idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-svrloc-nisplus-scheme-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Cannot find the required boilerplate sections (Copyright, IPR, etc.) in this document. Expected boilerplate is as follows today (2024-04-25) according to https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info : IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.a: This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 2: Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 3: This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Missing expiration date. The document expiration date should appear on the first and last page. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about Internet-Drafts being working documents. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about 6 months document validity -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of current Internet-Drafts. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of Shadow Directories. == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) ** The document seems to lack an Authors' Addresses Section. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (22 December 1998) is 9256 days in the past. Is this intentional? -- Found something which looks like a code comment -- if you have code sections in the document, please surround them with '' and '' lines. Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Missing reference section? '1' on line 105 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? '2' on line 108 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? '3' on line 112 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? '4' on line 116 looks like a reference Summary: 8 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 7 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Service Location Working Group Jonathan Wood 3 INTERNET DRAFT Roberto Tam 4 Sun Microsystems, Inc. 5 22 December 1998 7 The NIS+ Service Type 8 draft-ietf-svrloc-nisplus-scheme-00.txt 10 Status of This Memo 12 This document is a submission by the Service Location Working Group 13 of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Comments should be 14 submitted to the srvloc@srvloc.org mailing list. 16 This document is an Internet-Draft. Internet-Drafts are working 17 documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, 18 and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute 19 working documents as Internet-Drafts. 21 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 22 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at 23 any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet- Drafts as reference 24 material or to cite them other than as ``work in progress.'' 26 To view the entire list of current Internet-Drafts, please check 27 the ``1id-abstracts.txt'' listing contained in the Internet-Drafts 28 Shadow Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), ftp.nordu.net (Northern 29 Europe), ftp.nis.garr.it (Southern Europe), munnari.oz.au (Pacific 30 Rim), ftp.ietf.org (US East Coast), or ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast). 32 Distribution of this memo is unlimited. 34 Abstract 36 This document describes the NIS+ service type. NIS+ is a naming 37 service which serves as a repository for UNIX-style system 38 information. This service type can be used to dynamically discover 39 NIS+ servers. 41 1. Introduction 43 NIS+ is the succeeding iteration of NIS (also known as YP). It 44 stands for "Network Information Service+," and uses ONC RPC [1] 45 as its transport mechanism. This document describes a template 46 providing a service: URL and attributes useful for dynamically 47 discovering NIS+ servers; this type can be used with SLP [2]. 48 Service templates and service: schemes are defined in [3]. 50 This type is intended to be used as a concrete portion of the 51 abstract naming-directory type defined in [4]. The NIS+ type 52 includes all attributes from the naming-directory abstract type, 53 and defines two new attributes specific to NIS+ security. 55 For usage examples, refer to [4]. 57 2. The NIS+ Service Type 59 Names of submitters: Jonathan Wood 60 Roberto Tam 61 Language of service template: en 62 Security Considerations: 63 The nisplus service type inherits the security considerations from 64 the naming-directory service type [3]. Additionally, if SLP is 65 used to transport public keys, measures should be taken to insure 66 the integrity of these public keys across the network. One possible 67 measure is to use SLP security, which protects the integrity of 68 SLP payloads. 70 Template text: 71 -------------------------template begins here----------------------- 72 template-type=naming-directory:nisplus 74 template-version=0.0 76 template-description= 77 This is a concrete type; the abstract type for this service 78 is naming-directory (described in [4]). This type is used by 79 NIS+ servers to advertise their services and NIS+ clients 80 which wish to discover NIS+ servers. 82 template-url-syntax= 83 url-path = "nisplus://" addr "/" directory 84 addr = ipv4-addr 85 directory = string "." / string "." directory 86 ipv4-addr = 1*3DIGIT 3( "." 1*3DIGIT ) 87 string = ISO Latin 1 character set except the 88 character '/' (slash). The initial character 89 may not be a terminal character or the 90 characters '@' (at), '+' (plus), or (`-') 91 hyphen 93 security= string M 94 # security mechanisms supported by this server 95 none,dh,dh-ext 97 key= string M 98 # the stringified public key(s) and other keying material for 99 # this server. 101 --------------------------template ends here------------------------ 103 References: 105 [1] Sun Microsystems, Inc., RPC: Remote Procedure Call: Protocol 106 Specification Version 2, RFC 1057 June 1988. 108 [2] E. Guttman, C. Perkins, J. Veizades, M. Day. Service Location 109 Protocol. draft-ietf-svrloc-protocol-v2-10.txt, July 1998 (work in 110 progress). 112 [3] E. Guttman, C. Perkins, J. Kempf, Service Templates and service: 113 Schemes. draft-ietf-svrloc-service-scheme-12.txt 114 March, 1998 (work in progress). 116 [4] J. Wood, R. Tam, The Naming and Directory Service Abstract Type. 117 draft-ietf-svrloc-naming-directory-00.txt, November 1998 (work in 118 progress).