view Side-By-Side changes
LDAPExt WG University of Salford Intended Category: Standards Track Sean Mullan Sun Microsystems Expires:8 March1 January 2001 1 July 20008 September 1999Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3<draft-ietf-ldapext-matchedval-01.txt><draft-ietf-ldapext-matchedval-02.txt> STATUS OF THIS MEMO This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all the 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. This Internet-Draft expires on8 March 2000.1 January 2001. Comments and suggestions on this document are encouraged. Comments on this document should be sent to the LDAPExt working group discussion list: ietf-ldapext@netscape.com or directly to the authors. ABSTRACT This document describes a control for the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol v3 that is used to return a subset of attribute values from an entry, specifically, only those values thatcontributed to the search filter evaluating to TRUE.match a "values return" filter. Without support for this control, a client must retrieve all of an attribute's values and search for specific values locally. 1. Introduction When reading an attribute from an entry using LDAP v2 [1] or LDAPv3 [2], it is normally only possible to read either the attribute type, or the attribute type and all its values. It is not possible to selectively read just a few of the attribute values. If an attribute holds many values, for example, the userCertificate attribute, or the subschema publishing operational attributes objectClasses and attributeTypes [3], then it may be desirable for the user to be able to selectively retrieve a subset of the values, specifically, those attribute values that matchthe selection criteria as specified by thesome userin the filter.defined selection criteria. Without the control specified in this [ID/standard] a client must read all of the attribute's values and filter out the unwanted values, necessitating the client to implement the matching rules. It also requires the client to potentially read and process many irrelevant values, which can be inefficient if the values are large or complex, or there are many values stored per attribute. This Internet Draft specifies an LDAPv3 control to enable a user to return only those values that matched (i.e. returned TRUE to) one or more elements ofthe Searcha newly defined "values return" filter. This control can be especially useful when used in conjunction with extensible matching rules that match on one or more components of complex binary attribute values. Thecontrol has been described in such a way as to be fully compatible with the matchedValuesOnly boolean of the X.500 DAP [4] Search argument, as amended in the latest version [6]. Thekey words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [5]. 2. ThematchedValuesOnlyvaluesReturnFilter Control ThematchedValuesOnlyvaluesReturnFilter control MAY be critical or non-critical as determined by the user. It is only applicable to the Search operation, and SHALL be ignored by the server if it is present on any other LDAP operation (even if marked critical on such operations). The object identifier for this control is1.2.826.0.1.3344810.2.21.2.826.0.1.3344810.2.3 The controlValue isabsent.ValuesReturnFilter ::= SEQUENCE OF SimpleFilterItem SimpleFilterItem ::= CHOICE { equalityMatch [3] AttributeValueAssertion, substrings [4] SubstringFilter, greaterOrEqual [5] AttributeValueAssertion, lessOrEqual [6] AttributeValueAssertion, present [7] AttributeDescription, approxMatch [8] AttributeValueAssertion, extensibleMatch [9] SimpleMatchingAssertion } SimpleMatchingAssertion ::= SEQUENCE { matchingRule [1] MatchingRuleId OPTIONAL, type [2] AttributeDescription OPTIONAL, matchValue [3] AssertionValue} All the above data types have their standard meanings as defined in [2]. If the server supports this control, the server MUST make use of the control as follows: (1) The Search Filter is first executed in order to determine which entries satisfy the Search criteria. The control has no impact on this step. (2) If the typesOnly parameter of the Search Request is TRUE, the control has no effect and the Search Request SHOULD be processed as if the control had not been specified.(2)(3) If the attributes parameter of the Search Request consists of a list containing only the attribute with OID "1.1" (specifying that no attributes are to be returned), the control has no effect and the Search Request SHOULD be processed as if the control had not been specified.(3)(4) For each attribute listed in the attributes parameter of the Search Request, the server MUST apply the control as follows: i) Every attribute value that evaluates TRUE against one or morefilters, excludingelements of theignored filters (see below),ValuesReturnFilter islogically marked by the server as contributing toplaced in thefilter matching.SearchResultEntry. ii)AttributesEvery attribute value thathave no values marked as contributing, haveevaluates FALSE or undefined against alltheir values returned toelements of theuser. iii) Attributes that have one or more values marked as contributing have onlyValuesReturnFilter is not placed in thecontributingSearchResultEntry. An attribute that has no values selected is returnedto the user, whilst the other valueswith an empty set of vals. Editor's Note. There is possibly a more efficient but slightly more complex way of achieving thesame attribute (if there are any) are not returned. Certain filters are ignored forvalue filtering. An alternative is to remove thepurposes'present' SimpleFilterItem (which obviously evaluates true for every attribute value ofmarkingthe 'present' attributevalues as contributing. These are: the ôpresentö filter, since this filter does not test againstdescription), and to say that any attributevalues; the ônotö filter, since this would havewhose type is not mentioned in theeffect of markingValuesReturnFilter is not filtered and has alltheits attribute valuesexcept the one(s) that matched the non-negated filter.returned. Comments please. 3. Relationship to X.500 ThematchedValuesOnlycontroldefined in this documentisderived froma superset of the matchedValuesOnly booleanparameterof theX.511 (93)X.500 DAP [4] Searchoperation [4]. Note however thatargument, as amended inX.511 (93),thematchedValuesOnly parameter is ignored when used with an "equality" match FilterItem, and solatest version [6]. Close examination of theuser must usematchedValuesOnly boolean by theextensibleMatch filter along withLDAPExt group revealed ambiguities and complexities in theequality matching rule ifMVO boolean that could not easily be resolved. For example, are onlymatchedthose attribute valuesare wanted with equality matching. This slightly spurious equality match restriction has been removed from the 2000 version of X.511 [6]. For LDAP servers acting as a gatewaythat contributed toan X.500 directory, the matched valuesOnly control can be directly mapped ontotheX.511 matchedValuesOnly Search parameter as follows: (1) If the matchedValuesOnly control is specified,overall truth of thematchedValuesOnly DAP parameter MUST be set to true. Iffilter governed by thecontrol criticality value is TRUE then bit 17MVO boolean, or all values ofthe DAP criticalExtensions MUST be set. (2) If an equality matching rule is specifiedattributes in the filterofgoverned by theLDAPv3 search operation, thenMVO boolean, even ifoperating with a pre-2000 edition DSA, the corresponding equality FilterItem contained intheX.511 filter parameter MUST NOT be used, but rather the extensibleMatchfilter itemMUST be used instead (the assertion consisting of the equality matching rule,containing the attributetypeevaluated tomatch on, andfalse. For this reason theasserted value). When operatingLDAP group decided to replace the MVO boolean withDSAsa simple filter thatsupport the 2000 DAP enhancement, the equality FilterItem MAY be used.removes any uncertainty as to whether an attribute value has been selected or not. 4. Examples (1) The first example simply shows how the control can be used to selectively read a subset of attribute values. The entry below represents a groupOfNames object class containing several members from different organizations. cn: Cross Organizational Standards Body member:cn=joe, o=acmecn=joe,o=acme member:cn=alice, o=acmecn=alice,o=acme member:cn=bob, o=foocn=bob,o=foo member:cn=sue, o=barcn=sue,o=bar An LDAP search operation is specified with a baseObject set to the DN of the entry, a baseObject scope, a filter set to "member=*o=acme", and the list of attributes to be returned set to "member". In addition, amatchedValuesOnlyValuesReturnFilter control isattachedset tothe search request."member=*o=acme". The search results returned by the server would consist of the following entry: cn: Cross Organizational Standards Body member: cn=joe, o=acme member: cn=alice, o=acme (2) The second example shows how the controlhas no effectcan be set to match on attributes thatdoare (mail) and are notparticipate in(telephoneNumber) part of the search filter. It also shows how a user can filter some attribute values (mail) and not others (telephoneNumber). The entries below represent inetOrgPerson [7] object classes located below some distinguished name in the directory. cn: Sean Mullan mail: sean.mullan@sun.com mail: mullan@east.sun.com telephoneNumber: +1 781 442 0926 telephoneNumber: 555-9999 cn: David Chadwick mail: d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk An LDAP search operation is specified with a baseObject set to the DN of the entry, a subtree scope, a filter set to "(|(mail=sean.mullan@sun.com)(mail=d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk))", and the list of attributes to be returned set to "mail telephoneNumber". In addition, amatchedValuesOnlyValuesReturnFilter control isattachedset tothe search request."mail=sean.mullan@sun.com, mail=d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk, telephoneNumber=*" The search results returned by the server would consist of the following entries: cn: Sean Mullan mail: sean.mullan@sun.com telephoneNumber: +1 781 442 0926 telephoneNumber: 555-9999 cn: David Chadwick mail: d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk Note that the control has no effect on the values returned for the "telephoneNumber" attribute (all of the values are returned), sinceit didthe control specified that all values should be returned. (3) The third example shows how one might retrieve a single attribute type schema definition for the "gunk" attribute with OID 1.2.3.4.5 Assume the subschema subentry is held somewhere below the root entry with RDN "subschema subentry", and this holds an attributeTypes operational attribute holding the descriptions of the 35 attributes known to this server (each description is held as a single attribute value of the attributeTypes attribute). cn: subschema subentry objectClass: subschema attributeTypes: ( 2.5.4.3 NAME 'cn' SUP name ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.4.6 NAME 'c' SUP name SINGLE-VALUE ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.4.0 NAME 'objectClass' EQUALITY objectIdentifierMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38 ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.18.2 NAME 'modifyTimestamp' EQUALITY generalizedTimeMatch ORDERING generalizedTimeOrderingMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.24 SINGLE-VALUE NO-USER- MODIFICATION USAGE directoryOperation ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.21.6 NAME 'objectClasses' EQUALITY objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.37 USAGE directoryOperation ) attributeTypes: ( 1.2.3.4.5 NAME 'gunk' EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch SUBSTR caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.44{64} ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.21.5 NAME 'attributeTypes' EQUALITY objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.3 USAGE directoryOperation ) plus another 28 - you get the idea. The user creates an LDAP search operation with a baseObject set to root, a subtree scope, a filter set to "objectClass=subschema", the list of attributes to be returned set to "attributeTypes", and the ValuesReturnFilter set to "attributeTypes=1.2.3.4.5" The search result returned by the server would consist of the following entry: cn: subschema subentry attributeTypes: ( 1.2.3.4.5 NAME 'gunk' EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch SUBSTR caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.44{64} ) (4) The final example shows how the control can be set to match on attributes that are notparticipate inpart of the search filter. For example, searching for all entries that have an email address in the sun.com domain, and returning the telephone number for any attribute values that start with "555". The entries below represent inetOrgPerson [7] object classes located below some distinguished name in the directory. cn: Sean Mullan mail: sean.mullan@sun.com mail: mullan@east.sun.com telephoneNumber: +1 781 442 0926 telephoneNumber: 555-9999 cn: David Chadwick mail: d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk An LDAP search operation is specified with a baseObject set to the DN of the entry, a subtree scope, a filter set to "mail=*sun.com", and the list of attributes to be returned set to "telephoneNumber". In addition, a ValuesReturnFilter control is set to "telephoneNumber=555*" The search results returned by the server would consist of the following entry: cn: Sean Mullan telephoneNumber: 555-9999 5. Security Considerations This Internet Draft does not discuss security issues at all. Note that attribute values MUST only be returned if the access controls applied by the LDAP server allow them to be returned, and in this respect the effect of thematchedValuesOnlyValuesReturnFilter control is of no consequence. Note that thematchedValuesOnlyValuesReturnFilter control may have a positive effect on the deployment of public key infrastructures. Certain PKI operations, like searching for specific certificates, become more practical (when combined with X.509 certificate matching rules at the server) and more scalable, since the control avoids the downloading of potentially large numbers of irrelevant certificates which would have to be processed and filtered locally (which in some cases is very difficult to perform). 6. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank members of the LDAPExt list for their constructive comments on earlier versions of this draft, and in particular to Harald Alvestrand who first suggested having an attribute return filter and Bruce Greenblatt who first proposed a syntax for this control. 7. Copyright Copyright (C) The Internet Society (date). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.7.8. References [1] Yeong, W., Howes, T., and Kille, S. "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol", RFC 1777, March 1995. [2] M. Wahl, T. Howes, S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3)", Dec. 1997, RFC 2251 [3] M. Wahl, A. Coulbeck, T. Howes, S. Kille,ôLightweight"Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Attribute SyntaxDefinitionsö,Definitions", RFC 2252, Dec 1997 [4] ITU-T Rec. X.511, "The Directory: Abstract Service Definition", 1993. [5] S.Bradner. "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997. [6]ôFPDAMs toISO/IEC 9594Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9 to support the/ ITU-TRec. F.510 "Automated Directory Assistance, White PagesRec X.511 (2000) The Directory: Abstract ServiceDefinitions"ö, Collaborative ITU-T/SG7/Q15 and JTC1/SC6/WG7 OSI Directory Meeting 7-15 April 1999, Orlando, USADefinition. [7] M. Smith. "Definition of the inetOrgPerson LDAP Object Class", Internet Draft <draft-smith-ldap-inetorgperson-03.txt>, April 1999.8.9. Authors Addresses David Chadwick IS Institute University of Salford Salford M5 4WT England Email: d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk Sean Mullan Sun MicrosystemsLaboratories One Network Drive Burlington MA 01803-0902 USAEast Point Business Park Dublin 3 Ireland Tel:+1 781 442-0926 Fax: +1 781 442-1692+353 1 853 0655 Email: sean.mullan@sun.com Internet-Draft Returning Matched Values with LDAPv38 September 1999 51 July 2000 1 ----