send
queries to. While this method has the advantage of being correct
(initially), it adds the requirement that the list of initial servers
be kept small and constant. Otherwise, the required client update
process won't scale.
2.2 Well known DNS aliases
If the DIT uses a naming scheme similar to that in RFC 2377 [2], then
it is possible to build the DNS names of potential servers using well
known DNS aliases, like those documented in RFC 2219 [3]. When a
different naming scheme is used, it is also possible to build
potential server names based on the client's fully qualified domain
name or local (within the organization or country) environment.
One shortcoming of this method are that it is not exact. Multiple
DNS lookups and LDAP protocol operations may be necessary to find the
proper LDAP server to serve the client requests. To support client
roaming, it is necessary that either the RFC 2377 (or similar) naming
scheme be used or that roaming be implemented through tunnels.
Because this method uses DNS, it inherits all the security
considerations of using DNS to discover LDAP servers: see the
security consideration in [3] for more details.
2.3 Service Location Protocol
If a client supports the service location protocol [4], it could use
a SLP query for LDAP servers. The SLP template that is used to
describe LDAP servers is presented in [5], and requires that the
servers announce themselves using SLP and this template.
Using this method inherits the scaling and security considerations
for the service location protocol, which are documented further in
[4].
Expires 6/30/2000 [Page 2]
INTERNET DRAFT LDAP Taxonomy December 1999
2.4 Referrals
In LDAPv3, servers can return referrals to the client if the server
has knowledge of where a query might be satisfiable. Two ways of
deploying referral information are deploying a LDAP knowledge server
or exchanging CIP index objects [6] between servers.
A LDAP knowledge server would hold cross references to possibly
hundreds of other LDAP servers, so that a client would only need to
know about its local LDAP server and the knowledge server. As an
optimization, the local LDAP server could also act as a knowledge
server.
If CIP index objects are exchanged between LDAP servers, then those
objects can also carry URL information for providing referrals to
clients. Here, the client would only need to know about the local
server. Using CIP index objects inherits the security considerations
of CIP: see [6, 7, 8] for more details.
In either of these cases, the local LDAP server could be determined
using another of the methods discussed.
2.5 Using SRV records
RFC 2052 [12] defined SRV records for DNS, which bound a host name
and port to a label in the DNS. This makes it possible for a client
to look up information about a supported protocol for a domain and
get back a weighted list of fully qualified domain names and ports
for where that protocol is supported. For more information, see
[13].
3. Implementation
The Norwegian Directory Forum plans to start a service based on a
central LDAP service containing contact information for every
organization within Norway [10]. If an organization has more
information about its sub-units, employees or functions that it wants
to publish it can do so by placing this information in a publicly
available LDAP server and providing the management of the central
service with a pointer (URL) to this server.
The TISDAG project is running a test service based on the TISDAG
specification [11]. This service gathers indices from connected White
Pages Service Providers using CIP Tagged Index Objects [9]. The
rationale for this service is that by supplying the name of a person
or a function/role to the service it will return pointers to where
more information can be found about persons/functions with that name.
Expires 6/30/2000 [Page 3]
INTERNET DRAFT LDAP Taxonomy December 1999
The European cofunded project DESIRE (www.desire.org) is designing a
system to use a LDAP server that communicates with a referral index
that in turn, uses CIP Tagged Index Objects [9] and is fed by LDAP
crawlers. DANTE plans to set up a European infrastructure of such
referral index servers.
4. References
Request For Comments (RFC) and Internet Draft documents are available
from numerous mirror sites.
[1] M. Wahl, T. Howes, S. Kille, Lightweight Directory
Access Protocol (v3), RFC 2251, December 1997.
[2] A. Grimstad, R. Huber, S. Sataluri, M. Wahl, Naming
Plan for Internet Directory-Enabled Applications,
RFC 2377, September 1998.
[3] M. Hamilton, R. Wright, "Use of DNS Aliases for
Network Services," RFC 2219 (Also BCP 17), October,
1997.
[4] E. Guttman, C. Perkins, J. Veizades, M. Day, "Ser-
vice Location Protocol, Version 2," Internet Draft
(work in progress), April 1999.
[5] J. Wood, R. Tam, "The LDAP Service Type," Internet
Draft (work in progress), February 1998.
[6] J. Allen, M. Mealling, "The Architecture of the
Common Indexing Protocol (CIP)," Internet Draft
(work in progress), November 1998.
[7] J. Allen, M. Mealling, "MIME Object Definitions for
the Common Indexing Protocol (CIP)," Internet Draft
(work in progress), June 1997.
[8] J. Allen, P. Leach, R. Hedberg, "CIP Transport Pro-
tocols," Internet Draft (work in progress), April
1999.
[9] R. Hedberg, B. Greenblatt, R. Moats, M. Wahl, "A
Tagged Index Object for use in the Common Indexing
Protocol," Internet Draft (work in progress),
December 1998.
[10] R. Hedberg, H. Alverstrand, "Technical Specifica-
tion, The Norwegian Directory of Directories
Expires 6/30/2000 [Page 4]
INTERNET DRAFT LDAP Taxonomy December 1999
(NDD)," Internet Draft (work in progress), May
1999.
[11] R. Hedberg, L. Daigle, "Technical Infrastructure
for Swedish Directory Access Gateways (TISDAG),"
Internet Draft (work in progress), June 1999.
[12] A. Gulbrandsen, P. Vixie, "A DNS RR for specifying
the location of services (DNS SRV)," RFC 2052,
October 1996.
[13] M. Armijo, L. Esibov, P. Leach, "Discovering LDAP
Services with DNS," Internet Draft (work in pro-
gress), June 1999.
5. Author's Addresses
Ryan Moats Roland Hedberg
AT&T Catalogix
15621 Drexel Circle Dalsveien 53
Omaha, NE 68135 0775 Oslo
USA Norway
Email: jayhawk@att.com Email: roland@catalogix.ac.se
Appendix A. Historical Methods
A.1 Discovery
The discovery approach was to use a combination of other methods
presented in this taxonomy along with storing either the search DN or
a related URL in the DNS in some way. Using both TXT or NAPTR
records in the DNS were considered. This approach requires an
administrator to configure the DNS with necessary information.
Further, the idea of storing standards based information (either a DN
or an URL) in a DNS RR has been an extremely controversial one in the
IETF.
A.2 DHCP extensions
Another proposed method was to use DHCP to deliver information about
LDAP server to a DHCP client. This would require that such informa-
tion be configured into the DHCP server and that the client use DHCP
to load host configuration information. While there has been some
nascent interest in this method, there has been no interest in imple-
mentation of this approach.
Expires 6/30/2000 [Page 5]