view Side-By-Side changes
INTERNET-DRAFT S. Leggdraft-legg-ldapext-component-matching-06.txtdraft-legg-ldapext-component-matching-07.txt Adacel Technologies Intended Category: Standard Track March1,27, 2002 LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. 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 asInternet- Drafts.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. Distribution of this document is unlimited. Comments should be sent to the LDAPEXT working group mailing list <ietf-ldapext@netscape.com> or to the author. This Internet-Draft expires on127 September 2002. 1. Abstract The syntaxes of attributes inan LDAPa Lightweight Directory Access Protocol or X.500 directory range from simple data types, such as text string, integer, or boolean, to complex structured data types, such as the syntaxes of the directory schema operational attributes. The matching rules defined for the complex syntaxes, if any, usually only provide the most immediately useful matching capability. This document defines generic matching rules that can match any user selected component parts in an attribute value of any arbitrarilycomplex attribute syntax. GenericLegg Expires127 September 2002 [Page 1] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March1,27, 2002string encodings forcomplex attributeand assertion values of arbitrary syntax are also defined. The key 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 [1].syntax. 2. Table of Contents 1. Abstract ...................................................... 1 2. Table of Contents ............................................. 2 3. Introduction ..................................................32 4. Conventions ................................................... 4 5. ComponentAssertion ............................................ 54.15.1 Component Reference .......................................6 4.1.15 5.1.1 Component Type Substitutions ......................... 74.1.25.1.2 Referencing SET, SEQUENCE and CHOICE Components ...... 84.1.35.1.3 Referencing SET OF and SEQUENCE OF Components ........ 94.1.45.1.4 Referencing Components of Parameterized Types ........ 104.1.55.1.5 Component Referencing Example ........................ 104.1.65.1.6 Referencing Components of Open Types ................. 114.1.6.15.1.6.1 Open Type Referencing Example ................... 124.1.75.1.7 Referencing Contained Types .......................... 134.1.7.15.1.7.1 Contained Type Referencing Example .............. 144.25.2 Matching of Components .................................... 154.2.15.2.1 Applicability of Existing Matching Rules ............. 164.2.1.15.2.1.1 String Matching ................................. 164.2.1.25.2.1.2 Telephone Number Matching .......................18 4.2.1.317 5.2.1.3 Distinguished Name Matching .....................19 4.2.217 5.2.2 Additional Useful Matching Rules .....................19 4.2.2.117 5.2.2.1 The rdnMatch Matching Rule ......................19 4.2.2.218 5.2.2.2 The OpenAssertionType Syntax ....................20 4.2.2.318 5.2.2.3 The enumeratedMatch Matching Rule ...............20 4.2.2.419 5.2.2.4 The presentMatch Matching Rule ..................21 4.2.319 5.2.3 Summary of Useful Matching Rules .....................22 5.20 6. ComponentFilter ...............................................23 6.22 7. The componentFilterMatch Matching Rule ........................24 7.23 8. Equality Matching of Complex Components .......................26 7.124 8.1 The allComponentsMatch Matching Rule ......................26 7.225 8.2 Deriving Component Equality Matching Rules ................28 7.327 8.3 The directoryComponentsMatch Matching Rule ................30 8. Generic String Encoding Rules ................................. 31 8.1 GSER Transfer Syntax ...................................... 3829 9. Component Matching Examples ...................................3930 10. Security Considerations ......................................4536 11. Acknowledgements .............................................4537 12. Normative References .........................................4537 13. Informative References .......................................46 Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 2] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 200238 14. Intellectual Property Notice .................................4738 15. Copyright Notice .............................................4739 16. Author's Address .............................................4839 3. Introduction Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 2] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 The structure or data type of data held in an attribute of an LDAP[4][3] or X.500 [18] directory is described by the attribute's syntax. Attribute syntaxes range from simple data types, such as text string, integer, or boolean, to complex data types, for example, the syntaxes of the directory schema operational attributes. In X.500, the attribute syntaxes are explicitly described by ASN.1 [11] type definitions. ASN.1 type notation has a number of simple data types (e.g. PrintableString, INTEGER, BOOLEAN), and combining types (i.e. SET, SEQUENCE, SET OF, SEQUENCE OF, and CHOICE) for constructing arbitrarily complex data types from simpler component types. In LDAP, theattributesattribute syntaxes are usually described by ABNF[3][2] though there is an implied association between the LDAP attribute syntaxes and the X.500 ASN.1 types. To a large extent, the data types of attribute values in either an LDAP or X.500 directory are described by ASN.1 types. This formal description can be exploited to identify component parts of an attribute value for a variety of purposes. This document addresses attribute value matching. With any complex attribute syntax there is normally a requirement to partially match an attribute value of that syntax by matching only selected components of the value. Typically, matching rules specific to the attribute syntax are defined to fill this need. These highly specific matching rules usually only provide the most immediately useful matching capability. Some complex attribute syntaxes don't even have an equality matching rule let alone any additional matching rules for partial matching. This document defines a generic way of matching user selected components in an attribute value of any arbitrarily complex attribute syntax, where that syntax is described using ASN.1 type notation. All of the type notations defined in [11] are supported. Section45 describes the ComponentAssertion, a testable assertion about the value of a component of an attribute value of any complex syntax. Section56 introduces the ComponentFilter assertion, which is an expression of ComponentAssertions. The ComponentFilter enables more powerful filter matching of components in an attribute value.Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 3] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002Section67 defines the componentFilterMatch matching rule, which enables a ComponentFilter to be evaluated against attribute values. Section78 defines matching rules for component-wise equality matching of attribute values of any syntax described by an ASN.1 type definition.The native LDAP (i.e. "string") encodings for attribute syntaxes defined in ABNF do not clearly or consistently delineate the component parts of an attribute value. A regular and uniform string encoding for arbitrary component data types is needed forExamples showing theassertion syntaxusage ofthecomponentFilterMatchmatching rule.are in Section8 defines encoding rules, called9. Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 3] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 For a new attribute syntax, the Generic String Encoding Rulesor GSER, for a human readable text encoding (based on ASN.1 value notation) for an ASN.1 value of any ASN.1 type. Though primarily intended for assertion syntaxes in component matching rules, these encoding rules could also be used for new attribute syntaxes, or in other domains where human readable renderings of ASN.1 values would be useful. Note that "ASN.1 value" does not mean a BER encoded value. The ASN.1 value is an abstract concept that is independent of any particular encoding. BER is just one possible encoding of an ASN.1 value. The component matching rules operate at the abstract level without regard for the possible encodings of a value. Examples showing the usage of componentFilterMatch are in Section 9. For a new attribute syntax,[7] and the specifications in sections45 to 8 of this document make it possible to fully and precisely define, thenative LDAPLDAP-specific encoding, the LDAP and X.500 binary encoding (and possibly other encodings in the future, e.g. XML via XER), a suitable equality matching rule, and a comprehensive collection of component matching capabilities, by simply writing down an ASN.1 type definition for the syntax. These implicit definitions are also automatically extended if the ASN.1 type is later extended. The algorithmic relationship between the ASN.1 type definition, the various encodings and the component matching behaviour makes directory server implementation support for the component matching rules amenable to automatic code generation from ASN.1 type definitions. Schema designers have the choice of storing related items of data as a single attribute value of a complex syntax in some entry, or as a subordinate entry where the related data items are stored as separate attribute values of simpler syntaxes. The inability to search component parts of a complex syntax has been used as an argument for favouring the subordinate entries approach. The component matching rules provide the analogous matching capability on an attribute value of a complex syntax that a search filter has on a subordinate entry.Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 4] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002Most LDAP syntaxes have corresponding ASN.1 type definitions, though they are usually not reproduced or referenced alongside the formal definition of the LDAP syntax. Syntaxes defined with only a character string encoding, i.e. without an explicit or implied corresponding ASN.1 type definition, cannot use the component matching capabilities described in this document unless and until a semantically equivalent ASN.1 type definition is defined for them.In the remainder of4. Conventions Throughout this document "type"willshall be taken to mean an ASN.1 type unless explicitly qualified as an attribute type, and "value"willshall be taken to mean an ASN.1 value unless explicitly qualified as an attribute value. Note that "ASN.1 value" does not mean a BER [19] encoded value. The ASN.1 value is an abstract concept that is independent of any particular encoding. BER is just one possible encoding of an ASN.1 value. The component matching rules operate at the abstract level without regard for the possible encodings of a value. Attribute type and matching rule definitions in this document are provided in both the X.500 [8] and LDAP[5][4] description formats. Note that the LDAP descriptions have been rendered with additionalwhite- spaceLegg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 4] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 white-space and line breaks for the sake of readability.4.The key 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 [1]. 5. ComponentAssertion A ComponentAssertion is an assertion about the presence, or values of, components within an ASN.1 value, i.e. an instance of an ASN.1 type. The ASN.1 value is typically an attribute value, where the ASN.1 type is the syntax of the attribute. However a ComponentAssertion may also be applied to a component part of an attribute value. The assertion evaluates to either TRUE, FALSE or undefined for each tested ASN.1 value. A ComponentAssertion is described by the following ASN.1 type (assumed to be defined with "EXPLICIT TAGS" in force): ComponentAssertion ::= SEQUENCE { component ComponentReference, useDefaultValues BOOLEAN DEFAULT TRUE, rule MATCHING-RULE.&id, value MATCHING-RULE.&AssertionType } ComponentReference ::= UTF8String MATCHING-RULE.&id equates to the OBJECT IDENTIFIER of a matching rule. MATCHING-RULE.&AssertionType is an open type (formally known as the ANY type). The "component" field of a ComponentAssertion identifies which component part of a value of some ASN.1 type is to be tested, the "useDefaultValues" field indicates whether DEFAULT values are to be substituted for absent component values, the "rule" field indicatesLegg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 5] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002how the component is to be tested, and the "value" field is an asserted ASN.1 value against which the component is tested. The ASN.1 type of the asserted value is determined by the chosen rule. The fields of a ComponentAssertion are described in detail in the following sections.4.15.1 Component Reference The component field in a ComponentAssertion is a UTF8 character string[7][6] whose textual content is a component reference,identifying aLegg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 5] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 identifying a component part of some ASN.1 type or value. A component reference conforms to the following ABNF[3],[2], which extends the notation defined in Clause 14 of [11]: component-reference = ComponentId *( "." ComponentId ) ComponentId = identifier / from-beginning / count / from-end / ; extends Clause 14 content / ; extends Clause 14 select / ; extends Clause 14 all identifier = lowercase *alphanumeric *(hyphen 1*alphanumeric) alphanumeric = uppercase / lowercase / decimal-digit uppercase = %x41-5A ; "A" to "Z" lowercase = %x61-7A ; "a" to "z" hyphen = "-" from-beginning = positive-number count = "0" from-end = "-" positive-number content = %x63.6F.6E.74.65.6E.74 ; "content" select = "(" Value *( "," Value ) ")" all = "*" positive-number = non-zero-digit *decimal-digit decimal-digit = %x30-39 ; "0" to "9" non-zero-digit = %x31-39 ; "1" to "9" An <identifier> conforms to the definition of an identifier in ASN.1 notation (Clause 11.3 of [11]). It begins with a lowercase letter and is followed by zero or more letters, digits, and hyphens. ALegg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 6] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002hyphen is not permitted to be the last character and a hyphen is not permitted to be followed by another hyphen. The <Value> rule is described inSection 8.[7]. A component reference is a sequence of one or more ComponentIds where each successive ComponentId identifies either an inner component at the next level of nesting of an ASN.1 combining type, i.e. SET, SEQUENCE, SET OF, SEQUENCE OF, or CHOICE, or a specific type within an ASN.1 open type. A component reference is always considered in the context of a Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 6] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 particular complex ASN.1 type. When applied to the ASN.1 type the component reference identifies a specific component type. When applied to a value of the ASN.1 type a component reference identifies zero, one or more component values of that component type. The component values are potentially in a DEFAULT value if useDefaultValues is TRUE. The specific component type identified by the component reference determines what matching rules are capable of being used to match the component values. An empty string for a component reference, which would identify the whole ASN.1 value, is NOT supported since assertions about a whole value are already possible by the direct application of a matching rule to an attribute value. A valid component reference for a particular complex ASN.1 type is constructed by starting with the outermost combining type and repeatedly selecting one of the permissible forms of ComponentId to identify successively deeper nested components. A component reference MAY identify a component with a complex ASN.1 type, i.e. it is NOT required that the component type identified by a component reference be a simple ASN.1 type.4.1.15.1.1 Component Type Substitutions ASN.1 type notation has a number of constructs for referencing other defined types, and constructs that are irrelevant for matching purposes. These constructs are not represented in a component reference in any way and substitutions of the component type are performed to eliminate them from further consideration. These substitutions automatically occur prior to each ComponentId, whether constructing or interpreting a component reference, but do not occur after the last ComponentId, except as allowed by Section4.2.5.2. If the ASN.1 type is an ASN.1 type reference then the component type is taken to be the actual definition on the right hand side of theLegg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 7] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002type assignment for the referenced type. If the ASN.1 type is a tagged type then the component type is taken to be the type without the tag. If the ASN.1 type is a constrained type (see [11] and [14] for the details of ASN.1 constraintnotation).notation) then the component type is taken to be the type without the constraint. If the ASN.1 type is an ObjectClassFieldType (Clause 14 of [13]) that denotes a specific ASN.1 type (e.g. MATCHING-RULE.&id denotes the OBJECT IDENTIFIER type) then the component type is taken to be the Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 7] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 denoted type. Section4.1.65.1.6 describes the case where the ObjectClassFieldType denotes an open type. If the ASN.1 type is a selection type other than one used in the list of components for a SET or SEQUENCE type then the component type is taken to be the selected alternative type from the named CHOICE. If the ASN.1 type is a TypeFromObject (Clause 15 of [13]) then the component type is taken to be the denoted type. If the ASN.1 type is a ValueSetFromObjects (Clause 15 of [13]) then the component type is taken to be the governing type of the denoted values.4.1.25.1.2 Referencing SET, SEQUENCE and CHOICE Components If the ASN.1 type is a SET or SEQUENCE type then the <identifier> form of ComponentId MAY be used to identify the component type within that SET or SEQUENCE having that identifier. If <identifier> references an OPTIONAL component type and that component is not present in a particular value then there are no corresponding component values. If <identifier> references a DEFAULT component type and useDefaultValues is TRUE (the default setting for useDefaultValues) and that component is not present in a particular value then the component value is taken to be the default value. If <identifier> references a DEFAULT component type and useDefaultValues is FALSE and that component is not present in a particular value then there are no corresponding component values. If the ASN.1 type is a CHOICE type then the <identifier> form of ComponentId MAY be used to identify the alternative type within that CHOICE having that identifier. If <identifier> references an alternative other than the one used in a particular value then there are no corresponding component values.Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 8] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002The COMPONENTS OF notation in Clause 24 of [11] augments the defined list of components in a SET or SEQUENCE type by including all the components of another defined SET or SEQUENCE type respectively. These included components are referenced directly by identifier as though they were defined in-line in the SET or SEQUENCE type containing the COMPONENTS OF notation. The SelectionType (Clause 29 of [11]), when used in the list of components for a SET or SEQUENCE type, includes a single component from a defined CHOICE type. This included component is referenced directly by identifier as though it was defined in-line in the SET or SEQUENCE type. Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 8] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 The REAL type is treated as though it is the SEQUENCE type defined in Clause 20.5 of [11]. The EMBEDDED PDV type is treated as though it is the SEQUENCE type defined in Clause 32.5 of [11]. The EXTERNAL type is treated as though it is the SEQUENCE type defined in Clause 33.5 of [11]. The unrestricted CHARACTER STRING type is treated as though it is the SEQUENCE type defined in Clause 39.5 of [11]. The INSTANCE OF type is treated as though it is the SEQUENCE type defined in Annex C of [13]. The <identifier> form MUST NOT be used on any other ASN.1 type.4.1.35.1.3 Referencing SET OF and SEQUENCE OF Components If the ASN.1 type is a SET OF or SEQUENCE OF type then the<from- beginning>,<from-beginning>, <from-end>, <count> and <all> forms of ComponentId can be used. The <from-beginning> form of ComponentId MAY be used to identify one instance (i.e. value) of the component type of the SET OF or SEQUENCE OF type (e.g. if Foo ::= SET OF Bar, then Bar is the component type), where the instances are numbered from one upwards. If<from- beginning><from-beginning> references a higher numbered instance than the last instance in a particular value of the SET OF or SEQUENCE OF type then there is no corresponding component value. The <from-end> form of ComponentId MAY be used to identify one instance of the component type of the SET OF or SEQUENCE OF type, where "-1" is the last instance, "-2" is the second last instance,Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 9] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002and so on. If <from-end> references a lower numbered instance than the first instance in a particular value of the SET OF or SEQUENCE OF type then there is no corresponding component value. The <count> form of ComponentId identifies a notional count of the number of instances of the component type in a value of the SET OF or SEQUENCE OF type. This count is not explicitly represented but for matching purposes it has an assumed ASN.1 type of INTEGER (0..MAX). A ComponentId of the <count> form MUST be the last ComponentId in a component reference. The <all> form of ComponentId MAY be used to simultaneously identify all instances of the component type of the SET OF or SEQUENCE OF Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 9] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 type. It is through the <all> form that a component reference can identify more than one component value. However, if a particular value of the SET OF or SEQUENCE OF type is an empty list there are no corresponding component values. Where multiple component values are identified, the remaining ComponentIds in the component reference, if any, can identify zero, one or more subcomponent values for each of the higher level component values. The corresponding ASN.1 type for the <from-beginning>, <from-end>, and <all> forms of ComponentId is the component type of the SET OF or SEQUENCE OF type. The <from-beginning>, <count>, <from-end> and <all> forms MUST NOT be used on ASN.1 types other than SET OF or SEQUENCE OF.4.1.45.1.4 Referencing Components of Parameterized Types A component reference cannot be formed for a parameterized type unless the type has been used with actual parameters, in which case the type is treated as though the DummyReferences [15] have been substituted with the actual parameters.4.1.55.1.5 Component Referencing Example Consider the following ASN.1 type definitions. ExampleType ::= SEQUENCE { part1 [0] INTEGER, part2 [1] ExampleSet, part3 [2] SET OF OBJECT IDENTIFIER, part4 [3] ExampleChoice }Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 10] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002ExampleSet ::= SET { option PrintableString, setting BOOLEAN } ExampleChoice ::= CHOICE { eeny-meeny BIT STRING, miney-mo OCTET STRING } Following are component references constructed with respect to the type ExampleType. The component reference "part1" identifies a component of a value of Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 10] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 ExampleType having the ASN.1 tagged type [0] INTEGER. The component reference "part2" identifies a component of a value of ExampleType having the ASN.1 type of [1] ExampleSet The component reference "part2.option" identifies a component of a value of ExampleType having the ASN.1 type of PrintableString. A ComponentAssertion could also be applied to a value of ASN.1 type ExampleSet, in which case the component reference "option" would identify the same kind of information. The component reference "part3" identifies a component of a value of ExampleType having the ASN.1 type of [2] SET OF OBJECT IDENTIFIER. The component reference "part3.2" identifies the second instance of the part3 SET OF. The instance has the ASN.1 type of OBJECT IDENTIFIER. The component reference "part3.0" identifies the count of the number of instances in the part3 SET OF. The count has the corresponding ASN.1 type of INTEGER (0..MAX). The component reference "part3.*" identifies all the instances in the part3 SET OF. Each instance has the ASN.1 type of OBJECT IDENTIFIER. The component reference "part4" identifies a component of a value of ExampleType having the ASN.1 type of [3] ExampleChoice. The component reference "part4.miney-mo" identifies a component of a value of ExampleType having the ASN.1 type of OCTET STRING.4.1.65.1.6 Referencing Components of Open Types If a sequence of ComponentIds identifies an ObjectClassFieldType denoting an open type (e.g. ATTRIBUTE.&Type denotes an open type)Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 11] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002then the ASN.1 type of the component varies. An open type is typically constrained by some other component(s) in an outer enclosing type, either formally through the use of a component relation constraint [14], or informally in the accompanying text, so the actual ASN.1 type of a value of the open type will generally be known. The constraint will also limit the range of permissible types. The <select> form of ComponentId MAY be used to identify one of these permissible types in an open type. Subcomponents of that type can then be identified with further ComponentIds. The other components constraining the open type are termed the referenced components (using the terminology in [14]). The <select> Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 11] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 form contains a list of one or more values which take the place of the value(s) of the referenced component(s) to uniquely identify one of the permissable types of the open type. Where the open type is constrained by a component relation constraint, there is a <Value> in the <select> form for each of the referenced components in the component relation constraint, appearing in the same order. The ASN.1 type of each of these values is the same as the ASN.1 type of the corresponding referenced component. The type of a referenced component is potentially any ASN.1 type however it is typically an OBJECT IDENTIFIER or INTEGER, which means that the <Value> in the <select> form of ComponentId will nearly always be an <ObjectIdentifierValue> or <IntegerValue> (seeSection 8).[7]). Furthermore, component relation constraints typically have only one referenced component. Where the open type is not constrained by a component relation constraint, the specification introducing the syntax containing the open type SHOULD explicitly nominate the referenced components and their order, so that the <select> form can be used. If an instance of <select> contains a value other than the value of the referenced component used in a particular value of the outer enclosing type then there are no corresponding component values for the open type.4.1.6.15.1.6.1 Open Type Referencing Example The ASN.1 type AttributeTypeAndValue from [8] describes a single attribute value of a nominated attribute type. AttributeTypeAndValue ::= SEQUENCE { type ATTRIBUTE.&id ({SupportedAttributes}), value ATTRIBUTE.&Type ({SupportedAttributes}{@type}) }Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 12] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002ATTRIBUTE.&id denotes an OBJECT IDENTIFIER and ({SupportedAttributes}) constrains the OBJECT IDENTIFIER to be a supported attribute type. ATTRIBUTE.&Type denotes an open type, in this case an attribute value, and ({SupportedAttributes}{@type}) is a component relation constraint that constrains the open type to be of the attribute syntax for the attribute type. The component relation constraint references only the "type" component, which has the ASN.1 type of OBJECT IDENTIFIER, thus if the <select> form of ComponentId is used to identify attribute values of specific attribute types it will contain a single OBJECT IDENTIFIER value. Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 12] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 The component reference "value" on AttributeTypeAndValue refers to the open type. One of the X.500 standard attributes is facsimileTelephoneNumber [10], which is identified with the OBJECT IDENTIFIER 2.5.4.23, and is defined to have the following syntax. FacsimileTelephoneNumber ::= SEQUENCE { telephoneNumberPrintableString (SIZE(1.. ub-telephone-number)),PrintableString(SIZE(1..ub-telephone-number)), parameters G3FacsimileNonBasicParameters OPTIONAL } The component reference "value.(2.5.4.23)" on AttributeTypeAndValue specifies an attribute value with the FacsimileTelephoneNumber syntax. The component reference "value.(2.5.4.23).telephoneNumber" on AttributeTypeAndValue identifies the telephoneNumber component of a facsimileTelephoneNumber attribute value. The component reference "value.(facsimileTelephoneNumber)" is equivalent to "value.(2.5.4.23)". If the AttributeTypeAndValue ASN.1 value contains an attribute type other than facsimileTelephoneNumber then there are no corresponding component values for the component references "value.(2.5.4.23)" and "value.(2.5.4.23).telephoneNumber".4.1.75.1.7 Referencing Contained Types Sometimes the contents of a BIT STRING or OCTET STRING value are required to be the encodings of other ASN.1 values of specific ASN.1 types. For example, the extnValue component of the Extension type component in the Certificate type [9] is an OCTET STRING that is required to contain a DER encoding of a certificate extension value. It is useful to be able to refer to the embedded encoded value andLegg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 13] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002its components. An embedded encoded value is here referred to as a contained value and its associated type as the contained type. If the ASN.1 type is a BIT STRING or OCTET STRING type containing encodings of other ASN.1 values then the <content> form of ComponentId MAY be used to identify the contained type. Subcomponents of that type can then be identified with further ComponentIds. The contained type may be (effectively) an open type, constrained by some other component in an outer enclosing type (e.g. in a certificate Extension, extnValue is constrained by the chosen extnId). In these cases the next ComponentId, if any, MUST be of the Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 13] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 <select> form. For the purpose of building component references, the content of the extnValue OCTET STRING in the Extension type is assumed to be an open type having a notional component relation constraint with the extnId component as the single referenced component, i.e. EXTENSION.&ExtnType ({ExtensionSet}{@extnId}) The data-value component of the associated types for the EXTERNAL, EMBEDDED PDV and CHARACTER STRING types is an OCTET STRING containing the encoding of a data value described by the identification component. For the purpose of building component references, the content of the data-value OCTET STRING in these types is assumed to be an open type having a notional component relation constraint with the identification component as the single referenced component.4.1.7.15.1.7.1 Contained Type Referencing Example The Extension ASN.1 type from [9] describes a single certificate extension value of a nominated extension type. Extension ::= SEQUENCE { extnId EXTENSION.&id ({ExtensionSet}), critical BOOLEAN DEFAULT FALSE, extnValue OCTET STRING -- contains a DER encoding of a value of type &ExtnType -- for the extension object identified by extnId -- } EXTENSION.&id denotes an OBJECT IDENTIFIER and ({ExtensionSet}) constrains the OBJECT IDENTIFIER to be the identifier of a supported certificate extension. The component reference "extnValue" on Extension refers to aLegg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 14] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002component type of OCTET STRING. The corresponding component values will be OCTET STRING values. The component reference "extnValue.content" on Extension refers to the type of the contained type, which in this case is an open type. One of the X.509 [X.509] standard extensions is basicConstraints, which is identified with the OBJECT IDENTIFIER 2.5.29.19 and is defined to have the following syntax. BasicConstraintsSyntax ::= SEQUENCE { cA BOOLEAN DEFAULT FALSE, pathLenConstraint INTEGER (0..MAX) OPTIONAL } Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 14] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 The component reference "extnValue.content.(2.5.29.19)" on Extension specifies a BasicConstraintsSyntax extension value and the component reference "extnValue.content.(2.5.29.19).cA" identifies the cA component of a BasicConstraintsSyntax extension value.4.25.2 Matching of Components The rule in a ComponentAssertion specifies how the zero, one or more component values identified by the component reference are tested by the assertion. Attribute matching rules are used to specify the semantics of the test. Each matching rule has a notional set of attribute syntaxes (typically one), defined as ASN.1 types, to which it may be applied. When used in a ComponentAssertion these matching rules apply to the same ASN.1 types, only in this context the corresponding ASN.1 values are not complete attribute values. Note that the referenced component type may be a tagged and/or constrained version of the expected attribute syntax (e.g. [0] INTEGER, whereas integerMatch would expect simply INTEGER), or an open type. Additional type substitutions of the kind described in Section4.1.15.1.1 are performed as required to reduce the component type to the same type as the attribute syntax expected by the matching rule. If an open type is encountered the actual ASN.1 type of the component value is substituted before continuing. If a matching rule applies to more than one attribute syntax (e.g. objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch [10]) then the minimum number of substitutions required to conform to any one of those syntaxes are performed. If a matching rule can apply to any attribute syntax (e.g. the allComponentsMatch rule defined in Section7.1)8.1) then the referenced component type is used as is, with no additional substitutions.Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 15] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002The value in a ComponentAssertion will be of the assertion syntax (i.e. ASN.1 type) required by the chosen matching rule. Note that the assertion syntax of a matching rule is not necessarily the same as the attribute syntax(es) to which the rule may be applied. Some matching rules do not have a fixed assertion syntax (e.g. allComponentsMatch). The required assertion syntax is determined in each instance of use by the syntax of the attribute type to which the matching rule is applied. For these rules the ASN.1 type of the referenced component is used in place of an attribute syntax to decide the required assertion syntax. Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 15] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 The ComponentAssertion is undefined if:i)a) the matching rule in the ComponentAssertion is not known to the evaluating procedure,ii)b) if no part of the component reference identifies an open type and the matching rule is not applicable to the referenced component type, even with the additional type substitutions,iii)c) the value in the ComponentAssertion does not conform to the assertion syntax defined for the matching rule,iv)d) an open type in the tested value cannot be decoded, orv)e) the implementation does not support the particular combination of component reference and matching rule. If the ComponentAssertion is not undefined then the ComponentAssertion evaluates to TRUE if there is at least one component value for which the matching rule applied to that component value returns TRUE, and evaluates to FALSE otherwise (which includes the case where there are no component values). If some part of the component reference identifies an open type and the matching rule is not applicable to the referenced component type the ComponentAssertion evaluates to FALSE.4.2.15.2.1 Applicability of Existing Matching Rules4.2.1.15.2.1.1 String Matching ASN.1 has a number of built in restricted character string types with different character sets and/or different character encodings. A directory user generally has little interest in the particular character set or encoding used to represent a character stringLegg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 16] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002component value, and some directory server implementations make no distinction between the different string types in their internal representation of values. So rather than define string matching rules for each of the restricted character string types, the existing case ignore and case exact string matching rules are extended to apply to component values of any of the restricted character stringtypes,types and any ChoiceOfStrings type [7], in addition to component values of the DirectoryString type. This extension is only for the purposes of component matching described in this document. The relevant string matching rules are: caseIgnoreMatch, caseIgnoreOrderingMatch, caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch, caseExactMatch, Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 16] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 caseExactOrderingMatch and caseExactSubstringsMatch. The relevant restricted character string types are: NumericString, PrintableString, VisibleString, IA5String, UTF8String, BMPString, UniversalString, TeletexString, VideotexString, GraphicString and GeneralString. A ChoiceOfStrings type is a purely syntactic CHOICE of these ASN.1 string types. Note that [7] declares each and every use of the DirectoryString{} parameterized type to be a ChoiceOfStrings type. The assertion syntax of the string matching rules is still DirectoryString regardless of the string syntax of the component being matched. Thus an implementation will be called upon to compare a DirectoryString value to a value of one of the restricted character stringtypes.types, or a ChoiceOfStrings type. As is the case when comparing two DirectoryStrings where the chosen alternatives are of different string types, the comparison proceeds so long as the corresponding characters are representable in both character sets. Otherwise matching returns FALSE.It is not uncommon for ASN.1 specifications to define types that are5.2.1.2 Telephone Number Matching Early editions of X.520 [10] gave the syntax of the telephoneNumber attribute as aCHOICE between two or more alternativeconstrained PrintableString. The fourth edition of X.520 equates the ASN.1string types, wheretype name TelephoneNumber to theparticular alternative chosen carries no semantic significance (DirectoryString being a prime example). Such typesconstrained PrintableString and uses TelephoneNumber as the attribute and assertion syntax. For the purposes of component matching, telephoneNumberMatch and telephoneNumberSubstringsMatch aredefinedpermitted toavoid havingbe applied touse a complicated character encoding for all values when most values could use a simpler string type, orany PrintableString value, as well as todeal with evolving requirements that compel the use of a broader character set while still maintaining backward compatibility. ItTelephoneNumber values. 5.2.1.3 Distinguished Name Matching The DistinguishedName type isconvenientdefined by assignment toalsobeable to use the existing character string matching rules on types that are a purely syntactic choice of string types. While there are certain ASN.1 constructs that betraythesemantic significance ofsame as thealternatives within a CHOICERDNSequence type, however RDNSequence is sometimes directly used in other type definitions. For theabsencepurposes ofthose constructs does not necessarily mean a CHOICE type is purely syntactic. Therefore, itcomponent matching, distinguishedNameMatch isnecessary for specificationsalso permitted todeclare the purely syntactic CHOICE types so that they maybematched withapplied to values of theexisting stringRDNSequence type. 5.2.2 Additional Useful Matching Rules This section defines additional matchingrules.rules that may prove useful in ComponentAssertions. TheseCHOICE types will be referred to as ChoiceOfStrings types. The string matchingrulesabove are extended toMAY alsoapply to any ChoiceOfStrings type.be used in extensibleMatch search filters [3]. Legg Expires127 September 2002 [Page 17] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March1,27, 2002To be eligible5.2.2.1 The rdnMatch Matching Rule The distinguishedNameMatch matching rule can match whole distinguished names but it is sometimes useful to bedeclaredable to match specific RDNs in aChoiceOfStrings type an ASN.1 type MUST satisfyDN without regard for thefollowing conditions. i) The type is a CHOICE type. ii)other RDNs in the DN. The rdnMatch matching rule allows componenttypeRDNs ofeach alternative is onea DN to be tested. The LDAP-style definitions for rdnMatch and its assertion syntax are: ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.13.3 NAME 'rdnMatch' SYNTAX 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.0 ) ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.0 DESC 'RDN' ) The LDAP-specific encoding for a value of thefollowing ASN.1 restricted string types: NumericString, PrintableString, TeletexString (T61String), VideotexString, IA5String, GraphicString, VisibleString (ISO646String), GeneralString, BMPString, UniversalString or UTF8String. iii) All the alternatives are of different restricted string types, i.e. no two alternatives have the same ASN.1 restricted string type. iv) Either none of the alternatives has a constraint, or all of the alternatives have exactly the same constraint. Tagging on the alternative typesRDN syntax isignored. Considergiven by theASN.1 parameterized type<RelativeDistinguishedNameValue> rule in [7]. The X.500-style definitionof DirectoryString. DirectoryString { INTEGER : maxSize }for rdnMatch is: rdnMatch MATCHING-RULE ::=CHOICE{teletexString TeletexString (SIZE (1..maxSize)), printableString PrintableString (SIZE (1..maxSize)), bmpString BMPString (SIZE (1..maxSize)), universalString UniversalString (SIZE (1..maxSize)), uTF8String UTF8String (SIZE (1..maxSize))SYNTAX RelativeDistinguishedName ID { 1 2 36 79672281 1 13 3 } }Any use of the DirectoryString parameterized type with an actual parameter defines a ASN.1 type that satisfies the above conditions. Recognising that the alternative within a DirectoryString carries no semantic significance, this document declares (each and every use of) DirectoryString{} to be a ChoiceOfStrings type. Other specifications MAY declare other types satisfying the above conditions to be ChoiceOfStrings types.Thedeclaration SHOULD be made atrdnMatch rule evaluates to true if thepoint wherecomponent value and assertion value are theASN.1 type is defined, otherwise it SHOULD be made atsame RDN, using thepoint wheresame RDN comparison method as distinguishedNameMatch. When using rdnMatch to match components of DNs it isintroduced as, or in, an attribute syntax. 4.2.1.2 Telephone Number Matching Early editions of X.520 [10] gaveimportant to note that thesyntaxLDAP-specific encoding ofthe telephoneNumber attribute asaconstrained PrintableString. The fourth editionDN [5] reverses the order ofX.520 equatestheASN.1 type name TelephoneNumber toRDNs. So for theconstrained PrintableString and uses TelephoneNumberDN represented in LDAP as "cn=Steven Legg,o=Adacel,c=AU", theattribute and assertion syntax. ForRDN "cn=Steven Legg" corresponds to thepurposes ofcomponentmatching,reference "3", or alternatively, "-1". 5.2.2.2 The OpenAssertionType Syntax Some of the matching rules defined in this document have a variable assertion syntax. In X.500 this is indicated by omitting the optional SYNTAX field in the MATCHING-RULE information object. The assertion syntax then defaults to the target attribute's syntax in actual usage, unless the description of the matching rule says otherwise. The SYNTAX field in the LDAP-specific encoding of a MatchingRuleDescription is mandatory, so the OpenAssertionType syntax is defined to fill the same role. That is, the OpenAssertionType syntax is semantically equivalent to an omitted SYNTAX field in an X.500 MATCHING-RULE information object. OpenAssertionType MUST NOT be used as the attribute syntax in an attribute type definition. Legg Expires127 September 2002 [Page 18] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March1,27, 2002telephoneNumberMatch and telephoneNumberSubstringsMatch are permitted to be applied to any PrintableString value, as well as to TelephoneNumber values. 4.2.1.3 Distinguished Name Matching The DistinguishedName typeUnless explicitly varied by the description of a particular matching rule, if an OpenAssertionType assertion value appears in a ComponentAssertion its LDAP-specific encoding isdefineddescribed byassignmentthe <Value> rule in [7], otherwise its LDAP-specific encoding is the encoding defined for the syntax of the attribute type tobewhich thesame asmatching rule with theRDNSequence type, however RDNSequenceOpenAssertionType assertion syntax issometimes directly used in other type definitions. Forapplied. The LDAP definition for thepurposes of component matching, distinguishedNameMatchOpenAssertionType syntax is: ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.3 DESC 'OpenAssertionType' ) 5.2.2.3 The enumeratedMatch Matching Rule There isalso permitted tono existing matching rule that could beappliedused tovaluesmatch a value ofthe RDNSequencean arbitrary ENUMERATED type.4.2.2 Additional Useful Matching Rules This section defines additional matching rules that may prove useful in ComponentAssertions. These rules MAY also be used in extensibleMatch search filters [4]. 4.2.2.1 The rdnMatch Matching RuleThedistinguishedNameMatchenumeratedMatch matching rulecan match whole distinguished names but itissometimes usefuldefined to fill this role. It may beableapplied tomatch specific RDNs in a DN without regard for the other RDNs in the DN. The rdnMatch matching rule allows component RDNsvalues of any ENUMERATED type, or any INTEGER type (typically those with aDN to be tested.named number list). The LDAP-styledefinitionsdefinition forrdnMatch and its assertion syntax are:enumeratedMatch is: (1.2.36.79672281.1.13.31.2.36.79672281.1.13.4 NAME'rdnMatch''enumeratedMatch' SYNTAX1.2.36.79672281.1.5.0 ) ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.0 DESC 'RDN'1.2.36.79672281.1.5.3 )The native LDAP encoding forThis matching rule has avaluevariable assertion syntax. Since enumeratedMatch only applies to values of an ENUMERATED or INTEGER type, theRDN syntaxLDAP-specific encoding for an enumeratedMatch assertion value appearing in a ComponentAssertion is effectively constrained to the string encoding given by<RelativeDistinguishedNameValue>the <EnumeratedValue> rule or the <IntegerValue> rule respectively, inSection 8.[7]. The X.500-style definition forrdnMatchenumeratedMatch is:rdnMatchenumeratedMatch MATCHING-RULE ::= {SYNTAX RelativeDistinguishedNameID { 1 2 36 79672281 1 1334 } } TherdnMatchenumeratedMatch rule evaluates to true if the component value and assertion value are thesame RDN, using the same RDN comparison methodsame. The enumeratedMatch rule MAY be used asdistinguishedNameMatch.the equality matching rule for an attribute. 5.2.2.4 The presentMatch Matching Rule At times it would be useful to test not if a specific value of a particular component is present, but whether any value of a Legg Expires127 September 2002 [Page 19] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March1,27, 2002When using rdnMatch to match components of DNs itparticular component isimportant to note thatpresent. The presentMatch matching rule allows thenative LDAP encodingpresence of aDN [6] reverses the order of the RDNs. So for the DN represented in LDAP as "cn=Steven Legg,o=Adacel,c=AU", the RDN "cn=Steven Legg" corresponds to theparticular componentreference "3", or alternatively, "-1". 4.2.2.2value to be tested. TheOpenAssertionType Syntax Some of the matching rules defined in this document have a variableLDAP-style definitions for presentMatch and its assertionsyntax. In X.500 this is indicated by omitting the optionalsyntax are: ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.13.5 NAME 'presentMatch' SYNTAXfield in the MATCHING-RULE information object.1.2.36.79672281.1.5.1 ) ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.1 DESC 'NULL' ) Theassertion syntax then defaults toLDAP-specific encoding for a value of thetarget attribute'sNULL syntaxin actual usage, unless the description ofis given by thematching<NullValue> rulesays otherwise.in [7]. The X.500-style definition for presentMatch is: presentMatch MATCHING-RULE ::= { SYNTAXfieldNULL ID { 1 2 36 79672281 1 13 5 } } When used in a extensible match filter item, presentMatch behaves like thenative LDAP encoding"present" case of aMatchingRuleDescription is mandatory, so the OpenAssertionType syntax is definedregular search filter. In a ComponentAssertion, presentMatch evaluates tofillTRUE if and only if thesame role. That is,component reference identifies one or more component values, regardless of theOpenAssertionType syntaxactual component value contents. Note that if useDefaultValues issemantically equivalent to an omitted SYNTAX field in an X.500 MATCHING-RULE information object. OpenAssertionType MUST NOT be used asTRUE then theattribute syntax in an attribute type definition. Unless explicitly variedidentified component values may be (part of) a DEFAULT value. The notional count referenced by thedescription<count> form ofa particular matching rule,ComponentId is taken to be present ifan OpenAssertionType assertionthe SET OF valueappears in a ComponentAssertion its native LDAP encodingisdescribed by <Value>present, and absent otherwise. Note that inSection 8, otherwise its native LDAP encodingASN.1 notation an absent SET OF value is distinctly different from a SET OF value that is present but empty. It is up to theencoding defined for the syntax ofspecification using theattribute typeASN.1 notation towhich the matching rule withdecide whether theOpenAssertionType assertion syntaxdistinction matters. Often an empty SET OF component and an absent SET OF component are treated as semantically equivalent. If a SET OF value isapplied. The LDAP definition forpresent, but empty, a presentMatch on theOpenAssertionType syntax is: ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.3 DESC 'OpenAssertionType' ) 4.2.2.3 The enumeratedMatch Matching Rule There is no existing matching rule that couldSET OF component SHALL return TRUE and the notional count SHALL beusedregarded as present and equal tomatch a valuezero. 5.2.3 Summary ofan arbitrary ENUMERATED type.Useful Matching Rules TheenumeratedMatch matching rulefollowing isdefined to fill this role. It may be applied to values of any ENUMERATED type, or any INTEGER type (typically those withanamed number list). The LDAP-style definition for enumeratedMatch is: ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.13.4 NAME 'enumeratedMatch' SYNTAX 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.3 ) Thisnon-exhaustive list of useful matchingrule has a variable assertion syntax. Since enumeratedMatch only appliesrules and the ASN.1 types tovalueswhich they can be applied, taking account ofan ENUMERATED or INTEGERall the extensions described in Section 5.2.1, and the new matching rules defined in Section 5.2.2. Legg Expires127 September 2002 [Page 20] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March1,27, 2002type, the native LDAP encoding for an enumeratedMatch assertion value appearing in a ComponentAssertion is effectively constrained to the string encoding given by <EnumeratedValue> or <IntegerValue> respectively, in Section 8. The X.500-style definition for enumeratedMatch is: enumeratedMatch MATCHING-RULE ::= { ID { 1 2 36 79672281 1 13 4 } } The enumeratedMatch rule evaluates to true if the component value and assertion value are the same. The enumeratedMatch rule MAY be used as the equality matching rule for an attribute. 4.2.2.4 The presentMatch+================================+==============================+ | Matching RuleAt times it would be useful to test not if a specific value of a particular component is present, but whether| ASN.1 Type | +================================+==============================+ | bitStringMatch | BIT STRING | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | booleanMatch | BOOLEAN | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | caseIgnoreMatch | NumericString | | caseIgnoreOrderingMatch | PrintableString | | caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch | VisibleString (ISO646String) | | caseExactMatch | IA5String | | caseExactOrderingMatch | UTF8String | | caseExactSubstringsMatch | BMPString (UCS-2, UNICODE) | | | UniversalString (UCS-4) | | | TeletexString (T61String) | | | VideotexString | | | GraphicString | | | GeneralString | | | anyvalue of a particular component is present. The presentMatch matching rule allows the presence of a particular component value to be tested. The LDAP-style definitions for presentMatch and its assertion syntax are: ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.13.5 NAME 'presentMatch' SYNTAX 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.1 ) ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.1 DESC 'NULL' ) The native LDAP encoding for a value of the NULL syntax is given by <NullValue> in Section 8. The X.500-style definition for presentMatch is: presentMatch MATCHING-RULE ::= { SYNTAX NULL ID { 1 2 36 79672281 1 13 5 } } When used in a extensible match filter item, presentMatch behaves like the "present" case of a regular search filter. In a ComponentAssertion, presentMatch evaluates to TRUE if and only if the component reference identifies one or more component values, regardless of the actual component value contents. Note that if useDefaultValues is TRUE then the identified component values may be (part of) a DEFAULT value. Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 21] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 The notional count referenced by the <count> form of ComponentId is taken to be present if the SET OF value is present, and absent otherwise. Note that in ASN.1 notation an absent SET OF value is distinctly different from a SET OF value that is present but empty. It is up to the specification using the ASN.1 notation to decide whether the distinction matters. Often an empty SET OF component and an absent SET OF component are treated as semantically equivalent. If a SET OF value is present, but empty, a presentMatch on the SET OF component SHALL return TRUE and the notional count SHALL be regarded as present and equal to zero. 4.2.3 Summary of Useful Matching Rules The following is a non-exhaustive list of useful matching rules and the ASN.1 types to which they can be applied, taking account of all the extensions described within Section 4.2.1, and the new matching rules defined in Section 4.2.2. +================================+==============================+ | Matching Rule | ASN.1 Type | +================================+==============================+ | bitStringMatch | BIT STRING | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | booleanMatch | BOOLEANChoiceOfStrings type | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ |caseIgnoreMatch | NumericString | | caseIgnoreOrderingMatchcaseIgnoreIA5Match |PrintableStringIA5String | |caseIgnoreSubstringsMatchcaseExactIA5Match |VisibleString (ISO646String)| +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ |caseExactMatch | IA5String | | caseExactOrderingMatch | UTF8String | | caseExactSubstringsMatch | BMPString (UCS-2, UNICODE) | | | UniversalString (UCS-4) | | | TeletexString (T61String) | | | VideotexString | | | GraphicString | | | GeneralString | | | any ChoiceOfStrings type | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | caseIgnoreIA5Match | IA5String | | caseExactIA5Match | | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | distinguishedNameMatchdistinguishedNameMatch | DistinguishedName | | |RDNSequence | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | enumeratedMatch | ENUMERATED | | | INTEGER | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 22] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 | generalizedTimeMatch | GeneralizedTime | | generalizedTimeOrderingMatch | | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | integerMatch | INTEGER | | integerOrderingMatch | | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | numericStringMatch | NumericString | | numericStringOrderingMatch | | | numericStringSubstringsMatch | | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | objectIdentifierMatch | OBJECT IDENTIFIER | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | octetStringMatch | OCTET STRING | | octetStringOrderingMatch | | | octetStringSubstringsMatch | | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | presentMatch | any ASN.1 type | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | rdnMatch | RelativeDistinguishedName | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | telephoneNumberMatch | PrintableString | | telephoneNumberSubstringsMatch | TelephoneNumber | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | uTCTimeMatch | UTCTime | | uTCTimeOrderingMatch | | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ 5. ComponentFilter The ComponentAssertion allows the value(s) of any one component type in a complex ASN.1 type to be matched, but there is often a desire to match the values of more than one component type. A ComponentFilter is an assertion about the presence, or values of, multiple components within an ASN.1 value. The ComponentFilter assertion, an expression of ComponentAssertions, evaluates to either TRUE, FALSE or undefined for each tested ASN.1 value. A ComponentFilter is described by the following ASN.1 type (assumed to be defined with "EXPLICIT TAGS" in force): ComponentFilter ::= CHOICE { item [0] ComponentAssertion, and [1] SEQUENCE OF ComponentFilter, or [2] SEQUENCE OF ComponentFilter, not [3] ComponentFilter } Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 23] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 Note: despite the use of SEQUENCE OF instead of SET OF for the "and" and "or" alternatives in ComponentFilter, the order of the component filters is not significant. A ComponentFilter that is a ComponentAssertion evaluates to TRUE if the ComponentAssertion is TRUE, evaluates to FALSE if the ComponentAssertion is FALSE, and evaluates to undefined otherwise. The "and" of a sequence of component filters evaluates to TRUE if the sequence is empty or if each component filter evaluates to TRUE, evaluates to FALSE if at least one component filter is FALSE, and evaluates to undefined otherwise. The "or" of a sequence of component filters evaluates to FALSE if the sequence is empty or if each component filter evaluates to FALSE, evaluates to TRUE if at least one component filter is TRUE, and evaluates to undefined otherwise. The "not" of a component filter evaluates to TRUE if the component filter is FALSE, evaluates to FALSE if the component filter is TRUE, and evaluates to undefined otherwise. 6. The componentFilterMatch Matching Rule The componentFilterMatch matching rule allows a ComponentFilter to be applied to an attribute value. The result of the matching rule is the result of applying the ComponentFilter to the attribute value. The LDAP-style definitions for componentFilterMatch and its assertion syntax are: ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.13.2 NAME 'componentFilterMatch' SYNTAX 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.2 ) ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.2 DESC 'ComponentFilter' ) The native LDAP encoding of a ComponentAssertion is described by the following ABNF: ComponentAssertion = "{" sp component "," [ sp useDefaultValues "," ] sp rule "," sp assertion-value sp "}" component = component-label msp dquote component-reference dquote useDefaultValues = use-defaults-label msp BooleanValue rule = rule-label msp ObjectIdentifierValue Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 24] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 assertion-value = value-label msp Value component-label = %x63.6F.6D.70.6F.6E.65.6E.74 ; "component" use-defaults-label = %x75.73.65.44.65.66.61.75.6C.74.56.61.6C.75.65.73 ; "useDefaultValues" rule-label = %x72.75.6C.65 ; "rule" value-label = %x76.61.6C.75.65 ; "value" sp = *%x20 ; zero, one or more space characters msp = 1*%x20 ; one or more space characters dquote = %x22 ; " (double quote) The ABNF for <Value>, <ObjectIdentifierValue> and <BooleanValue> is defined in Section 8. The native LDAP encoding of a ComponentFilter is described by the following ABNF: ComponentFilter = filter-item / and-filter / or-filter / not-filter filter-item = item-chosen ComponentAssertion and-filter = and-chosen SequenceOfComponentFilter or-filter = or-chosen SequenceOfComponentFilter not-filter = not-chosen ComponentFilter item-chosen = %x69.74.65.6D.3A ; "item:" and-chosen = %x61.6E.64.3A ; "and:" or-chosen = %x6F.72.3A ; "or:" not-chosen = %x6E.6F.74.3A ; "not:" SequenceOfComponentFilter = "{" [ sp ComponentFilter *( "," sp ComponentFilter) ] sp "}" Note that the string encodings of ComponentAssertion and ComponentFilter conform to the generic string encodings defined in Section 8 (in the event that there is a discrepancy between the above ABNF and Section 8, Section 8 is to be taken as definitive). The X.500-style definition [8] for componentFilterMatch is: componentFilterMatch MATCHING-RULE ::= { SYNTAX ComponentFilter ID { 1 2 36 79672281 1 13 2 } } A ComponentAssertion can potentially use any matching rule, including componentFilterMatch, so componentFilterMatch MAY be nested. The component references in a nested componentFilterMatch are relative to the component corresponding to the containing ComponentAssertion. In Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 25] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 Section 9, an example search on the seeAlso attribute shows this usage. 7. Equality Matching of Complex Components It is possible to test if an attribute value of a complex ASN.1 syntax is the same as some purported (i.e. assertion) value by using a complicated ComponentFilter that tests if corresponding components are the same. However, it would be more convenient to be able to present a whole assertion value to a matching rule that could do the component-wise comparison of an attribute value with the assertion value for any arbitrary attribute syntax. Similarly, the ability to do a straightforward equality comparison of a component value that is itself of a complex ASN.1 type would also be convenient. It would be difficult to define a single matching rule that simultaneously satisfies all notions of what the equality matching semantics should be. For example, in some instances a case sensitive comparison of string components may be preferable to a case insensitive comparison. Therefore a basic equality matching rule, allComponentsMatch, is defined in Section 7.1, and the means to derive new matching rules from it with slightly different equality matching semantics is described in Section 7.2. The directoryComponentsMatch defined in Section 7.3 is a derivation of allComponentsMatch that suits typical uses of the directory. Other specifications are free to derive new rules from allComponentsMatch or directoryComponentsMatch, that suit their usage of the directory. The allComponentsMatch rule, the directoryComponentsMatch rule and any matching rules derived from them are collectively called component equality matching rules. 7.1 The allComponentsMatch Matching Rule The LDAP-style definition for allComponentsMatch is: ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.13.6 NAME 'allComponentsMatch' SYNTAX 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.3 ) The X.500-style definition for allComponentsMatch is: allComponentsMatch MATCHING-RULE ::= { ID { 1 2 36 79672281 1 13 6 } } Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 26] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 When allComponentsMatch is used in a ComponentAssertion the assertion syntax is the same as the ASN.1 type of the identified component. Otherwise, the assertion syntax of allComponentsMatch is the same as the attribute syntax of the attribute to which the matching rule is applied. Broadly speaking, this matching rule evaluates to true if and only if corresponding components of the assertion value and the attribute or component value are the same. In detail, equality is determined by the following cases applied recursively. a) Two values of a SET or SEQUENCE type are the same if and only if, for each component type, the corresponding component values are either, i) both absent, ii) both present and the same, or iii) absent or the same as the DEFAULT value for the component, if a DEFAULT value is defined. Values of an EMBEDDED PDV, EXTERNAL, unrestricted CHARACTER STRING, or INSTANCE OF type are compared according to their respective SEQUENCE type (see Section 4.1.2). b) Two values of a SEQUENCE OF type are the same if and only if, the values have the same number of (possibly duplicated) instances and corresponding instances are the same. c) Two values of a SET OF type are the same if and only if, the values have the same number of instances and each distinct instance occurs in both values the same number of times, i.e. both values have the same instances, including duplicates, but in any order. d) Two values of a CHOICE type are the same if and only if, both values are of the same chosen alternative and the component values are the same. e) Two BIT STRING values are the same if and only if the values have the same number of bits and corresponding bits are the same. If the BIT STRING type is defined with a named bit list then trailing zero bits in the values are treated as absent for the purposes of this comparison. f) Two BOOLEAN values are the same if and only if both are TRUE or Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 27] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 both are FALSE. g) Two values of a string type are the same if and only if the values have the same number of characters and corresponding characters are the same. Letter case is significant. For the purposes of allComponentsMatch, the string types are NumericString, PrintableString, TeletexString (T61String), VideotexString, IA5String, GraphicString, VisibleString (ISO646String), GeneralString, UniversalString, BMPString, UTF8String, GeneralizedTime, UTCTime and ObjectDescriptor. h) Two INTEGER values are the same if and only if the integers are equal. i) Two ENUMERATED values are the same if and only if the enumeration item identifiers are the same (equivalently, if the integer values associated with the identifiers are equal). j) Two NULL values are always the same, unconditionally. k) Two OBJECT IDENTIFIER values are the same if and only if the values have the same number of arcs and corresponding arcs are the same. l) Two OCTET STRING values are the same if and only if the values have the same number of octets and corresponding octets are the same. m) Two REAL values are the same if and only if they are both the same special value, or neither is a special value and they have the same base and represent the same real number. The special values for REAL are zero, PLUS-INFINITY and MINUS-INFINITY. n) Two RELATIVE-OID [12] values are the same if and only if the values have the same number of arcs and corresponding arcs are the same. The respective starting nodes for the RELATIVE-OID values are disregarded in the comparison, i.e. they are assumed to be the same. o) Two values of an open type are the same if and only if both are of the same ASN.1 type and are the same according to that type. Tags and constraints, being part of the type definition and not part of the abstract values, are ignored for matching purposes. The allComponentsMatch rule MAY be used as the defined equality matching rule for an attribute. 7.2 Deriving Component Equality Matching Rules Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 28] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 A new component equality matching rule with more refined matching semantics MAY be derived from allComponentsMatch, or any other component equality matching rule, using the convention described in this section. The matching behaviour of a derived component equality matching rule is specified by nominating, for each of one or more identified components, a commutative equality matching rule that will be used to match values of that component. This overrides the matching that would otherwise occur for values of that component using the base rule for the derivation. These overrides can be conveniently represented as rows in a table of the following form. Component | Matching Rule ============+=============== | | Usually, all component values of a particular ASN.1 type are to be matched the same way. An ASN.1 type reference (e.g. DistinguishedName) or an ASN.1 built-in type name (e.g. INTEGER) in the Component column of the table specifies that the nominated equality matching rule is to be applied to all values of the named type, regardless of context. An ASN.1 type reference with a component reference appended (separated by a ".") specifies that the nominated matching rule applies only to the identified components of values of the named type. Other component values that happen to be of the same ASN.1 type are not selected. Additional type substitutions as described in Section 4.2 are assumed to be performed to align the component type with the matching rule assertion syntax. Conceptually, the rows in a table for the base rule are appended to the rows in the table for a derived rule for the purpose of deciding the matching semantics of the derived rule. Notionally, allComponentsMatch has an empty table. A row specifying values of an outer containing type (e.g. DistinguishedName) takes precedence over a row specifying values of an inner component type (e.g. RelativeDistinguishedName), regardless of their order in the table. Specifying a row for component values of an inner type is only useful if a value of theRDNSequence | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | enumeratedMatch | ENUMERATED | | | INTEGER | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | generalizedTimeMatch | GeneralizedTime | | generalizedTimeOrderingMatch | | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | integerMatch | INTEGER | | integerOrderingMatch | | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | numericStringMatch | NumericString | | numericStringOrderingMatch | | | numericStringSubstringsMatch | | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | objectIdentifierMatch | OBJECT IDENTIFIER | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | octetStringMatch | OCTET STRING | | octetStringOrderingMatch | | | octetStringSubstringsMatch | | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | presentMatch | any ASN.1 typecan also appear on its own, or as a component of values of a different outer type. For example, if there is a row for DistinguishedName then a row for| +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | rdnMatch | RelativeDistinguishedNamecan only ever apply to| Legg Expires127 September 2002 [Page29]21] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March1,27, 2002RelativeDistinguishedName component values that are not part of a DistinguishedName. A row for values+--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | telephoneNumberMatch | PrintableString | | telephoneNumberSubstringsMatch | TelephoneNumber | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ | uTCTimeMatch | UTCTime | | uTCTimeOrderingMatch | | +--------------------------------+------------------------------+ 6. ComponentFilter The ComponentAssertion allows the value(s) ofan outerany one component type inthe table for the base rule takes precedence overarow for values of an innercomplex ASN.1 typein the table forto be matched, but there is often a desire to match thederived rule. Wherevalues of more than onerow applies to a particularcomponentvaluetype. A ComponentFilter is an assertion about theearlier row takes precedence overpresence, or values of, multiple components within an ASN.1 value. The ComponentFilter assertion, an expression of ComponentAssertions, evaluates to either TRUE, FALSE or undefined for each tested ASN.1 value. A ComponentFilter is described by thelater row. Thus rowsfollowing ASN.1 type (assumed to be defined with "EXPLICIT TAGS" in force): ComponentFilter ::= CHOICE { item [0] ComponentAssertion, and [1] SEQUENCE OF ComponentFilter, or [2] SEQUENCE OF ComponentFilter, not [3] ComponentFilter } Note: despite thetable for the derived rule take precedence over any rowsuse of SEQUENCE OF instead of SET OF for thesame component"and" and "or" alternatives in ComponentFilter, thetable fororder of thebase rule. 7.3 The directoryComponentsMatch Matching Rule The directoryComponentsMatch matching rulecomponent filters isderived fromnot significant. A ComponentFilter that is a ComponentAssertion evaluates to TRUE if theallComponentsMatch matching rule. The LDAP-style definition for directoryComponentsMatch is: ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.13.7 NAME 'directoryComponentsMatch' SYNTAX 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.3 ) The X.500-style definition for directoryComponentsMatch is: directoryComponentsMatch MATCHING-RULE ::= { ID { 1 2 36 79672281 1 13 7 } }ComponentAssertion is TRUE, evaluates to FALSE if the ComponentAssertion is FALSE, and evaluates to undefined otherwise. Thematching semantics"and" ofdirectoryComponentsMatch are described bya sequence of component filters evaluates to TRUE if thefollowing table, usingsequence is empty or if each component filter evaluates to TRUE, evaluates to FALSE if at least one component filter is FALSE, and evaluates to undefined otherwise. The "or" of a sequence of component filters evaluates to FALSE if theconvention described in Section 7.2. ASN.1 Type | Matching Rule =========================================+========================= RDNSequence | distinguishedNameMatch RelativeDistinguishedName | rdnMatch TelephoneNumber | telephoneNumberMatch FacsimileTelephoneNumber.telephoneNumber | telephoneNumberMatch NumericString | numericStringMatch GeneralizedTime | generalizedTimeMatch UTCTime | uTCTimeMatch DirectoryString{} | caseIgnoreMatch BMPString | caseIgnoreMatch GeneralString | caseIgnoreMatch GraphicString | caseIgnoreMatch IA5String | caseIgnoreMatch PrintableString | caseIgnoreMatch TeletexString | caseIgnoreMatch UniversalString | caseIgnoreMatch UTF8String | caseIgnoreMatch VideotexString | caseIgnoreMatchsequence is empty or if each component filter evaluates to FALSE, evaluates to TRUE if at least one component filter is TRUE, and evaluates to undefined otherwise. Legg Expires127 September 2002 [Page30]22] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March1,27, 2002VisibleString | caseIgnoreMatch Notes. 1) The DistinguishedName type is defined by assignment to be the same as the RDNSequence type. Some types (e.g. Name and LocalName) directly reference RDNSequence rather than DistinguishedName. Specifying RDNSequence captures all these DN-like types. 2) A RelativeDistinguishedName value is only matched by rdnMatch if it is not part of an RDNSequence value. 3)Thetelephone number component"not" ofthe FacsimileTelephoneNumber ASN.1 type [10] is defined asaconstrained PrintableString. PrintableStringcomponentvalues that are part of a FacsimileTelephoneNumber value can be identified separately from other components of PrintableString type by the specifier FacsimileTelephoneNumber.telephoneNumber, so that telephoneNumberMatch can be selectively applied. The fourth edition of X.520 definesfilter evaluates to TRUE if thetelephoneNumbercomponentof FacsimileTelephoneNumberfilter is FALSE, evaluates tobe of the type TelephoneNumber, makingFALSE if therow for FacsimileTelephoneNumber.telephoneNumber components redundant.component filter is TRUE, and evaluates to undefined otherwise. 7. ThedirectoryComponentsMatch rule MAY be used as the defined equalitycomponentFilterMatch Matching Rule The componentFilterMatch matching rulefor an attribute. 8. Generic String Encoding Rules This section definesallows ahuman readable UTF8 string encoding forComponentFilter to be applied to anASN.1 value of any given ASN.1 type.attribute value. Theprimary useresult ofthis encoding methodthe matching rule isforthestring encodingresult ofassertion values appearing in ComponentAssertions, howeverapplying theencoding method can also be nominatedComponentFilter todefinethestring encoding for newattributesyntaxes.value. Thestring encodings are based on ASN.1 value notation [11], with changes to accommodate the notation's use as a transfer syntax,LDAP-style definitions for componentFilterMatch andto support well established ad-hoc string encodingsits assertion syntax are: ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.13.2 NAME 'componentFilterMatch' SYNTAX 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.2 ) ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.2 DESC 'ComponentFilter' ) The LDAP-specific encoding fordirectory data types. Referencingthe ComponentFilter assertion syntax is specified by the Generic String Encoding Rules(GSER) is sufficient to define the string encoding of values ofin [7]. As aspecific ASN.1 type, though other specifications may wishconvenience toprovide a customized version of theimplementors, an equivalent ABNFas a convenience fordescription of theimplementor (for example, as has been doneGSER encoding forComponentAssertion andComponentFilterin Section 6). Such a specification SHOULD stateis provided here. In the event thatifthere is a discrepancy between this ABNF and the encoding determined by [7], [7] is to be taken as definitive. The GSER encoding of a ComponentFilter is described by the following equivalent ABNF: ComponentFilter = filter-item / and-filter / or-filter / not-filter filter-item = item-chosen ComponentAssertion and-filter = and-chosen SequenceOfComponentFilter or-filter = or-chosen SequenceOfComponentFilter not-filter = not-chosen ComponentFilter item-chosen = %x69.74.65.6D.3A ; "item:" and-chosen = %x61.6E.64.3A ; "and:" or-chosen = %x6F.72.3A ; "or:" not-chosen = %x6E.6F.74.3A ; "not:" SequenceOfComponentFilter = "{" [ sp ComponentFilter *( "," sp ComponentFilter) ] sp "}" ComponentAssertion = "{" sp component "," Legg Expires127 September 2002 [Page31]23] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March1,27, 2002the customized[ sp useDefaultValues "," ] sp rule "," sp assertion-value sp "}" component = component-label msp dquote component-reference dquote useDefaultValues = use-defaults-label msp BooleanValue rule = rule-label msp ObjectIdentifierValue assertion-value = value-label msp Value component-label = %x63.6F.6D.70.6F.6E.65.6E.74 ; "component" use-defaults-label = %x75.73.65.44.65.66.61.75.6C.74.56.61.6C.75 %x65.73 ; "useDefaultValues" rule-label = %x72.75.6C.65 ; "rule" value-label = %x76.61.6C.75.65 ; "value" sp = *%x20 ; zero, one or more space characters msp = 1*%x20 ; one or more space characters dquote = %x22 ; " (double quote) The ABNF for <Value>, <ObjectIdentifierValue> andthe GSER encoding<BooleanValue> is defined inthis section, that[7]. The ABNF descriptions of LDAP-specific encodings for attribute syntaxes typically do not clearly or consistently delineate theGSERcomponent parts of an attribute value. A regular and uniform character string encodingtakes precedence.for arbitrary component data types is needed to encode the assertion value in a ComponentAssertion. Thestring<Value> rule from [7] provides a human readable text encodingoffor a component value of any arbitrary ASN.1type is described by the following ABNF: Value = BitStringValue / BooleanValue / ChoiceValue / EmbeddedPDVValue / EnumeratedValue / ExternalValue / GeneralizedTimeValue / IntegerValue / InstanceOfValue / NullValue / ObjectDescriptorValue / ObjectIdentifierValue / OctetStringValue / RealValue / RelativeOIDValue / SequenceOfValue / SequenceValue / SetOfValue / SetValue / StringValue / UTCTimeValue / VariantEncoding A value of a type with a defined type name is encoded according to the typetype. The X.500-style definitionon the right hand side of the type assignment[8] forthe type name.componentFilterMatch is: componentFilterMatch MATCHING-RULE ::= { SYNTAX ComponentFilter ID { 1 2 36 79672281 1 13 2 } } Avalue of a type denoted by theComponentAssertion can potentially useofany matching rule, including componentFilterMatch, so componentFilterMatch MAY be nested. The component references in aparameterized type with actual parameters is encoded accordingnested componentFilterMatch are relative to theparameterized type with the DummyReferences substituted with the actual parameters. A value of a tagged or constrained type is encoded as a value of the type without the tag or constraint, respectively. Tags do not appear in the string encodings defined by this document. A value of an open type denoted by an ObjectClassFieldType is encoded accordingcomponent corresponding to thespecific type of the value. A value of a fixed type denoted bycontaining ComponentAssertion. In Section 9, anObjectClassFieldTypeexample search on the seeAlso attribute shows this usage. 8. Equality Matching of Complex Components It isencoded accordingpossible tothat fixed type. Atest if an attribute value of aselection typecomplex ASN.1 syntax isencoded according tothetypesame as some purported (i.e. assertion) value by using Legg Expires127 September 2002 [Page32]24] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March1,27, 2002referenced by the selection type. A value ofatype described by TypeFromObject notation is encoded according tocomplicated ComponentFilter that tests if corresponding components are thedenoted type. A value ofsame. However, it would be more convenient to be able to present atype described by ValueSetFromObjects notation is encoded accordingwhole assertion value to a matching rule that could do thegoverning type. ASN.1 identifiers figure prominently in the string encodings. The ABNF for an identifier was first given in Section 4.1 but is repeated here for convenience. The casecomponent-wise comparison ofletters inanidentifier is always significant. identifier = lowercase *alphanumeric *(hyphen 1*alphanumeric) alphanumeric = uppercase / lowercase / decimal-digit uppercase = %x41-5A ; "A" to "Z" lowercase = %x61-7A ; "a" to "z" decimal-digit = %x30-39 ; "0"attribute value with the assertion value for any arbitrary attribute syntax. Similarly, the ability to"9" hyphen = "-" Ado a straightforward equality comparison of a component value that is itself ofthe BIT STRINGa complex ASN.1 typeis encoded accordingwould also be convenient. It would be difficult tothe <BitStringValue> rule. If the definitiondefine a single matching rule that simultaneously satisfies all notions of what theBIT STRING type includesequality matching semantics should be. For example, in some instances anamed bit list, the <bit-list> formcase sensitive comparison of<BitStringValue> rule MAYstring components may beused. Ifpreferable to a case insensitive comparison. Therefore a basic equality matching rule, allComponentsMatch, is defined in Section 8.1, and thenumber of bitsmeans to derive new matching rules from it with slightly different equality matching semantics is described ina BIT STRING valueSection 8.2. The directoryComponentsMatch defined in Section 8.3 is amultiplederivation of allComponentsMatch that suits typical uses offourthe<hstring> formdirectory. Other specifications are free to derive new rules from allComponentsMatch or directoryComponentsMatch, that suit their usage of<BitStringValue> MAY be used.the directory. The<bstring> form of <BitStringValue>allComponentsMatch rule, the directoryComponentsMatch rule and any matching rules derived from them are collectively called component equality matching rules. 8.1 The allComponentsMatch Matching Rule The LDAP-style definition for allComponentsMatch is: ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.13.6 NAME 'allComponentsMatch' SYNTAX 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.3 ) The X.500-style definition for allComponentsMatch is: allComponentsMatch MATCHING-RULE ::= { ID { 1 2 36 79672281 1 13 6 } } When allComponentsMatch is usedotherwise. BitStringValue = bstring / hstring / bit-list The <bit-list> rule encodes the one bitsinthe bit string value asacomma separated list of identifiers. Each <identifier> MUST be one of those inComponentAssertion thenamed bit list. An <identifier> MUST NOT appear more than once inassertion syntax is the same<bit-list>. The <bstring> rule encodes each bitas thecharacter "0" or "1" in order fromASN.1 type of thefirst bit toidentified component. Otherwise, thelast bit. The <hstring> rule encodes each groupassertion syntax offour bits as a hexadecimal number where the first bitallComponentsMatch is themost significant. An odd numbersame as the attribute syntax ofhexadecimal digits is permitted. bit-list = "{" [ sp identifier *( "," sp identifier ) ] sp "}" hstring = squote *hexadecimal-digit squote %x48 ; '...'H hexadecimal-digit = %x30-39 / ; "0" to "9" %x41-46 ; "A"the attribute to"F" bstring = squote *binary-digit squote %x42 ; '...'B binary-digit = "0" / "1"which the matching rule is applied. Broadly speaking, this matching rule evaluates to true if and only if corresponding components of the assertion value and the attribute or Legg Expires127 September 2002 [Page33]25] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March1,27, 2002sp = *%x20 ; zero, one or more space characters squote = %x27 ; ' (single quote) Acomponent valueofare theBOOLEAN typesame. In detail, equality isencoded according todetermined by the<BooleanValue> rule. BooleanValue = %x54.52.55.45 / ; "TRUE" %x46.41.4C.53.45 ; "FALSE" A valuefollowing cases applied recursively. a) Two values ofthe INTEGERa SET or SEQUENCE typeis encoded according to the <IntegerValue> rule. Ifare thedefinition ofsame if and only if, for each component type, theINTEGER type includes a named number list,corresponding component values are either, 1) both absent, 2) both present and the<identifier> form of <IntegerValue> MAY be used, in which casesame, or 3) absent or the<identifier> MUST be one of those insame as thenamed number list. The ABNF for <positive-number> was first given in Section 4.1 but is repeated hereDEFAULT value forconvenience. IntegerValue = "0" / positive-number / ("-" positive-number) / identifier positive-number = non-zero-digit *decimal-digit non-zero-digit = %x31-39 ; "1" to "9" Athe component, if a DEFAULT value is defined. Values ofthe ENUMERATEDan EMBEDDED PDV, EXTERNAL, unrestricted CHARACTER STRING, or INSTANCE OF typeis encodedare compared according tothe <EnumeratedValue> rule. The <identifier> MUST be onetheir respective SEQUENCE type (see Section 5.1.2). b) Two values ofthose ina SEQUENCE OF type are thelist of enumerations insame if and only if, thedefinition ofvalues have theENUMERATED type. EnumeratedValue = identifier A valuesame number of (possibly duplicated) instances and corresponding instances are theNULLsame. c) Two values of a SET OF typeis encoded according toare the<NullValue> rule. NullValue = %x4E.55.4C.4C ; "NULL" A value ofsame if and only if, theOBJECT IDENTIFIER type is encoded according tovalues have the<ObjectIdentifierValue> rule. The <ObjectIdentifierValue> rule allows either a dotted decimal representationsame number of instances and each distinct instance occurs in both values theOBJECT IDENTIFIER value or an object descriptor name,same number of times, i.e.<descr>. The <descr> rule is describedboth values have the same instances, including duplicates, but in[5]. An object descriptor name is potentially ambiguous and should be used with care. ObjectIdentifierValue = numeric-oid / descr numeric-oid = oid-component 1*( "." oid-component ) oid-component = "0" / positive-number A valueany order. d) Two values ofthe RELATIVE-OIDa CHOICE typeis encoded according toare the<RelativeOIDValue> rule. Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 34] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 RelativeOIDValue = oid-component *( "." oid-component ) A valuesame if and only if, both values are of theOCTET STRING type is encoded according tosame chosen alternative and the<OctetStringValue> rule. The octetscomponent values areencoded in order fromthefirst octet tosame. e) Two BIT STRING values are thelast octet. Each octet is encoded as a pair of hexadecimal digits wheresame if and only if thefirst digit corresponds tovalues have thefour most significant bitssame number of bits and corresponding bits are theoctet.same. If thehexadecimal string does not have an even number of digits the four least significantBIT STRING type is defined with a named bit list then trailing zero bits in thelast octetvalues are treated as absent for the purposes of this comparison. f) Two BOOLEAN values are the same if and only if both are TRUE or both areassumed to be zero. OctetStringValue = hstring The contentsFALSE. g) Two values of a stringvaluetype areencoded as a UTF8 character string between double quotes. Depending ontheASN.1 string type,same if andan application's internal representationonly if the values have the same number ofthat string type, a translation to or fromcharacters and corresponding characters are theUTF8 character encoding may be required.same. Letter case is significant. For the purposes of allComponentsMatch, the string types are NumericString, PrintableString, TeletexString (T61String), VideotexString, Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 26] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 IA5String, GraphicString, VisibleString(ISO646String) are compatible with UTF8 and do not require any translation. BMPString (UCS-2) and UniversalString (UCS-4) have a direct mapping to(ISO646String), GeneralString, UniversalString, BMPString, UTF8String, GeneralizedTime, UTCTime andfrom UTF8 [7]. ForObjectDescriptor. h) Two INTEGER values are theremaining string types see [11]. Any embedded double quotes insame if and only if theresulting UTF8 character stringintegers are equal. i) Two ENUMERATED values areescaped by repeating the double quote characters. StringValue = dquote *SafeUTF8Character dquote dquote = %x22 ; " (double quote) SafeUTF8Character = %x00-21 / %x23-7F / ; ASCII minus dquote dquote dquote / ; escaped double quote %xC0-DF %x80-BF / ; 2 byte UTF8 character %xE0-EF 2(%x80-BF) / ; 3 byte UTF8 character %xF0-F7 3(%x80-BF) / ; 4 byte UTF8 character %xF8-FB 4(%x80-BF) / ; 5 byte UTF8 character %xFC-FD 5(%x80-BF) ; 6 byte UTF8 character A value oftheGeneralizedTime type, UTCTime type or ObjectDescriptor type is encoded as a string value. GeneralizedTimesame if andUTCTime useonly if theVisibleString character set soenumeration item identifiers are theconversion to UTF8 is trivial. ObjectDescriptor usessame (equivalently, if theGraphicString type. GeneralizedTimeValue = StringValue UTCTimeValue = StringValue ObjectDescriptorValue = StringValue A value of a CHOICE type is encoded according tointeger values associated with the identifiers are equal). j) Two NULL values are always the same, unconditionally. k) Two OBJECT IDENTIFIER values are the<ChoiceValue> rule. The <ChoiceOfStringsValue> encoding MAY be usedsame if and only if thecorresponding CHOICE type has been declared a ChoiceOfStrings type. This document declares DirectoryString to be a ChoiceOfStrings type Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 35] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 (see Section 4.2.1.1). The <IdentifiedChoiceValue> form of <ChoiceValue> is used otherwise. ChoiceValue = IdentifiedChoiceValue / ChoiceOfStringsValue IdentifiedChoiceValue = identifier ":" Value ChoiceOfStringsValue = StringValue For implementations that recognisevalues have theinternal structuresame number of arcs and corresponding arcs are theDirectoryString CHOICE type (e.g. X.500 directories),same. l) Two OCTET STRING values are the same if and only if thecharacter string betweenvalues have thequotes in a <StringValue> containssame number of octets and corresponding octets are the same. m) Two REAL values are the same if and onlycharacters thatif they arepermitted in a PrintableStringboth theDirectoryStringsame special value, or neither isassumed to usea special value and they have theprintableString alternative, otherwise it is assumed to usesame base and represent theuTF8String alternative.same real number. The<IdentifiedChoiceValue> rule MAY be usedspecial values fora valueREAL are zero, PLUS-INFINITY and MINUS-INFINITY. n) Two RELATIVE-OID [12] values are the same if and only if the values have the same number oftype DirectoryString to indicate a different alternative toarcs and corresponding arcs are theone that would otherwise be assumed fromsame. The respective starting nodes for thestring contents. No matter what alternative is chosen,RELATIVE-OID values are disregarded in the<Value> will stillcomparison, i.e. they are assumed to bea UTF8 encoded character string, however it is a syntax error ifthecharacters insame. o) Two values of an open type are theUTF8 string cannot be represented insame if and only if both are of thestringsame ASN.1 typeofand are thechosen alternative. Implementationssame according to thatdon't care abouttype. Tags and constraints, being part of theinternal structuretype definition and not part ofa DirectoryString value MUST be able to parsethe<IdentifiedChoiceValue> formabstract values, are ignored fora DirectoryString value, though the particular identifier found willmatching purposes. The allComponentsMatch rule MAY beof no interest.used as the defined equality matching rule for an attribute. 8.2 Deriving Component Equality Matching Rules Avalue of a SEQUENCE type is encoded according tonew component equality matching rule with more refined matching semantics MAY be derived from allComponentsMatch, or any other component equality matching rule, using the<SequenceValue> rule.convention described in this section. Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 27] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 The<ComponentList>matching behaviour of a derived component equality matching ruleencodesis specified by nominating, for each of one or more identified components, acomma separated listcommutative equality matching rule that will be used to match values of that component. This overrides theparticular componentmatching that would otherwise occur for valuespresent in the SEQUENCE value, where eachof that componentvalue is preceded byusing thecorresponding identifier frombase rule for theSEQUENCE type definition. The components are encodedderivation. These overrides can be conveniently represented as rows inthe ordera table oftheir definition intheSEQUENCE type. SequenceValue = ComponentList ComponentList = "{" [ sp NamedValue *( "," sp NamedValue) ] sp "}" NamedValue = identifier msp Value msp = 1*%x20 ; one or more space characters A valuefollowing form. Component | Matching Rule ============+=============== | | Usually, all component values of aSETparticular ASN.1 typeis encoded accordingare to be matched the<SetValue> rule. The components are encodedsame way. An ASN.1 type reference (e.g. DistinguishedName) or an ASN.1 built-in type name (e.g. INTEGER) in theorderComponent column oftheir definition intheSETtable specifies that the nominated equality matching rule is to be applied to all values of the named type, regardless of context. An ASN.1 type(i.e. just likereference with aSEQUENCE value). This iscomponent reference appended (separated by adeliberate departure from ASN.1 value notation where".") specifies that the nominated matching rule applies only to the identified components ofa SET canvalues of the named type. Other component values that happen to bewritten in any order. Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 36] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 SetValue = ComponentList SEQUENCE and SETof the same ASN.1 typedefinitionsaresometimes extended bynot selected. Additional type substitutions as described in Section 5.2 are assumed to be performed to align theinclusion of additionalcomponenttypes, so an implementation SHOULD be capable of skipping over any <NamedValue> encodingtype withan identifier that is not recognised, ontheassumption thatmatching rule assertion syntax. Conceptually, thesender is usingrows in amore recent definition oftable for theSEQUENCE or SET type. A value of a SEQUENCE OF type is encoded accordingbase rule are appended to the<SequenceOfValue> rule, as a comma separated list of the instancesrows in thevalue. Each instance is encoded according totable for a derived rule for thecomponent typepurpose of deciding theSEQUENCE OF type. SequenceOfValue = "{" [ sp Value *( "," sp Value) ] sp "}"matching semantics of the derived rule. Notionally, allComponentsMatch has an empty table. Avaluerow specifying values ofa SET OFan outer containing typeis encoded according to the <SetOfValue> rule, as(e.g. DistinguishedName) takes precedence over alistrow specifying values ofthe instances in the value. Each instance is encoded according to thean inner component type (e.g. RelativeDistinguishedName), regardless of their order in theSET OF type. SetOfValue = "{" [ sp Value *( "," sp Value) ] sp "}" A valuetable. Specifying a row for component values of anEMBEDDED PDV, EXTERNAL, unrestricted CHARACTER STRING, or INSTANCE OFinner type isencoded according to the corresponding SEQUENCE type (see Section 4.1.2). EmbeddedPDVValue = SequenceValue ExternalValue = SequenceValue InstanceOfValue = SequenceValue Aonly useful if a value of theREALtypeMUST be encodedcan also appear on its own, or as"0"a component of values of a different outer type. For example, ifit is zero, otherwise itthere isencoded as either the special value <PLUS-INFINITY>, the special value <MINUS-INFINITY>,a row for DistinguishedName then a row for RelativeDistinguishedName can only ever apply to RelativeDistinguishedName component values that are not part of a DistinguishedName. A row for values of anoptionally signed <realnumber> (based onouter type in theextended value notationtable forREAL from [19]) or asthe base rule takes precedence over avaluerow for values ofthe corresponding SEQUENCEan inner type in the table forREAL (see Section 4.1.2). RealValue = "0" ; zero REAL value / PLUS-INFINITY ; positive infinity / MINUS-INFINITY ; negative infinity / realnumber ; positive base 10 REAL value / "-" realnumber ; negative base 10 REAL value / SequenceValue ; non-zero REAL value, base 2 or 10 realnumber = mantissa exponent mantissa = (positive-number [ "." *decimal-digit ]) / ( "0." *("0") positive-number ) exponent = "E" ( "0" / ([ "-" ] positive-number)) PLUS-INFINITY = %x50.4C.55.53.2D.49.4E.46.49.4E.49.54.59the derived rule. Legg Expires127 September 2002 [Page37]28] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March1,27, 2002; "PLUS-INFINITY" MINUS-INFINITY = %x4D.49.4E.55.53.2D.49.4E.46.49.4E.49.54.59 ; "MINUS-INFINITY" The values of some named complex ASN.1 types have special string encodings. These special encodings are always used instead ofWhere more than one row applies to a particular component value theencoding that would otherwise apply based onearlier row takes precedence over thetype definition. VariantEncoding = RDNSequenceValue / RelativeDistinguishedNameValue / ORAddressValue A value oflater row. Thus rows in theRDNSequence type, i.e. a distinguished name, is encoded according totable for the<RDNSequenceValue> rule, as a quoted LDAPDN character string.derived rule take precedence over any rows for the same component in the table for the base rule. 8.3 Thecharacter stringdirectoryComponentsMatch Matching Rule The directoryComponentsMatch matching rule isfirstderivedaccording tofrom the<distinguishedName> ruleallComponentsMatch matching rule. The LDAP-style definition for directoryComponentsMatch is: ( 1.2.36.79672281.1.13.7 NAME 'directoryComponentsMatch' SYNTAX 1.2.36.79672281.1.5.3 ) The X.500-style definition for directoryComponentsMatch is: directoryComponentsMatch MATCHING-RULE ::= { ID { 1 2 36 79672281 1 13 7 } } The matching semantics of directoryComponentsMatch are described by the following table, using the convention described in Section3 of [6], and then it8.2. ASN.1 Type | Matching Rule =========================================+======================== RDNSequence | distinguishedNameMatch RelativeDistinguishedName | rdnMatch TelephoneNumber | telephoneNumberMatch FacsimileTelephoneNumber.telephoneNumber | telephoneNumberMatch NumericString | numericStringMatch GeneralizedTime | generalizedTimeMatch UTCTime | uTCTimeMatch DirectoryString{} | caseIgnoreMatch BMPString | caseIgnoreMatch GeneralString | caseIgnoreMatch GraphicString | caseIgnoreMatch IA5String | caseIgnoreMatch PrintableString | caseIgnoreMatch TeletexString | caseIgnoreMatch UniversalString | caseIgnoreMatch UTF8String | caseIgnoreMatch VideotexString | caseIgnoreMatch VisibleString | caseIgnoreMatch Notes. 1) The DistinguishedName type isencodeddefined by assignment to be the same Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 29] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 asif it were a UTF8String value, i.e. between double quotes with any embedded double quotes escaped by being repeated. RDNSequenceValue = StringValuethe RDNSequence type. Some types (e.g. Name and LocalName) directly reference RDNSequence rather than DistinguishedName. Specifying RDNSequence captures all these DN-like types. 2) A RelativeDistinguishedName valuethatis only matched by rdnMatch if it is not part of an RDNSequencevalue is encoded according to the <RelativeDistinguishedNameValue> rule as a quoted character string.value. 3) Thecharacter string is first derived according to the <name-component> rule in Section 3telephone number component of[6], and then itthe FacsimileTelephoneNumber ASN.1 type [10] isencodeddefined asif it wereaUTF8String value. RelativeDistinguishedNameValue = StringValue Aconstrained PrintableString. PrintableString component values that are part of a FacsimileTelephoneNumber value can be identified separately from other components ofthe ORAddressPrintableString typeis encoded according toby the<ORAddressValue> rule as a quoted character string.specifier FacsimileTelephoneNumber.telephoneNumber, so that telephoneNumberMatch can be selectively applied. Thecharacter string is first derived according tofourth edition of X.520 defines thetextual representationtelephoneNumber component ofMTS.ORAddress from [2], and then it is encoded as if it were an IA5String value. ORAddressValue = StringValue 8.1 GSER Transfer Syntax The following OBJECT IDENTIFIER has been assignedFacsimileTelephoneNumber toidentify the Generic String Encoding Rules: { 1 2 36 79672281 0 0 } This OBJECT IDENTIFIER wouldbeused,of the type TelephoneNumber, making the row forexample, to describeFacsimileTelephoneNumber.telephoneNumber components redundant. The directoryComponentsMatch rule MAY be used as thetransfer syntaxdefined equality matching rule fora GSER encoded data-value inanEXTERNAL or EMBEDDED PDV value. Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 38] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002attribute. 9. Component Matching Examples This section contains examples of search filters using the componentFilterMatch matching rule. The filters are described using the string representation of LDAP search filters from [17]. Note that [17] requires asterisks to be escaped in assertion values (in these examples the assertion values are all <ComponentAssertion> encodings). The asterisks have not been escaped in these examples for the sake of clarity, and to avoid confusing the LDAP protocol representation of search filter assertion values, where such escaping does not apply. Line breaks and indenting have been added only as an aid to readability. The example search filters are all single extensible match filter items, though there is no reason why componentFilterMatch can't be used in more complicated search filters. The first examples describe searches over the objectClasses schema operational attribute, which has an attribute syntax described by the ASN.1 type ObjectClassDescription [8], and holds the definitions of the object classes known to a directory server. The definition of ObjectClassDescription is as follows: ObjectClassDescription ::= SEQUENCE { identifier OBJECT-CLASS.&id, Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 30] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 name SET OF DirectoryString{ ub-schema }{ub-schema} OPTIONAL, description DirectoryString{ ub-schema }{ub-schema} OPTIONAL, obsolete BOOLEAN DEFAULT FALSE, information [0] ObjectClassInformation } ObjectClassInformation ::= SEQUENCE { subclassOf SET OF OBJECT-CLASS.&id OPTIONAL, kind ObjectClassKind DEFAULT structural, mandatories [3] SET OF ATTRIBUTE.&id OPTIONAL, optionals [4] SET OF ATTRIBUTE.&id OPTIONAL } ObjectClassKind ::= ENUMERATED { abstract (0), structural (1), auxiliary (2) } OBJECT-CLASS.&id and ATTRIBUTE.&id are equivalent to the OBJECT IDENTIFIER ASN.1 type. A value of OBJECT-CLASS.&id is an OBJECT IDENTIFIER for an object class. A value of ATTRIBUTE.&id is an OBJECT IDENTIFIER for an attribute type. The following search filter finds the object class definition for the object class identified by the OBJECT IDENTIFIER 2.5.6.18:Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 39] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 (objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:=item:{(objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "identifier", rule objectIdentifierMatch, value 2.5.6.18 }) A match on the "identifier" component of objectClasses values is equivalent to the objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch matching rule applied to attribute values of the objectClasses attribute type. The componentFilterMatch matching rule subsumes the functionality of the objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch, integerFirstComponentMatch and directoryStringFirstComponentMatch matching rules. The following search filter finds the object class definition for the object class called foobar:(objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:=item:{(objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "name.*", rule caseIgnoreMatch, value "foobar" }) An object class definition can have multiple names and the above filter will match an objectClasses value if any one of the names is "foobar". The component reference "name.0" identifies the notional count of the number of names in an object class definition. The following search Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 31] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 filter finds object class definitions with exactly one name: (objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "name.0", rule integerMatch, value 1 }) The "description" component of an ObjectClassDescription is defined to be an OPTIONAL DirectoryString. The following search filter finds object class definitions that have descriptions, regardless of the contents of the description string. (objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "description", rule presentMatch, value NULL }) The presentMatch returns TRUE if the description component is present and FALSE otherwise. The following search filter finds object class definitions that don't have descriptions.(objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:=not: item:{(objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:= not:item:{ component "description", rule presentMatch, value NULL })Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 40] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002The following search filter finds object class definitions with the word "bogus" in the description: (objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "description", rule caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch, value { any:"bogus" } }) The assertion value is of the SubstringAssertion syntax, i.e. SubstringAssertion ::= SEQUENCE OF CHOICE { initial [0] DirectoryString {ub-match}, any [1] DirectoryString {ub-match}, final [2] DirectoryString {ub-match} } The "obsolete" component of an ObjectClassDescription is defined to be DEFAULT FALSE. An object class is obsolete if the "obsolete" component is present and set to TRUE. The following search filter finds all obsolete object classes: (objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "obsolete", rule booleanMatch, value TRUE }) An object class is not obsolete if the "obsolete" component is not Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 32] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 present, in which case it defaults to FALSE, or is present but is explicitly set to FALSE. The following search filter finds all non- obsolete object classes. (objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "obsolete", rule booleanMatch, value FALSE }) The useDefaultValues flag in the ComponentAssertion defaults to TRUE so the componentFilterMatch rule treats an absent "obsolete" component as being present and set to FALSE. The following search filter finds only object class definitions where the "obsolete" component has been explicitly set to FALSE, rather than implicitly defaulting to FALSE. (objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "obsolete", useDefaultValues FALSE, rule booleanMatch, value FALSE }) With the useDefaultValues flag set to FALSE, if the "obsolete" component is absent the component reference identifies no component value and the matching rule will return FALSE. The matching rule can only return TRUE if the component is present and set to FALSE. The "information.kind" component of the ObjectClassDescription is anLegg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 41] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002ENUMERATED type. The following search filter finds object class definitions for auxiliary object classes. (objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "information.kind", rule enumeratedMatch, value auxiliary }) The following search filter finds auxiliary object classes with commonName (cn or 2.5.4.3) as a mandatory attribute: (objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:=and:{ item:{ component "information.kind", rule enumeratedMatch, value auxiliary }, item:{ component "information.mandatories.*", rule objectIdentifierMatch, value cn } }) The following search filter finds auxiliary object classes with commonName as a mandatory or optional attribute: (objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:=and:{ item:{ component "information.kind", rule enumeratedMatch, value auxiliary }, or:{ item:{ component "information.mandatories.*", Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 33] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 rule objectIdentifierMatch, value cn }, item:{ component "information.optionals.*", rule objectIdentifierMatch, value cn } } }) Extra care is required when matching optional SEQUENCE OF or SET OF components because of the distinction between an absent list of instances and a present, but empty, list of instances. The following search filter finds object class definitions with less than three names, including object class definitions with a present but empty list of names, but does not find object class definitions with an absent list of names. (objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "name.0", rule integerOrderingMatch, value 3 }) If the "name" component is absent the "name.0" component is also considered to be absent and the ComponentAssertion evaluates to FALSE. If the "name" component is present, but empty, the "name.0" component is also present and equal to zero, so the ComponentAssertion evaluates to TRUE. To also find the object class definitions with an absent list of names the following search filter would be used: (objectClasses:componentFilterMatch:=or:{Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 42] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002not:item:{ component "name", rule presentMatch, value NULL }, item:{ component "name.0", rule integerOrderingMatch, value 3 } }) Distinguished names embedded in other syntaxes can be matched with a componentFilterMatch. The uniqueMember attribute type has an attribute syntax described by the ASN.1 type NameAndOptionalUID. NameAndOptionalUID ::= SEQUENCE { dn DistinguishedName, uid UniqueIdentifier OPTIONAL } The following search filter finds values of the uniqueMember attribute containing the author's DN:(uniqueMember:componentFilterMatch:=item:{(uniqueMember:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "dn", rule distinguishedNameMatch, value "cn=Steven Legg,o=Adacel,c=AU" }) The DistinguishedName and RelativeDistinguishedName ASN.1 types are also complex ASN.1 types so the component matching rules can be applied to their inner components. Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 34] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 DistinguishedName ::= RDNSequence RDNSequence ::= SEQUENCE OF RelativeDistinguishedName RelativeDistinguishedName ::= SET SIZE (1..MAX) OF AttributeTypeAndValue AttributeTypeAndValue ::= SEQUENCE { type AttributeType ({SupportedAttributes}), value AttributeValue ({SupportedAttributes}{@type}) } AttributeType ::= ATTRIBUTE.&id AttributeValue ::= ATTRIBUTE.&Type ATTRIBUTE.&Type is an open type. A value of ATTRIBUTE.&Type is constrained by the type component of AttributeTypeAndValue to be of the attribute syntax of the nominated attribute type. Note: the fourth edition of X.500 extends and renames the AttributeTypeAndValue SEQUENCE type. The seeAlso attribute has the DistinguishedName syntax. The following search filter finds seeAlso attribute values containing the RDN, "o=Adacel", anywhere in the DN:Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 43] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002(seeAlso:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "*", rule rdnMatch, value "o=Adacel" }) The following search filter finds all seeAlso attribute values with "cn=Steven Legg" as the RDN of the named entry (i.e. the "first" RDN in an LDAPDN or the "last" RDN in an X.500 DN). (seeAlso:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "-1", rule rdnMatch, value "cn=Steven Legg" }) The following search filter finds all seeAlso attribute values naming entries in the DIT subtree of "o=Adacel,c=AU": (seeAlso:componentFilterMatch:=and:{ item:{ component "1", rule rdnMatch, value "c=AU" }, item:{ component "2", rule rdnMatch, value "o=Adacel" } }) The following search filter finds all seeAlso attribute values containing the naming attribute types commonName (cn) and telephoneNumber in the same RDN: (seeAlso:componentFilterMatch:= Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 35] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 item:{ component "*", rule componentFilterMatch, value and:{ item:{ component "*.type", rule objectIdentifierMatch, value cn }, item:{ component "*.type", rule objectIdentifierMatch, value telephoneNumber } } }) The following search filter would find all seeAlso attribute values containing the attribute types commonName and telephoneNumber, but not necessarily in the same RDN: (seeAlso:componentFilterMatch:=and:{ item:{ component "*.*.type", rule objectIdentifierMatch, value cn }, item:{ component "*.*.type", rule objectIdentifierMatch, value telephoneNumber } }) The following search filter finds all seeAlso attribute values containing the word "Adacel" in any organizationalUnitName (ou) attribute value in any AttributeTypeAndValue of any RDN: (seeAlso:componentFilterMatch:= item:{ component "*.*.value.(2.5.4.11)", rule caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch, value { any:"Adacel" } })Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 44] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002The component reference "*.*.value" identifies an open type, in this case an attribute value. In a particular AttributeTypeAndValue, if the attribute type is not organizationalUnitName then the ComponentAssertion evaluates to FALSE. Otherwise the substring assertion is evaluated against the attribute value. 10. Security Considerations The component matching rules described in this document allow for a compact specification of matching capabilities that could otherwise have been defined by a plethora of specific matching rules, i.e. despite their expressiveness and flexibility the component matching rules do not behave in a way uncharacteristic of other matching rules, so the security issues for component matching rules are no different than for any other matching rule. However, because the component matching rules are applicable to any attribute syntax, support for them in a directory server may allow searching of attributes that were previously unsearchable by virtue of there not being a suitable matching rule. Such attribute types ought to be properly protected with appropriate access controls.The generic string encodings in Section 8 do not necessarily enable the exact octet encoding of values of the TeletexString, VideotexString, GraphicString or GeneralString types to be reconstructed, so a transformation from DER to GSER and back to DER may not reproduce the original DER encoding. This has consequences for the verification of digital signatures.Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 36] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 11. Acknowledgements The author would like to thank Tom Gindin for private email discussions that clarified and refined the ideas presented in this document. 12. Normative References [1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC2119, March 1997. [2] Kille, S., "MIXER (Mime Internet X.400 Enhanced Relay): Mapping between X.400 and RFC 822/MIME", RFC 2156, January 1998. [3]2119, March 1997. [2] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997.Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 45] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002 [4][3] Wahl, M., Howes, T. and S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3)", RFC 2251, December 1997.[5][4] Wahl, M., Coulbeck, A., Howes, T. and S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Attribute Syntax Definitions", RFC 2252, December 1997.[6][5] Wahl, M., Kille S. and T. Howes. "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): UTF-8 String Representation of Distinguished Names", RFC 2253, December 1997.[7][6] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646", RFC 2279, January 1998. [7] Legg, S., "Generic String Encoding Rules for ASN.1 Types", draft-legg-ldap-gser-xx.txt, a work in progress, March 2002. [8] ITU-T Recommendation X.501 (1993) | ISO/IEC 9594-2:1994, Information Technology - Open Systems Interconnection - The Directory: Models [9] ITU-T Recommendation X.509 (1997) | ISO/IEC 9594-8:1998, Information Technology - Open Systems Interconnection - The Directory: Authentication Framework [10] ITU-T Recommendation X.520 (1993) | ISO/IEC 9594-6:1994, Information Technology - Open Systems Interconnection - The Directory: Selected attribute types [11] ITU-T Recommendation X.680 (1997) | ISO/IEC 8824-1:1998 Information Technology - Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1): Specification of basic notation Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 37] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 [12] ITU-T Recommendation X.680 - Amendment 1 (06/99) | ISO/IEC 8824-1:1998/Amd 1:2000 Relative object identifiers [13] ITU-T Recommendation X.681 (1997) | ISO/IEC 8824-2:1998 Information Technology - Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1): Information object specification [14] ITU-T Recommendation X.682 (1997) | ISO/IEC 8824-3:1998 Information Technology - Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1): Constraint specification [15] ITU-T Recommendation X.683 (1997) | ISO/IEC 8824-4:1998 Information Technology - Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1): Parameterization of ASN.1 specifications 13. Informative ReferencesLegg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 46] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002[16] Hovey, R. and S. Bradner, "The Organizations Involved in the IETF Standards Process", BCP 11, RFC 2028, October 1996. [17] Howes, T., "The String Representation of LDAP Search Filters", RFC 2254, December 1997. [18] ITU-T Recommendation X.500 (1993) | ISO/IEC 9594-1:1994, Information Technology - Open Systems Interconnection - The Directory: Overview of concepts, models and services [19] ITU-T RecommendationX.680X.690 (1997) | ISO/IEC 8825-1:1998 Information Technology -Corrigendum 3 (02/2001)ASN.1 encoding rules: Specification of Basic Encoding Rules (BER), Canonical Encoding Rules (CER) and Distinguished Encoding Rules (DER) 14. Intellectual Property Notice The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. [16] Copies of claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 38] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive Director. 15. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). 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 otherLegg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 47] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002Internet 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. 16. Author's Address Steven Legg Adacel Technologies Ltd. 405-409 Ferntree Gully Road Mount Waverley, Victoria 3149 AUSTRALIA Phone: +61 3 9451 2107 Fax: +61 3 9541 2121 Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 39] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 EMail: steven.legg@adacel.com.au 17. Appendix A - Changes From Previous Drafts 17.1 Changes in Draft 01 Section 4.1.7 (now 5.1.7) was added to enable component matching of values embedded in encoded form into BIT STRINGs or OCTET STRINGs. In particular, this is to allow component matching of values in Certificate extensions. The <content> rule was added in Section 4.1 (now 5.1) to allow the OCTET STRING contents to be treated as either raw octets or as an embedded value. References to a companion document summarizing the ASN.1 types of LDAP syntaxes were removed to avoid holding up this document. The OpenType syntax was renamed to OpenAssertionType. Object identifiers for the new syntax and matching rule definitions have been allocated from an arc belonging to Adacel Technologies Ltd.Legg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 48] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 200217.2 Changes in Draft 02 The context specific tagging in the ComponentAssertion ASN.1 type was unnecessary and has been removed. The encoding of OpenAssertionType assertion values outside of ComponentAssertions has been clarified, and the description of OpenAssertionType has been promoted to its own section. 17.3 Changes in Draft 03 The default matching by allComponentsMatch of component values of BIT STRING types with named bit lists has been changed to ignore trailing zero bits. Typographical errors in the <SafeUTF8Character> rule have been fixed. 17.4 Changes in Draft 04 When the matching rule in a ComponentAssertion has a variable assertion syntax it is not possible to determine the syntax of the value component from the ComponentAssertion alone when the associated component reference has referenced through an open type. Deducing what that syntax should be from inspection of the other ComponentAssertions in a ComponentFilter is difficult to implement in any comprehensive way. The <select> form of ComponentId has been Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page 40] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 introduced so that the syntax can always be determined from the contents of the ComponentAssertion alone. This not only simplifies implementation but can lead to simpler ComponentFilters since there is no longer a requirement to test that the components constraining an open type have particular values. The open type referencing example has been changed accordingly. The contained type referencing example has also been changed because it is an example of a contained open type. The presentationAddressMatch rule is not commutative so it has been removed from the table defining directoryComponentsMatch. The default behaviour of allComponentsMatch is already a suitable commutative substitute for matching PresentationAddress values. The null character has been included in the range of legal characters for <SafeUTF8Character>. The ASN.1 type of the notional iteration count associated with SET OF and SEQUENCE OF values has been refined to INTEGER (0..MAX). The encoding rules in Section 8 (now draft-legg-ldap-gser-xx.txt) have been formally named the Generic String Encoding Rules (GSER) and a transfer syntax object identifierLegg Expires 1 September 2002 [Page 49] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 1, 2002has been assigned. The term "LDAP string encoding" has been replaced by the term "nativeLDAPLDAP-specific encoding" to align with terminology anticipated to be used in the revision of RFC 2252. 17.5 Changes in Draft 05 Reformatted the draft to conform to recent and proposed RFC editorial policy. The use of the <oid> rule from RFC 2252 has been replaced by a local definition to specifically outlaw leading zero characters in OBJECT IDENTIFIER components. Provisions for the RELATIVE-OID ASN.1 type defined in Amendment 1 to X.680 have been added. The comparison of REAL values has been clarified and the GSER encoding of REAL values has been extended. Removed extraneous spaces from example DNs. 17.6 Changes in Draft 06 An ABNF syntax error in the <exponent> rule was fixed. Legg Expires127 September 2002 [Page 41] INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP & X.500 Component Matching Rules March 27, 2002 17.7 Changes in Draft 07 The term "native LDAP encoding" has been replaced by the term "LDAP- specific encoding" to align with terminology anticipated to be used in the revision of RFC 2252. Section 8 has been extracted to become a separate Internet draft, draft-legg-ldap-gser-00.txt. The specifications for ChoiceOfStrings types have also been moved to this new Internet draft. Various editorial changes have been made to this draft to accommodate this split. Legg Expires 27 September 2002 [Page50]42] ----