LDAPv3 specification: Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Technical Specification
The short document that names which RFCs together make up LDAP version 3 and settles an IESG warning about authentication.
Hodges, J. and R. Morgan, "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Technical Specification", RFC 3377, DOI 10.17487/RFC3377, September 2002, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3377>.
@misc{rfc3377,
series = {Request for Comments},
number = 3377,
howpublished = {RFC 3377},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC3377},
url = {https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3377},
author = {J. Hodges and R. Morgan},
title = {{Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Technical Specification}},
pagetotal = 6,
year = 2002,
month = sep,
} RFC text
Contents
Network Working Group J. Hodges
Request for Comments: 3377 Sun Microsystems Inc.
Category: Standards Track R. Morgan
University of Washington
September 2002
Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3):
Technical Specification
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 (2002). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
This document specifies the set of RFCs comprising the Lightweight
Directory Access Protocol Version 3 (LDAPv3), and addresses the "IESG
Note" attached to RFCs 2251 through 2256.
1. Background and Motivation
The specification for the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
version 3 (LDAPv3) nominally comprises eight RFCs which were issued
in two distinct subsets at separate times -- RFCs 2251 through 2256
first, then RFCs 2829 and 2830 following later.
RFC 2251 through 2256 do not mandate the implementation of any
satisfactory authentication mechanisms and hence were published with
an "IESG Note" discouraging implementation and deployment of LDAPv3
clients or servers implementing update functionality until a Proposed
Standard for mandatory authentication in LDAPv3 is published.
RFC 2829 was subsequently published in answer to the IESG Note.
The purpose of this document is to explicitly specify the set of RFCs
comprising LDAPv3, and formally address the IESG Note through
explicit inclusion of RFC 2829.
2. Specification of LDAPv3
The Lightweight Directory Access Protocol version 3 (LDAPv3) is
specified by this set of nine RFCs:
[RFC2251] Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3) [the
specification of the LDAP on-the-wire protocol]
[RFC2252] Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Attribute
Syntax Definitions
[RFC2253] Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): UTF-8
String Representation of Distinguished Names
[RFC2254] The String Representation of LDAP Search Filters
[RFC2255] The LDAP URL Format
[RFC2256] A Summary of the X.500(96) User Schema for use with
LDAPv3
[RFC2829] Authentication Methods for LDAP
[RFC2830] Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Extension
for Transport Layer Security
And, this document (RFC3377).
The term "LDAPv3" is often used informally to refer to the protocol
specified by the above set of RFCs, or subsets thereof. However, the
LDAPv3 protocol suite, as defined here, should be formally identified
in other documents by a normative reference to this document.
3. Addressing the "IESG Note" in RFCs 2251 through 2256
The IESG approved publishing RFCs 2251 through 2256 with an attendant
IESG Note included in each document. The Note begins with:
This document describes a directory access protocol that provides
both read and update access. Update access requires secure
authentication, but this document does not mandate implementation
of any satisfactory authentication mechanisms.
The Note ends with this statement:
Implementors are hereby discouraged from deploying LDAPv3 clients
or servers which implement the update functionality, until a
Proposed Standard for mandatory authentication in LDAPv3 has been
approved and published as an RFC.
[RFC2829] is expressly the "Proposed Standard for mandatory
authentication in LDAPv3" called for in the Note. Thus, the IESG
Note in [RFC2251], [RFC2252], [RFC2253], [RFC2254], [RFC2255], and
[RFC2256] is addressed.
4. Security Considerations
This document does not directly discuss security, although the
context of the aforementioned IESG Note is security related, as is
the manner in which it is addressed.
Please refer to the referenced documents, especially [RFC2829],
[RFC2251], and [RFC2830], for further information concerning LDAPv3
security.
5. Acknowledgements
The authors thank Patrik Faltstrom, Leslie Daigle, Thomas Narten, and
Kurt Zeilenga for their contributions to this document.
6. References
[RFC2251] Wahl, M., Kille, S. and T. Howes, "Lightweight Directory
Access Protocol (v3)", RFC 2251, December 1997.
[RFC2252] Wahl, M., Coulbeck, A., Howes, T. and S. Kille,
"Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Attribute
Syntax Definitions", RFC 2252, December 1997.
[RFC2253] Kille, S., Wahl, M. and T. Howes, "Lightweight Directory
Access Protocol (v3): UTF-8 String Representation of
Distinguished Names", RFC 2253, December 1997.
[RFC2254] Howes, T., "The String Representation of LDAP Search
Filters", RFC 2254, December 1997.
[RFC2255] Howes, T. and M. Smith, "The LDAP URL Format", RFC 2255,
December 1997.
[RFC2256] Wahl, M., "A Summary of the X.500(96) User Schema for use
with LDAPv3", RFC 2256, December 1997.
[RFC2829] Wahl, M., Alvestrand, H., Hodges, J. and R. Morgan,
"Authentication Methods for LDAP", RFC 2829, May 2000.
[RFC2830] Hodges, J., Morgan, R. and M. Wahl, "Lightweight Directory
Access Protocol (v3): Extension for Transport Layer
Security", RFC 2830, May 2000.
7. Intellectual Property Rights Notices
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. 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
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.
8. Authors' Addresses
Jeff Hodges
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
901 San Antonio Road, USCA22-212
Palo Alto, CA 94303
USA
Phone: +1-408-276-5467
EMail: Jeff.Hodges@sun.com
RL "Bob" Morgan
Computing and Communications
University of Washington
Seattle, WA
USA
Phone: +1-206-221-3307
EMail: rlmorgan@washington.edu
9. Full Copyright Statement
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 other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
AI ELI5
On this page
§1Background and Motivation
The specification of the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol version 3 (LDAPv3) nominally comprises eight RFCs that were issued in two subsets: RFCs 2251 through 2256 first, then RFCs 2829 and 2830 later.
RFCs 2251 through 2256 do not mandate any satisfactory authentication mechanism. They were therefore published with an IESG Note discouraging implementation and deployment of LDAPv3 clients or servers with update functionality until a Proposed Standard for mandatory authentication was published. RFC 2829 was later published in answer to that Note.
The purpose of RFC 3377 is to say explicitly which RFCs make up LDAPv3, and to formally address the IESG Note by including RFC 2829.
The first LDAP papers said "do not let people change things until there is a good way to check who they are." Later a paper about checking identity arrived, and this document connects the two.
§2The Set of RFCs That Make Up LDAPv3
LDAPv3 is specified by a set of nine RFCs: the eight above plus RFC 3377 itself. Each covers one piece:
- RFC 2251: the LDAP on-the-wire protocol.
- RFC 2252: attribute syntax definitions.
- RFC 2253: UTF-8 string representation of distinguished names.
- RFC 2254: string representation of search filters.
- RFC 2255: the LDAP URL format.
- RFC 2256: a summary of the X.500(96) user schema.
- RFC 2829: authentication methods.
- RFC 2830: the extension for Transport Layer Security.
The term LDAPv3 is often used informally for this set or subsets of it. The RFC says the full suite, as defined here, should be identified in other documents by a normative reference to RFC 3377.
It is like a board game with a rulebook split into booklets. This page lists exactly which booklets belong in the box.
| RFC | What it specifies |
|---|---|
| 2251 | LDAP on-the-wire protocol |
| 2252 | Attribute syntax definitions |
| 2253 | UTF-8 string representation of distinguished names |
| 2254 | String representation of search filters |
| 2255 | LDAP URL format |
| 2256 | Summary of the X.500(96) user schema |
| 2829 | Authentication methods |
| 2830 | Extension for Transport Layer Security |
| 3377 THIS RFC | This document: names the set |
§3Addressing the IESG Note
The IESG attached a Note to each of RFCs 2251 through 2256. It begins by observing that the protocol provides both read and update access, that update access requires secure authentication, and that the documents do not mandate any satisfactory authentication mechanism.
It ends by discouraging implementors from deploying LDAPv3 clients or servers that implement update functionality until a Proposed Standard for mandatory authentication has been approved and published as an RFC.
RFC 3377 states that RFC 2829 is expressly that Proposed Standard. With it included in the LDAPv3 set, the IESG Note in RFCs 2251, 2252, 2253, 2254, 2255 and 2256 is addressed.
The warning said "wait before letting people edit, until there is a proper lock." The lock now exists, so the warning is answered.
§4Security Considerations
RFC 3377 does not directly discuss security, although the IESG Note it responds to is security related, as is the way it is addressed. For security detail the reader is pointed to the referenced documents, especially RFC 2829, RFC 2251 and RFC 2830.
This paper does not explain the locks itself. It tells you which other papers do.