idnits 2.17.1 draft-zeilenga-ldap-user-schema-07.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** It looks like you're using RFC 3978 boilerplate. You should update this to the boilerplate described in the IETF Trust License Policy document (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), which is required now. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3667, Section 5.1 on line 23. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.5 on line 868. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 1 on line 841. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 2 on line 848. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 3 on line 854. ** Found boilerplate matching RFC 3978, Section 5.4, paragraph 1 (on line 860), which is fine, but *also* found old RFC 2026, Section 10.4C, paragraph 1 text on line 39. ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.1 IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line, instead of the newer IETF Trust Copyright according to RFC 4748. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.5 Disclaimer, instead of the newer disclaimer which includes the IETF Trust according to RFC 4748. ** The document uses RFC 3667 boilerplate or RFC 3978-like boilerplate instead of verbatim RFC 3978 boilerplate. After 6 May 2005, submission of drafts without verbatim RFC 3978 boilerplate is not accepted. The following non-3978 patterns matched text found in the document. That text should be removed or replaced: By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, or will be disclosed, and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of current Internet-Drafts -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of Shadow Directories. == It seems as if not all pages are separated by form feeds - found 0 form feeds but 20 pages Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The 'Obsoletes: ' line in the draft header should list only the _numbers_ of the RFCs which will be obsoleted by this document (if approved); it should not include the word 'RFC' in the list. == The 'Updates: ' line in the draft header should list only the _numbers_ of the RFCs which will be updated by this document (if approved); it should not include the word 'RFC' in the list. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document seems to lack the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? (The document does seem to have the reference to RFC 2119 which the ID-Checklist requires). -- 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 (24 October 2004) is 7123 days in the past. Is this intentional? 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: 'RFC2822' is mentioned on line 639, but not defined ** Obsolete undefined reference: RFC 2822 (Obsoleted by RFC 5322) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2822 (ref. 'RFC2821') (Obsoleted by RFC 5322) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3490 (Obsoleted by RFC 5890, RFC 5891) -- No information found for draft-ietf-ldapbis-roadmap-xx - is the name correct? -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'Roadmap' -- No information found for draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-xx - is the name correct? -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'Models' -- No information found for draft-ietf-ldapbis-syntaxes-xx - is the name correct? -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'Syntaxes' -- No information found for draft-ietf-ldapbis-user-schema-xx - is the name correct? -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'Schema' -- No information found for draft-ietf-ldapbis-authmeth-xx - is the name correct? -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'AuthMeth' -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 1274 (Obsoleted by RFC 4524) -- No information found for draft-ietf-ldapbis-bcp64-xx - is the name correct? Summary: 11 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 6 warnings (==), 19 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 INTERNET-DRAFT Editor: Kurt D. Zeilenga 2 Intended Category: Standard Track OpenLDAP Foundation 3 Expires in six months 24 October 2004 4 Obsoletes: RFC 1274 5 Updates: RFC 2798 7 LDAP: Additional Schema Elements 8 10 Status of this Memo 12 This document is intended to be, after appropriate review and 13 revision, submitted to the RFC Editor as a Standard Track document. 14 Distribution of this memo is unlimited. Technical discussion of this 15 document will take place on the IETF LDAPEXT mailing list 16 . Please send editorial comments directly to the 17 author . 19 By submitting this Internet-Draft, I accept the provisions of Section 20 4 of RFC 3667. By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any 21 applicable patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been 22 disclosed, or will be disclosed, and any of which I become aware will 23 be disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668. 25 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task 26 Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other 27 groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. 29 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 30 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 31 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material 32 or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 34 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 35 . The list of 36 Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 37 . 39 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. 41 Please see the Full Copyright section near the end of this document 42 for more information. 44 Abstract 45 This document provides a collection of schema elements for use with 46 the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol from COSINE and Internet 47 X.500 pilot projects. 49 Table of Contents (to be expanded by editor) 51 Status of this Memo 1 52 Abstract 53 Conventions 2 54 Table of Contents 55 1. Background and Intended Use 3 56 2. Terminology and Conventions 57 3. Attribute Types 58 3.1. associatedDomain 59 3.2. associatedName 60 3.3. buildingName 61 3.3. co 8 62 3.5. documentAuthor 63 3.6. documentIdentifier 64 3.7. documentLocation 65 3.8. documentPublisher 9 66 3.9. documentTitle 67 3.10. documentVersion 68 3.11. drink 69 3.12. homePhone 10 70 3.13. homePostalAddress 71 3.14. host 72 3.16. info 73 3.17. mail 11 74 3.18. manager 75 3.19. mobile 76 3.20. organizationalStatus 77 3.21. pager 78 3.22. personalTitle 79 3.23. roomNumber 80 3.24. secretary 13 81 3.26. uniqueIdentifier 82 3.27. userClass 14 83 4. Object Classes 84 4.1. account 85 4.2. document 86 4.3. documentSeries 15 87 4.4. domainRelatedObject 88 4.5. friendlyCountry 89 4.6. rFC822LocalPart 90 4.7. room 16 91 4.8. simpleSecurityObject 92 5. Security Considerations 93 6. IANA Considerations 17 94 7. Acknowledgments 18 95 8. Author's Address 96 9. References 19 97 Full Copyright 20 99 1. Background and Intended Use 101 This document provides descriptions of additional for schema elements 102 for use with the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) 103 [Roadmap]. The elements were originally introduced for use in the 104 COSINE and Internet X.500 pilot projects [RFC1274]. This document 105 adapts the schema elements for use in modern directory applications, 106 while preserving established syntaxes and semantics. 108 This document, together with RFC 2247 and [Schema], obsoletes RFC 109 1274. Some of these items were described in the inetOrgPerson 110 [RFC2798] schema. This document supersedes these descriptions. This 111 document, together with [Schema], replaces section 9.1.3 of RFC 2798. 113 2. Terminology and Conventions 115 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 116 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 117 document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119]. 119 DIT stands for Directory Information Tree. 120 DN stands for Distinguished Name. 121 DSA stands for Directory System Agent, a server. 122 DSE stands for DSA-Specific Entry. 123 DUA stands for Directory User Agent, a client. 125 These terms are discussed in [Models]. 127 Schema definitions are provided using LDAP description formats 128 [Models]. Definitions provided here are formatted (line wrapped) for 129 readability. 131 3. Attribute Types 133 This section details attribute types for use in LDAP. 135 3.1. associatedDomain 136 The associatedDomain attribute type specifies DNS domains [RFC1034] 137 which are associated with an object. For example, the entry in the 138 DIT with a DN might have an associated domain of 139 "example.com". 141 ( 0.9.2342.19200300.100.1.37 NAME 'associatedDomain' 142 EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match 143 SUBSTR caseIgnoreIA5SubstringsMatch 144 SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 ) 146 The IA5String (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26) syntax and the 147 caseIgnoreIA5Match and caseIgnoreIA5SubstringsMatch rules are 148 described in [Syntaxes]. 150 It is noted that the directory will not ensure that values of this 151 attribute conform to the production [RFC1034]. It is the 152 application responsibility to ensure domains it stores in this 153 attribute are appropriately represented. 155 It is also noted that applications supporting Internationalized Domain 156 Names SHALL use the ToASCII method [RFC3490] to produce