1 |
|
---|
2 |
|
---|
3 |
|
---|
4 |
|
---|
5 |
|
---|
6 |
|
---|
7 | Network Working Group K. Zeilenga, Ed.
|
---|
8 | Request for Comments: 4514 OpenLDAP Foundation
|
---|
9 | Obsoletes: 2253 June 2006
|
---|
10 | Category: Standards Track
|
---|
11 |
|
---|
12 |
|
---|
13 | Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP):
|
---|
14 | String Representation of Distinguished Names
|
---|
15 |
|
---|
16 | Status of This Memo
|
---|
17 |
|
---|
18 | This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
|
---|
19 | Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
|
---|
20 | improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
|
---|
21 | Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
|
---|
22 | and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
|
---|
23 |
|
---|
24 | Copyright Notice
|
---|
25 |
|
---|
26 | Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
|
---|
27 |
|
---|
28 | Abstract
|
---|
29 |
|
---|
30 | The X.500 Directory uses distinguished names (DNs) as primary keys to
|
---|
31 | entries in the directory. This document defines the string
|
---|
32 | representation used in the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
|
---|
33 | (LDAP) to transfer distinguished names. The string representation is
|
---|
34 | designed to give a clean representation of commonly used
|
---|
35 | distinguished names, while being able to represent any distinguished
|
---|
36 | name.
|
---|
37 |
|
---|
38 | 1. Background and Intended Usage
|
---|
39 |
|
---|
40 | In X.500-based directory systems [X.500], including those accessed
|
---|
41 | using the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) [RFC4510],
|
---|
42 | distinguished names (DNs) are used to unambiguously refer to
|
---|
43 | directory entries [X.501][RFC4512].
|
---|
44 |
|
---|
45 | The structure of a DN [X.501] is described in terms of ASN.1 [X.680].
|
---|
46 | In the X.500 Directory Access Protocol [X.511] (and other ITU-defined
|
---|
47 | directory protocols), DNs are encoded using the Basic Encoding Rules
|
---|
48 | (BER) [X.690]. In LDAP, DNs are represented in the string form
|
---|
49 | described in this document.
|
---|
50 |
|
---|
51 | It is important to have a common format to be able to unambiguously
|
---|
52 | represent a distinguished name. The primary goal of this
|
---|
53 | specification is ease of encoding and decoding. A secondary goal is
|
---|
54 | to have names that are human readable. It is not expected that LDAP
|
---|
55 |
|
---|
56 |
|
---|
57 |
|
---|
58 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 1]
|
---|
59 | |
---|
60 |
|
---|
61 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
62 |
|
---|
63 |
|
---|
64 | implementations with a human user interface would display these
|
---|
65 | strings directly to the user, but that they would most likely be
|
---|
66 | performing translations (such as expressing attribute type names in
|
---|
67 | the local national language).
|
---|
68 |
|
---|
69 | This document defines the string representation of Distinguished
|
---|
70 | Names used in LDAP [RFC4511][RFC4517]. Section 2 details the
|
---|
71 | RECOMMENDED algorithm for converting a DN from its ASN.1 structured
|
---|
72 | representation to a string. Section 3 details how to convert a DN
|
---|
73 | from a string to an ASN.1 structured representation.
|
---|
74 |
|
---|
75 | While other documents may define other algorithms for converting a DN
|
---|
76 | from its ASN.1 structured representation to a string, all algorithms
|
---|
77 | MUST produce strings that adhere to the requirements of Section 3.
|
---|
78 |
|
---|
79 | This document does not define a canonical string representation for
|
---|
80 | DNs. Comparison of DNs for equality is to be performed in accordance
|
---|
81 | with the distinguishedNameMatch matching rule [RFC4517].
|
---|
82 |
|
---|
83 | This document is a integral part of the LDAP technical specification
|
---|
84 | [RFC4510], which obsoletes the previously defined LDAP technical
|
---|
85 | specification, RFC 3377, in its entirety. This document obsoletes
|
---|
86 | RFC 2253. Changes since RFC 2253 are summarized in Appendix B.
|
---|
87 |
|
---|
88 | This specification assumes familiarity with X.500 [X.500] and the
|
---|
89 | concept of Distinguished Name [X.501][RFC4512].
|
---|
90 |
|
---|
91 | 1.1. Conventions
|
---|
92 |
|
---|
93 | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
|
---|
94 | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
|
---|
95 | document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119].
|
---|
96 |
|
---|
97 | Character names in this document use the notation for code points and
|
---|
98 | names from the Unicode Standard [Unicode]. For example, the letter
|
---|
99 | "a" may be represented as either <U+0061> or <LATIN SMALL LETTER A>.
|
---|
100 |
|
---|
101 | Note: a glossary of terms used in Unicode can be found in [Glossary].
|
---|
102 | Information on the Unicode character encoding model can be found in
|
---|
103 | [CharModel].
|
---|
104 |
|
---|
105 |
|
---|
106 |
|
---|
107 |
|
---|
108 |
|
---|
109 |
|
---|
110 |
|
---|
111 |
|
---|
112 |
|
---|
113 |
|
---|
114 |
|
---|
115 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 2]
|
---|
116 | |
---|
117 |
|
---|
118 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
119 |
|
---|
120 |
|
---|
121 | 2. Converting DistinguishedName from ASN.1 to a String
|
---|
122 |
|
---|
123 | X.501 [X.501] defines the ASN.1 [X.680] structure of distinguished
|
---|
124 | name. The following is a variant provided for discussion purposes.
|
---|
125 |
|
---|
126 | DistinguishedName ::= RDNSequence
|
---|
127 |
|
---|
128 | RDNSequence ::= SEQUENCE OF RelativeDistinguishedName
|
---|
129 |
|
---|
130 | RelativeDistinguishedName ::= SET SIZE (1..MAX) OF
|
---|
131 | AttributeTypeAndValue
|
---|
132 |
|
---|
133 | AttributeTypeAndValue ::= SEQUENCE {
|
---|
134 | type AttributeType,
|
---|
135 | value AttributeValue }
|
---|
136 |
|
---|
137 | This section defines the RECOMMENDED algorithm for converting a
|
---|
138 | distinguished name from an ASN.1-structured representation to a UTF-8
|
---|
139 | [RFC3629] encoded Unicode [Unicode] character string representation.
|
---|
140 | Other documents may describe other algorithms for converting a
|
---|
141 | distinguished name to a string, but only strings that conform to the
|
---|
142 | grammar defined in Section 3 SHALL be produced by LDAP
|
---|
143 | implementations.
|
---|
144 |
|
---|
145 | 2.1. Converting the RDNSequence
|
---|
146 |
|
---|
147 | If the RDNSequence is an empty sequence, the result is the empty or
|
---|
148 | zero-length string.
|
---|
149 |
|
---|
150 | Otherwise, the output consists of the string encodings of each
|
---|
151 | RelativeDistinguishedName in the RDNSequence (according to Section
|
---|
152 | 2.2), starting with the last element of the sequence and moving
|
---|
153 | backwards toward the first.
|
---|
154 |
|
---|
155 | The encodings of adjoining RelativeDistinguishedNames are separated
|
---|
156 | by a comma (',' U+002C) character.
|
---|
157 |
|
---|
158 | 2.2. Converting RelativeDistinguishedName
|
---|
159 |
|
---|
160 | When converting from an ASN.1 RelativeDistinguishedName to a string,
|
---|
161 | the output consists of the string encodings of each
|
---|
162 | AttributeTypeAndValue (according to Section 2.3), in any order.
|
---|
163 |
|
---|
164 | Where there is a multi-valued RDN, the outputs from adjoining
|
---|
165 | AttributeTypeAndValues are separated by a plus sign ('+' U+002B)
|
---|
166 | character.
|
---|
167 |
|
---|
168 |
|
---|
169 |
|
---|
170 |
|
---|
171 |
|
---|
172 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 3]
|
---|
173 | |
---|
174 |
|
---|
175 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
176 |
|
---|
177 |
|
---|
178 | 2.3. Converting AttributeTypeAndValue
|
---|
179 |
|
---|
180 | The AttributeTypeAndValue is encoded as the string representation of
|
---|
181 | the AttributeType, followed by an equals sign ('=' U+003D) character,
|
---|
182 | followed by the string representation of the AttributeValue. The
|
---|
183 | encoding of the AttributeValue is given in Section 2.4.
|
---|
184 |
|
---|
185 | If the AttributeType is defined to have a short name (descriptor)
|
---|
186 | [RFC4512] and that short name is known to be registered [REGISTRY]
|
---|
187 | [RFC4520] as identifying the AttributeType, that short name, a
|
---|
188 | <descr>, is used. Otherwise the AttributeType is encoded as the
|
---|
189 | dotted-decimal encoding, a <numericoid>, of its OBJECT IDENTIFIER.
|
---|
190 | The <descr> and <numericoid> are defined in [RFC4512].
|
---|
191 |
|
---|
192 | Implementations are not expected to dynamically update their
|
---|
193 | knowledge of registered short names. However, implementations SHOULD
|
---|
194 | provide a mechanism to allow their knowledge of registered short
|
---|
195 | names to be updated.
|
---|
196 |
|
---|
197 | 2.4. Converting an AttributeValue from ASN.1 to a String
|
---|
198 |
|
---|
199 | If the AttributeType is of the dotted-decimal form, the
|
---|
200 | AttributeValue is represented by an number sign ('#' U+0023)
|
---|
201 | character followed by the hexadecimal encoding of each of the octets
|
---|
202 | of the BER encoding of the X.500 AttributeValue. This form is also
|
---|
203 | used when the syntax of the AttributeValue does not have an LDAP-
|
---|
204 | specific ([RFC4517], Section 3.1) string encoding defined for it, or
|
---|
205 | the LDAP-specific string encoding is not restricted to UTF-8-encoded
|
---|
206 | Unicode characters. This form may also be used in other cases, such
|
---|
207 | as when a reversible string representation is desired (see Section
|
---|
208 | 5.2).
|
---|
209 |
|
---|
210 | Otherwise, if the AttributeValue is of a syntax that has a LDAP-
|
---|
211 | specific string encoding, the value is converted first to a UTF-8-
|
---|
212 | encoded Unicode string according to its syntax specification (see
|
---|
213 | [RFC4517], Section 3.3, for examples). If that UTF-8-encoded Unicode
|
---|
214 | string does not have any of the following characters that need
|
---|
215 | escaping, then that string can be used as the string representation
|
---|
216 | of the value.
|
---|
217 |
|
---|
218 | - a space (' ' U+0020) or number sign ('#' U+0023) occurring at
|
---|
219 | the beginning of the string;
|
---|
220 |
|
---|
221 | - a space (' ' U+0020) character occurring at the end of the
|
---|
222 | string;
|
---|
223 |
|
---|
224 |
|
---|
225 |
|
---|
226 |
|
---|
227 |
|
---|
228 |
|
---|
229 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 4]
|
---|
230 | |
---|
231 |
|
---|
232 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
233 |
|
---|
234 |
|
---|
235 | - one of the characters '"', '+', ',', ';', '<', '>', or '\'
|
---|
236 | (U+0022, U+002B, U+002C, U+003B, U+003C, U+003E, or U+005C,
|
---|
237 | respectively);
|
---|
238 |
|
---|
239 | - the null (U+0000) character.
|
---|
240 |
|
---|
241 | Other characters may be escaped.
|
---|
242 |
|
---|
243 | Each octet of the character to be escaped is replaced by a backslash
|
---|
244 | and two hex digits, which form a single octet in the code of the
|
---|
245 | character. Alternatively, if and only if the character to be escaped
|
---|
246 | is one of
|
---|
247 |
|
---|
248 | ' ', '"', '#', '+', ',', ';', '<', '=', '>', or '\'
|
---|
249 | (U+0020, U+0022, U+0023, U+002B, U+002C, U+003B,
|
---|
250 | U+003C, U+003D, U+003E, U+005C, respectively)
|
---|
251 |
|
---|
252 | it can be prefixed by a backslash ('\' U+005C).
|
---|
253 |
|
---|
254 | Examples of the escaping mechanism are shown in Section 4.
|
---|
255 |
|
---|
256 | 3. Parsing a String Back to a Distinguished Name
|
---|
257 |
|
---|
258 | The string representation of Distinguished Names is restricted to
|
---|
259 | UTF-8 [RFC3629] encoded Unicode [Unicode] characters. The structure
|
---|
260 | of this string representation is specified using the following
|
---|
261 | Augmented BNF [RFC4234] grammar:
|
---|
262 |
|
---|
263 | distinguishedName = [ relativeDistinguishedName
|
---|
264 | *( COMMA relativeDistinguishedName ) ]
|
---|
265 | relativeDistinguishedName = attributeTypeAndValue
|
---|
266 | *( PLUS attributeTypeAndValue )
|
---|
267 | attributeTypeAndValue = attributeType EQUALS attributeValue
|
---|
268 | attributeType = descr / numericoid
|
---|
269 | attributeValue = string / hexstring
|
---|
270 |
|
---|
271 | ; The following characters are to be escaped when they appear
|
---|
272 | ; in the value to be encoded: ESC, one of <escaped>, leading
|
---|
273 | ; SHARP or SPACE, trailing SPACE, and NULL.
|
---|
274 | string = [ ( leadchar / pair ) [ *( stringchar / pair )
|
---|
275 | ( trailchar / pair ) ] ]
|
---|
276 |
|
---|
277 | leadchar = LUTF1 / UTFMB
|
---|
278 | LUTF1 = %x01-1F / %x21 / %x24-2A / %x2D-3A /
|
---|
279 | %x3D / %x3F-5B / %x5D-7F
|
---|
280 |
|
---|
281 | trailchar = TUTF1 / UTFMB
|
---|
282 | TUTF1 = %x01-1F / %x21 / %x23-2A / %x2D-3A /
|
---|
283 |
|
---|
284 |
|
---|
285 |
|
---|
286 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 5]
|
---|
287 | |
---|
288 |
|
---|
289 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
290 |
|
---|
291 |
|
---|
292 | %x3D / %x3F-5B / %x5D-7F
|
---|
293 |
|
---|
294 | stringchar = SUTF1 / UTFMB
|
---|
295 | SUTF1 = %x01-21 / %x23-2A / %x2D-3A /
|
---|
296 | %x3D / %x3F-5B / %x5D-7F
|
---|
297 |
|
---|
298 | pair = ESC ( ESC / special / hexpair )
|
---|
299 | special = escaped / SPACE / SHARP / EQUALS
|
---|
300 | escaped = DQUOTE / PLUS / COMMA / SEMI / LANGLE / RANGLE
|
---|
301 | hexstring = SHARP 1*hexpair
|
---|
302 | hexpair = HEX HEX
|
---|
303 |
|
---|
304 | where the productions <descr>, <numericoid>, <COMMA>, <DQUOTE>,
|
---|
305 | <EQUALS>, <ESC>, <HEX>, <LANGLE>, <NULL>, <PLUS>, <RANGLE>, <SEMI>,
|
---|
306 | <SPACE>, <SHARP>, and <UTFMB> are defined in [RFC4512].
|
---|
307 |
|
---|
308 | Each <attributeType>, either a <descr> or a <numericoid>, refers to
|
---|
309 | an attribute type of an attribute value assertion (AVA). The
|
---|
310 | <attributeType> is followed by an <EQUALS> and an <attributeValue>.
|
---|
311 | The <attributeValue> is either in <string> or <hexstring> form.
|
---|
312 |
|
---|
313 | If in <string> form, a LDAP string representation asserted value can
|
---|
314 | be obtained by replacing (left to right, non-recursively) each <pair>
|
---|
315 | appearing in the <string> as follows:
|
---|
316 |
|
---|
317 | replace <ESC><ESC> with <ESC>;
|
---|
318 | replace <ESC><special> with <special>;
|
---|
319 | replace <ESC><hexpair> with the octet indicated by the <hexpair>.
|
---|
320 |
|
---|
321 | If in <hexstring> form, a BER representation can be obtained from
|
---|
322 | converting each <hexpair> of the <hexstring> to the octet indicated
|
---|
323 | by the <hexpair>.
|
---|
324 |
|
---|
325 | There is one or more attribute value assertions, separated by <PLUS>,
|
---|
326 | for a relative distinguished name.
|
---|
327 |
|
---|
328 | There is zero or more relative distinguished names, separated by
|
---|
329 | <COMMA>, for a distinguished name.
|
---|
330 |
|
---|
331 | Implementations MUST recognize AttributeType name strings
|
---|
332 | (descriptors) listed in the following table, but MAY recognize other
|
---|
333 | name strings.
|
---|
334 |
|
---|
335 |
|
---|
336 |
|
---|
337 |
|
---|
338 |
|
---|
339 |
|
---|
340 |
|
---|
341 |
|
---|
342 |
|
---|
343 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 6]
|
---|
344 | |
---|
345 |
|
---|
346 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
347 |
|
---|
348 |
|
---|
349 | String X.500 AttributeType
|
---|
350 | ------ --------------------------------------------
|
---|
351 | CN commonName (2.5.4.3)
|
---|
352 | L localityName (2.5.4.7)
|
---|
353 | ST stateOrProvinceName (2.5.4.8)
|
---|
354 | O organizationName (2.5.4.10)
|
---|
355 | OU organizationalUnitName (2.5.4.11)
|
---|
356 | C countryName (2.5.4.6)
|
---|
357 | STREET streetAddress (2.5.4.9)
|
---|
358 | DC domainComponent (0.9.2342.19200300.100.1.25)
|
---|
359 | UID userId (0.9.2342.19200300.100.1.1)
|
---|
360 |
|
---|
361 | These attribute types are described in [RFC4519].
|
---|
362 |
|
---|
363 | Implementations MAY recognize other DN string representations.
|
---|
364 | However, as there is no requirement that alternative DN string
|
---|
365 | representations be recognized (and, if so, how), implementations
|
---|
366 | SHOULD only generate DN strings in accordance with Section 2 of this
|
---|
367 | document.
|
---|
368 |
|
---|
369 | 4. Examples
|
---|
370 |
|
---|
371 | This notation is designed to be convenient for common forms of name.
|
---|
372 | This section gives a few examples of distinguished names written
|
---|
373 | using this notation. First is a name containing three relative
|
---|
374 | distinguished names (RDNs):
|
---|
375 |
|
---|
376 | UID=jsmith,DC=example,DC=net
|
---|
377 |
|
---|
378 | Here is an example of a name containing three RDNs, in which the
|
---|
379 | first RDN is multi-valued:
|
---|
380 |
|
---|
381 | OU=Sales+CN=J. Smith,DC=example,DC=net
|
---|
382 |
|
---|
383 | This example shows the method of escaping of a special characters
|
---|
384 | appearing in a common name:
|
---|
385 |
|
---|
386 | CN=James \"Jim\" Smith\, III,DC=example,DC=net
|
---|
387 |
|
---|
388 | The following shows the method for encoding a value that contains a
|
---|
389 | carriage return character:
|
---|
390 |
|
---|
391 | CN=Before\0dAfter,DC=example,DC=net
|
---|
392 |
|
---|
393 | In this RDN example, the type in the RDN is unrecognized, and the
|
---|
394 | value is the BER encoding of an OCTET STRING containing two octets,
|
---|
395 | 0x48 and 0x69.
|
---|
396 |
|
---|
397 |
|
---|
398 |
|
---|
399 |
|
---|
400 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 7]
|
---|
401 | |
---|
402 |
|
---|
403 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
404 |
|
---|
405 |
|
---|
406 | 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.0=#04024869
|
---|
407 |
|
---|
408 | Finally, this example shows an RDN whose commonName value consists of
|
---|
409 | 5 letters:
|
---|
410 |
|
---|
411 | Unicode Character Code UTF-8 Escaped
|
---|
412 | ------------------------------- ------ ------ --------
|
---|
413 | LATIN CAPITAL LETTER L U+004C 0x4C L
|
---|
414 | LATIN SMALL LETTER U U+0075 0x75 u
|
---|
415 | LATIN SMALL LETTER C WITH CARON U+010D 0xC48D \C4\8D
|
---|
416 | LATIN SMALL LETTER I U+0069 0x69 i
|
---|
417 | LATIN SMALL LETTER C WITH ACUTE U+0107 0xC487 \C4\87
|
---|
418 |
|
---|
419 | This could be encoded in printable ASCII [ASCII] (useful for
|
---|
420 | debugging purposes) as:
|
---|
421 |
|
---|
422 | CN=Lu\C4\8Di\C4\87
|
---|
423 |
|
---|
424 | 5. Security Considerations
|
---|
425 |
|
---|
426 | The following security considerations are specific to the handling of
|
---|
427 | distinguished names. LDAP security considerations are discussed in
|
---|
428 | [RFC4511] and other documents comprising the LDAP Technical
|
---|
429 | Specification [RFC4510].
|
---|
430 |
|
---|
431 | 5.1. Disclosure
|
---|
432 |
|
---|
433 | Distinguished Names typically consist of descriptive information
|
---|
434 | about the entries they name, which can be people, organizations,
|
---|
435 | devices, or other real-world objects. This frequently includes some
|
---|
436 | of the following kinds of information:
|
---|
437 |
|
---|
438 | - the common name of the object (i.e., a person's full name)
|
---|
439 | - an email or TCP/IP address
|
---|
440 | - its physical location (country, locality, city, street address)
|
---|
441 | - organizational attributes (such as department name or
|
---|
442 | affiliation)
|
---|
443 |
|
---|
444 | In some cases, such information can be considered sensitive. In many
|
---|
445 | countries, privacy laws exist that prohibit disclosure of certain
|
---|
446 | kinds of descriptive information (e.g., email addresses). Hence,
|
---|
447 | server implementers are encouraged to support Directory Information
|
---|
448 | Tree (DIT) structural rules and name forms [RFC4512], as these
|
---|
449 | provide a mechanism for administrators to select appropriate naming
|
---|
450 | attributes for entries. Administrators are encouraged to use
|
---|
451 | mechanisms, access controls, and other administrative controls that
|
---|
452 | may be available to restrict use of attributes containing sensitive
|
---|
453 | information in naming of entries. Additionally, use of
|
---|
454 |
|
---|
455 |
|
---|
456 |
|
---|
457 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 8]
|
---|
458 | |
---|
459 |
|
---|
460 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
461 |
|
---|
462 |
|
---|
463 | authentication and data security services in LDAP [RFC4513][RFC4511]
|
---|
464 | should be considered.
|
---|
465 |
|
---|
466 | 5.2. Use of Distinguished Names in Security Applications
|
---|
467 |
|
---|
468 | The transformations of an AttributeValue value from its X.501 form to
|
---|
469 | an LDAP string representation are not always reversible back to the
|
---|
470 | same BER (Basic Encoding Rules) or DER (Distinguished Encoding Rules)
|
---|
471 | form. An example of a situation that requires the DER form of a
|
---|
472 | distinguished name is the verification of an X.509 certificate.
|
---|
473 |
|
---|
474 | For example, a distinguished name consisting of one RDN with one AVA,
|
---|
475 | in which the type is commonName and the value is of the TeletexString
|
---|
476 | choice with the letters 'Sam', would be represented in LDAP as the
|
---|
477 | string <CN=Sam>. Another distinguished name in which the value is
|
---|
478 | still 'Sam', but is of the PrintableString choice, would have the
|
---|
479 | same representation <CN=Sam>.
|
---|
480 |
|
---|
481 | Applications that require the reconstruction of the DER form of the
|
---|
482 | value SHOULD NOT use the string representation of attribute syntaxes
|
---|
483 | when converting a distinguished name to the LDAP format. Instead,
|
---|
484 | they SHOULD use the hexadecimal form prefixed by the number sign ('#'
|
---|
485 | U+0023) as described in the first paragraph of Section 2.4.
|
---|
486 |
|
---|
487 | 6. Acknowledgements
|
---|
488 |
|
---|
489 | This document is an update to RFC 2253, by Mark Wahl, Tim Howes, and
|
---|
490 | Steve Kille. RFC 2253 was a product of the IETF ASID Working Group.
|
---|
491 |
|
---|
492 | This document is a product of the IETF LDAPBIS Working Group.
|
---|
493 |
|
---|
494 | 7. References
|
---|
495 |
|
---|
496 | 7.1. Normative References
|
---|
497 |
|
---|
498 | [REGISTRY] IANA, Object Identifier Descriptors Registry,
|
---|
499 | <http://www.iana.org/assignments/ldap-parameters>.
|
---|
500 |
|
---|
501 | [Unicode] The Unicode Consortium, "The Unicode Standard, Version
|
---|
502 | 3.2.0" is defined by "The Unicode Standard, Version
|
---|
503 | 3.0" (Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley, 2000. ISBN 0-201-
|
---|
504 | 61633-5), as amended by the "Unicode Standard Annex
|
---|
505 | #27: Unicode 3.1"
|
---|
506 | (http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr27/) and by the
|
---|
507 | "Unicode Standard Annex #28: Unicode 3.2"
|
---|
508 | (http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr28/).
|
---|
509 |
|
---|
510 |
|
---|
511 |
|
---|
512 |
|
---|
513 |
|
---|
514 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 9]
|
---|
515 | |
---|
516 |
|
---|
517 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
518 |
|
---|
519 |
|
---|
520 | [X.501] International Telecommunication Union -
|
---|
521 | Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "The
|
---|
522 | Directory -- Models," X.501(1993) (also ISO/IEC 9594-
|
---|
523 | 2:1994).
|
---|
524 |
|
---|
525 | [X.680] International Telecommunication Union -
|
---|
526 | Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "Abstract
|
---|
527 | Syntax Notation One (ASN.1) - Specification of Basic
|
---|
528 | Notation", X.680(1997) (also ISO/IEC 8824-1:1998).
|
---|
529 |
|
---|
530 | [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
|
---|
531 | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
|
---|
532 |
|
---|
533 | [RFC3629] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
|
---|
534 | 10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, November 2003.
|
---|
535 |
|
---|
536 | [RFC4234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
|
---|
537 | Specifications: ABNF", RFC 4234, October 2005.
|
---|
538 |
|
---|
539 | [RFC4510] Zeilenga, K., Ed., "Lightweight Directory Access
|
---|
540 | Protocol (LDAP): Technical Specification Road Map", RFC
|
---|
541 | 4510, June 2006.
|
---|
542 |
|
---|
543 | [RFC4511] Sermersheim, J., Ed., "Lightweight Directory Access
|
---|
544 | Protocol (LDAP): The Protocol", RFC 4511, June 2006.
|
---|
545 |
|
---|
546 | [RFC4512] Zeilenga, K., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
|
---|
547 | (LDAP): Directory Information Models", RFC 4512, June
|
---|
548 | 2006.
|
---|
549 |
|
---|
550 | [RFC4513] Harrison, R., Ed., "Lightweight Directory Access
|
---|
551 | Protocol (LDAP): Authentication Methods and Security
|
---|
552 | Mechanisms", RFC 4513, June 2006.
|
---|
553 |
|
---|
554 | [RFC4517] Legg, S., Ed., "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
|
---|
555 | (LDAP): Syntaxes and Matching Rules", RFC 4517, June
|
---|
556 | 2006.
|
---|
557 |
|
---|
558 | [RFC4519] Sciberras, A., Ed., "Lightweight Directory Access
|
---|
559 | Protocol (LDAP): Schema for User Applications", RFC
|
---|
560 | 4519, June 2006.
|
---|
561 |
|
---|
562 | [RFC4520] Zeilenga, K., "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
|
---|
563 | (IANA) Considerations for the Lightweight Directory
|
---|
564 | Access Protocol (LDAP)", BCP 64, RFC 4520, June 2006.
|
---|
565 |
|
---|
566 |
|
---|
567 |
|
---|
568 |
|
---|
569 |
|
---|
570 |
|
---|
571 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 10]
|
---|
572 | |
---|
573 |
|
---|
574 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
575 |
|
---|
576 |
|
---|
577 | 7.2. Informative References
|
---|
578 |
|
---|
579 | [ASCII] Coded Character Set--7-bit American Standard Code for
|
---|
580 | Information Interchange, ANSI X3.4-1986.
|
---|
581 |
|
---|
582 | [CharModel] Whistler, K. and M. Davis, "Unicode Technical Report
|
---|
583 | #17, Character Encoding Model", UTR17,
|
---|
584 | <http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr17/>, August
|
---|
585 | 2000.
|
---|
586 |
|
---|
587 | [Glossary] The Unicode Consortium, "Unicode Glossary",
|
---|
588 | <http://www.unicode.org/glossary/>.
|
---|
589 |
|
---|
590 | [X.500] International Telecommunication Union -
|
---|
591 | Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "The
|
---|
592 | Directory -- Overview of concepts, models and
|
---|
593 | services," X.500(1993) (also ISO/IEC 9594-1:1994).
|
---|
594 |
|
---|
595 | [X.511] International Telecommunication Union -
|
---|
596 | Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "The
|
---|
597 | Directory: Abstract Service Definition", X.511(1993)
|
---|
598 | (also ISO/IEC 9594-3:1993).
|
---|
599 |
|
---|
600 | [X.690] International Telecommunication Union -
|
---|
601 | Telecommunication Standardization Sector,
|
---|
602 | "Specification of ASN.1 encoding rules: Basic Encoding
|
---|
603 | Rules (BER), Canonical Encoding Rules (CER), and
|
---|
604 | Distinguished Encoding Rules (DER)", X.690(1997) (also
|
---|
605 | ISO/IEC 8825-1:1998).
|
---|
606 |
|
---|
607 | [RFC2849] Good, G., "The LDAP Data Interchange Format (LDIF) -
|
---|
608 | Technical Specification", RFC 2849, June 2000.
|
---|
609 |
|
---|
610 |
|
---|
611 |
|
---|
612 |
|
---|
613 |
|
---|
614 |
|
---|
615 |
|
---|
616 |
|
---|
617 |
|
---|
618 |
|
---|
619 |
|
---|
620 |
|
---|
621 |
|
---|
622 |
|
---|
623 |
|
---|
624 |
|
---|
625 |
|
---|
626 |
|
---|
627 |
|
---|
628 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 11]
|
---|
629 | |
---|
630 |
|
---|
631 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
632 |
|
---|
633 |
|
---|
634 | Appendix A. Presentation Issues
|
---|
635 |
|
---|
636 | This appendix is provided for informational purposes only; it is not
|
---|
637 | a normative part of this specification.
|
---|
638 |
|
---|
639 | The string representation described in this document is not intended
|
---|
640 | to be presented to humans without translation. However, at times it
|
---|
641 | may be desirable to present non-translated DN strings to users. This
|
---|
642 | section discusses presentation issues associated with non-translated
|
---|
643 | DN strings. Issues with presentation of translated DN strings are
|
---|
644 | not discussed in this appendix. Transcoding issues are also not
|
---|
645 | discussed in this appendix.
|
---|
646 |
|
---|
647 | This appendix provides guidance for applications presenting DN
|
---|
648 | strings to users. This section is not comprehensive; it does not
|
---|
649 | discuss all presentation issues that implementers may face.
|
---|
650 |
|
---|
651 | Not all user interfaces are capable of displaying the full set of
|
---|
652 | Unicode characters. Some Unicode characters are not displayable.
|
---|
653 |
|
---|
654 | It is recommended that human interfaces use the optional hex pair
|
---|
655 | escaping mechanism (Section 2.3) to produce a string representation
|
---|
656 | suitable for display to the user. For example, an application can
|
---|
657 | generate a DN string for display that escapes all non-printable
|
---|
658 | characters appearing in the AttributeValue's string representation
|
---|
659 | (as demonstrated in the final example of Section 4).
|
---|
660 |
|
---|
661 | When a DN string is displayed in free-form text, it is often
|
---|
662 | necessary to distinguish the DN string from surrounding text. While
|
---|
663 | this is often done with whitespace (as demonstrated in Section 4), it
|
---|
664 | is noted that DN strings may end with whitespace. Careful readers of
|
---|
665 | Section 3 will note that the characters '<' (U+003C) and '>' (U+003E)
|
---|
666 | may only appear in the DN string if escaped. These characters are
|
---|
667 | intended to be used in free-form text to distinguish a DN string from
|
---|
668 | surrounding text. For example, <CN=Sam\ > distinguishes the string
|
---|
669 | representation of the DN composed of one RDN consisting of the AVA
|
---|
670 | (the commonName (CN) value 'Sam ') from the surrounding text. It
|
---|
671 | should be noted to the user that the wrapping '<' and '>' characters
|
---|
672 | are not part of the DN string.
|
---|
673 |
|
---|
674 | DN strings can be quite long. It is often desirable to line-wrap
|
---|
675 | overly long DN strings in presentations. Line wrapping should be
|
---|
676 | done by inserting whitespace after the RDN separator character or, if
|
---|
677 | necessary, after the AVA separator character. It should be noted to
|
---|
678 | the user that the inserted whitespace is not part of the DN string
|
---|
679 | and is to be removed before use in LDAP. For example, the following
|
---|
680 | DN string is long:
|
---|
681 |
|
---|
682 |
|
---|
683 |
|
---|
684 |
|
---|
685 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 12]
|
---|
686 | |
---|
687 |
|
---|
688 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
689 |
|
---|
690 |
|
---|
691 | CN=Kurt D. Zeilenga,OU=Engineering,L=Redwood Shores,
|
---|
692 | O=OpenLDAP Foundation,ST=California,C=US
|
---|
693 |
|
---|
694 | So it has been line-wrapped for readability. The extra whitespace is
|
---|
695 | to be removed before the DN string is used in LDAP.
|
---|
696 |
|
---|
697 | Inserting whitespace is not advised because it may not be obvious to
|
---|
698 | the user which whitespace is part of the DN string and which
|
---|
699 | whitespace was added for readability.
|
---|
700 |
|
---|
701 | Another alternative is to use the LDAP Data Interchange Format (LDIF)
|
---|
702 | [RFC2849]. For example:
|
---|
703 |
|
---|
704 | # This entry has a long DN...
|
---|
705 | dn: CN=Kurt D. Zeilenga,OU=Engineering,L=Redwood Shores,
|
---|
706 | O=OpenLDAP Foundation,ST=California,C=US
|
---|
707 | CN: Kurt D. Zeilenga
|
---|
708 | SN: Zeilenga
|
---|
709 | objectClass: person
|
---|
710 |
|
---|
711 | Appendix B. Changes Made since RFC 2253
|
---|
712 |
|
---|
713 | This appendix is provided for informational purposes only, it is not
|
---|
714 | a normative part of this specification.
|
---|
715 |
|
---|
716 | The following substantive changes were made to RFC 2253:
|
---|
717 |
|
---|
718 | - Removed IESG Note. The IESG Note has been addressed.
|
---|
719 | - Replaced all references to ISO 10646-1 with [Unicode].
|
---|
720 | - Clarified (in Section 1) that this document does not define a
|
---|
721 | canonical string representation.
|
---|
722 | - Clarified that Section 2 describes the RECOMMENDED encoding
|
---|
723 | algorithm and that alternative algorithms are allowed. Some
|
---|
724 | encoding options described in RFC 2253 are now treated as
|
---|
725 | alternative algorithms in this specification.
|
---|
726 | - Revised specification (in Section 2) to allow short names of any
|
---|
727 | registered attribute type to appear in string representations of
|
---|
728 | DNs instead of being restricted to a "published table". Removed
|
---|
729 | "as an example" language. Added statement (in Section 3)
|
---|
730 | allowing recognition of additional names but require recognition
|
---|
731 | of those names in the published table. The table now appears in
|
---|
732 | Section 3.
|
---|
733 | - Removed specification of additional requirements for LDAPv2
|
---|
734 | implementations which also support LDAPv3 (RFC 2253, Section 4)
|
---|
735 | as LDAPv2 is now Historic.
|
---|
736 | - Allowed recognition of alternative string representations.
|
---|
737 | - Updated Section 2.4 to allow hex pair escaping of all characters
|
---|
738 | and clarified escaping for when multiple octet UTF-8 encodings
|
---|
739 |
|
---|
740 |
|
---|
741 |
|
---|
742 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 13]
|
---|
743 | |
---|
744 |
|
---|
745 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
746 |
|
---|
747 |
|
---|
748 | are present. Indicated that null (U+0000) character is to be
|
---|
749 | escaped. Indicated that equals sign ('=' U+003D) character may
|
---|
750 | be escaped as '\='.
|
---|
751 | - Rewrote Section 3 to use ABNF as defined in RFC 4234.
|
---|
752 | - Updated the Section 3 ABNF. Changes include:
|
---|
753 | + allowed AttributeType short names of length 1 (e.g., 'L'),
|
---|
754 | + used more restrictive <oid> production in AttributeTypes,
|
---|
755 | + did not require escaping of equals sign ('=' U+003D)
|
---|
756 | characters,
|
---|
757 | + did not require escaping of non-leading number sign ('#'
|
---|
758 | U+0023) characters,
|
---|
759 | + allowed space (' ' U+0020) to be escaped as '\ ',
|
---|
760 | + required hex escaping of null (U+0000) characters, and
|
---|
761 | + removed LDAPv2-only constructs.
|
---|
762 | - Updated Section 3 to describe how to parse elements of the
|
---|
763 | grammar.
|
---|
764 | - Rewrote examples.
|
---|
765 | - Added reference to documentations containing general LDAP
|
---|
766 | security considerations.
|
---|
767 | - Added discussion of presentation issues (Appendix A).
|
---|
768 | - Added this appendix.
|
---|
769 |
|
---|
770 | In addition, numerous editorial changes were made.
|
---|
771 |
|
---|
772 | Editor's Address
|
---|
773 |
|
---|
774 | Kurt D. Zeilenga
|
---|
775 | OpenLDAP Foundation
|
---|
776 |
|
---|
777 | EMail: Kurt@OpenLDAP.org
|
---|
778 |
|
---|
779 |
|
---|
780 |
|
---|
781 |
|
---|
782 |
|
---|
783 |
|
---|
784 |
|
---|
785 |
|
---|
786 |
|
---|
787 |
|
---|
788 |
|
---|
789 |
|
---|
790 |
|
---|
791 |
|
---|
792 |
|
---|
793 |
|
---|
794 |
|
---|
795 |
|
---|
796 |
|
---|
797 |
|
---|
798 |
|
---|
799 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 14]
|
---|
800 | |
---|
801 |
|
---|
802 | RFC 4514 LDAP: Distinguished Names June 2006
|
---|
803 |
|
---|
804 |
|
---|
805 | Full Copyright Statement
|
---|
806 |
|
---|
807 | Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
|
---|
808 |
|
---|
809 | This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
|
---|
810 | contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
|
---|
811 | retain all their rights.
|
---|
812 |
|
---|
813 | This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
|
---|
814 | "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
|
---|
815 | OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
|
---|
816 | ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
|
---|
817 | INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
|
---|
818 | INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
|
---|
819 | WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
|
---|
820 |
|
---|
821 | Intellectual Property
|
---|
822 |
|
---|
823 | The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
|
---|
824 | Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
|
---|
825 | pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
|
---|
826 | this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
|
---|
827 | might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
|
---|
828 | made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
|
---|
829 | on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
|
---|
830 | found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
|
---|
831 |
|
---|
832 | Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
|
---|
833 | assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
|
---|
834 | attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
|
---|
835 | such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
|
---|
836 | specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
|
---|
837 | http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
|
---|
838 |
|
---|
839 | The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
|
---|
840 | copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
|
---|
841 | rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
|
---|
842 | this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
|
---|
843 | ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
|
---|
844 |
|
---|
845 | Acknowledgement
|
---|
846 |
|
---|
847 | Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
|
---|
848 | Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
|
---|
849 |
|
---|
850 |
|
---|
851 |
|
---|
852 |
|
---|
853 |
|
---|
854 |
|
---|
855 |
|
---|
856 | Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 15]
|
---|
857 | |
---|
858 |
|
---|