OpenRFC.org Requests For Comments ... for the community
Welcome to OpenRFC
Home Full RFC index RFC humour Our technology
 
RFC 3876
Returning Matched Values with the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol version 3 (LDAPv3).
D. Chadwick, S. Mullan. September 2004.

 
[Direct link][Download PDF version][Download text version]
 

Network Working Group D. Chadwick Request for Comments: 3876 University of Salford Category: Standards Track S. Mullan Sun Microsystems September 2004 Returning Matched Values with the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol version 3 (LDAPv3) Status of this Memo This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). Abstract This document describes a control for the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol version 3 that is used to return a subset of attribute values from an entry. Specifically, only those values that match a "values return" filter. Without support for this control, a client must retrieve all of an attribute's values and search for specific values locally. 1. Introduction When reading an attribute from an entry using the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol version 3 (LDAPv3) [2], it is normally only possible to read either the attribute type, or the attribute type and all its values. It is not possible to selectively read just a few of the attribute values. If an attribute holds many values, for example, the userCertificate attribute, or the subschema publishing operational attributes objectClasses and attributeTypes [3], then it may be desirable for the user to be able to selectively retrieve a subset of the values, specifically, those attribute values that match some user defined selection criteria. Without the control specified in this document, a client must read all of the attribute's values and filter out the unwanted values, necessitating the client to implement the matching rules. It also requires the client to Chadwick & Mullan Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 3876 Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3 September 2004 potentially read and process many irrelevant values, which can be inefficient if the values are large or complex, or there are many values stored per attribute. This document specifies an LDAPv3 control to enable a user to return only those values that matched (i.e., returned TRUE to) one or more elements of a newly defined "values return" filter. This control can be especially useful when used in conjunction with extensible matching rules that match on one or more components of complex binary attribute values. 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 BCP 14, RFC 2119 [4]. 2. The valuesReturnFilter Control The valuesReturnFilter control is either critical or non-critical as determined by the user. It only has meaning for the Search operation, and SHOULD only be added to the Search operation by the client. If the server supports the control and it is present on a Search operation, the server MUST obey the control, regardless of the value of the criticality flag. If the control is marked as critical, and either the server does not support the control or the control is applied to an operation other than Search, the server MUST return an unavailableCriticalExtension error. If the control is not marked as critical, and either the server does not support the control or the control is applied to an operation other than Search, then the server MUST ignore the control. The object identifier for this control is 1.2.826.0.1.3344810.2.3. The controlValue is an OCTET STRING, whose value is the BER encoding [6], as per Section 5.1 of RFC 2251 [2], of a value of the ASN.1 [5] type ValuesReturnFilter. ValuesReturnFilter ::= SEQUENCE OF SimpleFilterItem SimpleFilterItem ::= CHOICE { equalityMatch [3] AttributeValueAssertion, substrings [4] SubstringFilter, greaterOrEqual [5] AttributeValueAssertion, lessOrEqual [6] AttributeValueAssertion, present [7] AttributeDescription, approxMatch [8] AttributeValueAssertion, extensibleMatch [9] SimpleMatchingAssertion } Chadwick & Mullan Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 3876 Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3 September 2004 SimpleMatchingAssertion ::= SEQUENCE { matchingRule [1] MatchingRuleId OPTIONAL, type [2] AttributeDescription OPTIONAL, --- at least one of the above must be present matchValue [3] AssertionValue} All the above data types have their standard meanings as defined in [2]. If the server supports this control, the server MUST make use of the control as follows: 1) The Search Filter is first executed in order to determine which entries satisfy the Search criteria (these are the filtered entries). The control has no impact on this step. 2) If the typesOnly parameter of the Search Request is TRUE, the control has no effect and the Search Request is processed as if the control had not been specified. 3) If the attributes parameter of the Search Request consists of a list containing only the attribute with OID "1.1" (specifying that no attributes are to be returned), the control has no effect and the Search Request is processed as if the control had not been specified. 4) For each attribute listed in the attributes parameter of the Search Request, the server MUST apply the control as follows to each entry in the set of filtered entries: i) Every attribute value that evaluates TRUE against one or more elements of the ValuesReturnFilter is placed in the corresponding SearchResultEntry. ii) Every attribute value that evaluates FALSE or undefined against all elements of the ValuesReturnFilter is not placed in the corresponding SearchResultEntry. An attribute that has no values selected is returned with an empty set of values. Note. If the AttributeDescriptionList (see [2]) is empty or comprises "*", then the control MUST be applied against every user attribute. If the AttributeDescriptionList contains a "+", then the control MUST be applied against every operational attribute. Chadwick & Mullan Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 3876 Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3 September 2004 3. Relationship to X.500 The control is a superset of the matchedValuesOnly (MVO) boolean of the X.500 Directory Access Protocol (DAP) [8] Search argument, as amended in the latest version [9]. Close examination of the matchedValuesOnly boolean by the LDAP Extensions (LDAPEXT) Working Group revealed ambiguities and complexities in the MVO boolean that could not easily be resolved. For example, it was not clear if the MVO boolean governed only those attribute values that contributed to the overall truth of the filter, or all of the attribute values, even if the filter item containing the attribute was evaluated as false. For this reason the LDAPEXT group decided to replace the MVO boolean with a simple filter that removes any uncertainty as to whether an attribute value has been selected or not. 4. Relationship to other LDAP Controls The purpose of this control is to select zero, one, or more attribute values from each requested attribute in a filtered entry, and to discard the remainder. Once the attribute values have been discarded by this control, they MUST NOT be re-instated into the Search results by other controls. This control acts independently of other LDAP controls such as server side sorting [13] and duplicate entries [10]. However, there might be interactions between this control and other controls so that a different set of Search Result Entries are returned, or the entries are returned in a different order, depending upon the sequencing of this control and other controls in the LDAP request. For example, with server side sorting, if sorting is done first, and value return filtering second, the set of Search Results may appear to be in the wrong order since the value filtering may remove the attribute values upon which the ordering was done. (The sorting document specifies that entries without any sort key attribute values should be treated as coming after all other attribute values.) Similarly with duplicate entries, if duplication is performed before value filtering, the set of Search Result Entries may contain identical duplicate entries, each with an empty set of attribute values, because the value filtering removed the attribute values that were used to duplicate the results. For these reasons, the ValuesReturnFilter control in a SearchRequest SHOULD precede other controls that affect the number and ordering of SearchResultEntrys. Chadwick & Mullan Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 3876 Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3 September 2004 5. Examples All entries are provided in an LDAP Data Interchange Format (LDIF)[11]. The string representation of the valuesReturnFilter in the examples below uses the following ABNF [15] notation: valuesReturnFilter = "(" 1*simpleFilterItem ")" simpleFilterItem = "(" item ")" where item is as defined below (adapted from RFC2254 [14]). item = simple / present / substring / extensible simple = attr filtertype value filtertype = equal / approx / greater / less equal = "=" approx = "~=" greater = ">=" less = "<=" extensible = attr [":" matchingrule] ":=" value / ":" matchingrule ":=" value present = attr "=*" substring = attr "=" [initial] any [final] initial = value any = "*" *(value "*") final = value attr = AttributeDescription from Section 4.1.5 of [1] matchingrule = MatchingRuleId from Section 4.1.9 of [1] value = AttributeValue from Section 4.1.6 of [1] 1) The first example shows how the control can be set to return all attribute values from one attribute type (e.g., telephoneNumber) and a subset of values from another attribute type (e.g., mail). The entries below represent organizationalPerson object classes located somewhere beneath the distinguished name dc=ac,dc=uk. dn: cn=Sean Mullan,ou=people,dc=sun,dc=ac,dc=uk cn: Sean Mullan sn: Mullan objectClass: organizationalPerson objectClass: person objectClass: inetOrgPerson mail: sean.mullan@hotmail.com mail: mullan@east.sun.com telephoneNumber: + 781 442 0926 telephoneNumber: 555-9999 Chadwick & Mullan Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 3876 Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3 September 2004 dn: cn=David Chadwick,ou=isi,o=salford,dc=ac,dc=uk cn: David Chadwick sn: Chadwick objectClass: organizationalPerson objectClass: person objectClass: inetOrgPerson mail: d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk An LDAP search operation is specified with a baseObject set to the DN of the search base (i.e., dc=ac,dc=uk), a subtree scope, a filter set to (sn=mullan), and the list of attributes to be returned set to "mail,telephoneNumber" or "*". In addition, a ValuesReturnFilter control is set to ((mail=*hotmail.com)(telephoneNumber=*)). The search results returned by the server would consist of the following entry: dn: cn=Sean Mullan,ou=people,dc=sun,dc=ac,dc=uk mail: sean.mullan@hotmail.com telephoneNumber: + 781 442 0926 telephoneNumber: 555-9999 Note that the control has no effect on the values returned for the "telephoneNumber" attribute (all of the values are returned), since the control specified that all values should be returned. 2) The second example shows how one might retrieve a single attribute type subschema definition for the "gunk" attribute with OID 1.2.3.4.5 from the subschema subentry. Assume the subschema subentry is held below the root entry with DN cn=subschema subentry,o=myorg and this holds an attributeTypes operational attribute holding the descriptions of the 35 attributes known to this server (each description is held as a single attribute value of the attributeTypes attribute). dn: cn=subschema subentry,o=myorg cn: subschema subentry objectClass: subschema attributeTypes: ( 2.5.4.3 NAME 'cn' SUP name ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.4.6 NAME 'c' SUP name SINGLE-VALUE ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.4.0 NAME 'objectClass' EQUALITY obj ectIdentifierMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.38 ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.18.2 NAME 'modifyTimestamp' EQUALITY gen eralizedTimeMatch ORDERING generalizedTimeOrderingMatch SYN TAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.24 SINGLE-VALUE NO-USER- MODIFICATION USAGE directoryOperation ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.21.6 NAME 'objectClasses' EQUALITY obj Chadwick & Mullan Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 3876 Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3 September 2004 ectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch SYNTAX 1.3. 6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.37 USAGE directoryOperation ) attributeTypes: ( 1.2.3.4.5 NAME 'gunk' EQUALITY caseIgnoreMat ch SUBSTR caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch SYNTAX 1.3. 6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.44{64} ) attributeTypes: ( 2.5.21.5 NAME 'attributeTypes' EQUALITY obj ectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch SYNTAX 1.3. 6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.3 USAGE directoryOperation ) plus another 28 - you get the idea. The user creates an LDAP search operation with a baseObject set to cn=subschema subentry,o=myorg, a scope of base, a filter set to (objectClass=subschema), the list of attributes to be returned set to "attributeTypes", and the ValuesReturnFilter set to ((attributeTypes=1.2.3.4.5)) The search result returned by the server would consist of the following entry: dn: cn=subschema subentry,o=myorg attributeTypes: ( 1.2.3.4.5 NAME 'gunk' EQUALITY caseIgnoreMat ch SUBSTR caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch SYNTAX 1.3. 6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.44{64} ) 3) The final example shows how the control can be used to match on a userCertificate attribute value. Note that this example requires the LDAP server to support the certificateExactMatch matching rule defined in [12] as the EQUALITY matching rule for userCertificate. The entry below represents a pkiUser object class stored in the directory. dn: cn=David Chadwick,ou=people,o=University of Salford,c=gb cn: David Chadwick objectClass: person objectClass: organizationalPerson objectClass: pkiUser objectClass: inetOrgPerson sn: Chadwick mail: d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk userCertificate;binary: {binary representation of a certificate with a serial number of 2468 issued by o=truetrust ltd,c=gb} userCertificate;binary: {binary representation of certificate with a serial number of 1357 issued by o=truetrust ltd,c=gb} userCertificate;binary: {binary representation of certificate with a serial number of 1234 issued by dc=certsRus,dc=com} Chadwick & Mullan Standards Track [Page 7]
RFC 3876 Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3 September 2004 An LDAP search operation is specified with a baseObject set to o=University of Salford,c=gb, a subtree scope, a filter set to (sn=chadwick), and the list of attributes to be returned set to "userCertificate;binary". In addition, a ValuesReturnFilter control is set to ((userCertificate=1357$o=truetrust ltd,c=gb)). The search result returned by the server would consist of the following entry: dn: cn=David Chadwick,ou=people,o=University of Salford,c=gb userCertificate;binary: {binary representation of certificate with a serial number of 1357 issued by o=truetrust ltd,c=gb} 6. Security Considerations This document does not primarily discuss security issues. Note however that attribute values MUST only be returned if the access controls applied by the LDAP server allow them to be returned, and in this respect the effect of the ValuesReturnFilter control is of no consequence. Note that the ValuesReturnFilter control may have a positive effect on the deployment of public key infrastructures. Certain PKI operations, like searching for specific certificates, become more scalable, and more practical when combined with X.509 certificate matching rules at the server, since the control avoids the downloading of potentially large numbers of irrelevant certificates which would have to be processed and filtered locally (which in some cases is very difficult to perform). 7. IANA Considerations The Matched Values control as an LDAP Protocol Mechanism [7] has been registered as follows: Subject: Request for LDAP Protocol Mechanism Registration Object Identifier: 1.2.826.0.1.3344810.2.3 Description: Matched Values Control Person & email address to contact for further information: David Chadwick <d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk> Usage: Control Specification: RFC3876 Author/Change Controller: IESG Comments: none Chadwick & Mullan Standards Track [Page 8]
RFC 3876 Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3 September 2004 This document uses the OID 1.2.826.0.1.3344810.2.3 to identify the matchedValues control described here. This OID was assigned by TrueTrust Ltd, under its BSI assigned English/Welsh Registered Company number [16]. 8. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank members of the LDAPExt list for their constructive comments on earlier versions of this document, and in particular to Harald Alvestrand who first suggested having an attribute return filter and Bruce Greenblatt who first proposed a syntax for this control. 9. References 9.1. Normative References [1] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996. [2] Wahl, M., Howes, T., and S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (w3)", RFC 2251, December 1997. [3] Wahl, M., Coulbeck, A., Howes, T., and S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Attribute Syntax Definitions", RFC 2252, December 1997. [4] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [5] ITU-T Recommendation X.680 (1997) | ISO/IEC 8824-1:1998, Information Technology - Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1): Specification of Basic Notation [6] ITU-T Recommendation X.690 (1997) | ISO/IEC 8825-1,2,3:1998 Information technology - ASN.1 encoding rules: Specification of Basic Encoding Rules (BER), Canonical Encoding Rules (CER) and Distinguished Encoding Rules (DER) [7] Zeilenga, K., "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Considerations for the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP)", BCP 64, RFC 3383, September 2002. Chadwick & Mullan Standards Track [Page 9]
RFC 3876 Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3 September 2004 9.2. Informative References [8] ITU-T Rec. X.511, "The Directory: Abstract Service Definition", 1993. [9] ISO/IEC 9594 / ITU-T Rec X.511 (2001) The Directory: Abstract Service Definition. [10] Sermersheim, J., "LDAP Control for a Duplicate Entry Representation of Search Results", Work in Progress, October 2000. [11] Good, G., "The LDAP Data Interchange Format (LDIF) - Technical Specification", RFC 2849, June 2000. [12] Chadwick, D. and S.Legg, "Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure - Additional LDAP Schema for PKIs", Work in Progress, June 2002 [13] Howes, T., Wahl, M., and A. Anantha, "LDAP Control Extension for Server Side Sorting of Search Results", RFC 2891, August 2000. [14] Howes, T., "The String Representation of LDAP Search Filters", RFC 2254, December 1997. [15] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997. [16] BRITISH STANDARD BS 7453 Part 1. Procedures for UK Registration for Open System Standards Part 1: Procedures for the UK Name Registration Authority. Chadwick & Mullan Standards Track [Page 10]
RFC 3876 Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3 September 2004 10. Authors' Addresses David Chadwick IS Institute University of Salford Salford M5 4WT England Phone: +44 161 295 5351 EMail: d.w.chadwick@salford.ac.uk Sean Mullan Sun Microsystems One Network Drive Burlington, MA 01803 USA EMail: sean.mullan@sun.com Chadwick & Mullan Standards Track [Page 11]
RFC 3876 Returning Matched Values with LDAPv3 September 2004 11. Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/S HE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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. Intellectual Property The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights 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; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in IETF Documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat 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 implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf- ipr@ietf.org. Acknowledgement Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society. Chadwick & Mullan Standards Track [Page 12]

   

[Home] [Full RFC index] [RFC humour] [Our technology]

Copyright © Inter-Corporate Computer & Network Services, Inc.  All rights reserved.
All trademarks and RFC contents are the property of their respective owners.