📄 rfc1564.txt
字号:
Network Working Group P. BarkerRequest for Comments: 1564 University College LondonCategory: Informational R. Hedberg Technical University Delft January 1994 DSA Metrics (OSI-DS 34 (v3))Status of this Memo This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.Abstract This document defines a set of criteria by which a DSA implementation may be judged. Particular issues covered include conformance to standards; performance; demonstrated interoperability. The intention is that the replies to the questions posed provide a fairly full description of a DSA. Some of the questions will yield answers which are purely descriptive; others, however, are intended to elicit answers which give some measure of the utility of the DSA. The marks awarded for a DSA in each particular area should give a good indication of the DSA's capabilities, and its suitability for particular uses. Please send comments to the authors or to the discussion group <osi-ds@CS.UCL.AC.UK>.Table of Contents 1. Overview 2 2. General Information 3 3. Conformance to OSI Standards 4 3.1 Directory protocols............................. 4 3.2 Implementors' agreements and profiles ......... 6 3.3 Protocol stacks................................. 6 3.4 DIT structure ................................. 7 4. Other protocols 7 5. Extensions to the 1988 Standard 7 5.1 Schema ......................................... 7 5.2 Support for replication......................... 8 5.3 Support for access control ..................... 8 5.4 Miscellaneous ................................. 9 6. Miscellaneous characteristics 10Barker & Hedberg [Page 1] RFC 1564 DSA Metrics January 1994 7. Management tools 11 7.1 Dynamic system management ..................... 11 7.2 Static system management ...................... 12 7.3 Data management................................. 12 8. Operational Use 12 9. Interoperability 12 10. Performance 13 10.1 Speed for various operations .................. 14 10.1.1 Bind ..................................... 14 10.1.2 List ..................................... 15 10.1.3 Search .................................. 15 10.1.4 Read ..................................... 16 10.1.5 Add entry................................. 16 10.1.6 Modify entry ............................. 16 10.1.7 Modify RDN .............................. 16 10.1.8 Query rate .............................. 17 10.2 The results..................................... 17 10.3 Environment used for benchmarking ............. 17 11. Security Considerations 21 12. Authors' Addresses 211. Overview The purpose of this document is to define some metrics by which DSA products can be measured. Such metrics are valuable as whilst an X.500 DSA must conform to the specification in the standard - this is a sine qua non - protocol conformance is not in itself the hallmark of a usable implementation. A DSA must perform operations within a reasonable time; a DSA must offer good throughput of queries; a DSA must be able to handle a reasonable volume of data; if modification operations are provided, some sort of access control must be provided; a DSA and its data must be manageable. In many respects, it is almost impossible to say that one DSA is better than other from looking at the responses to questions in this document. For some, the cost or level of support will be the key criterion. For another user, the flexibility of the schema management facilities, or the feasibility of running the DSA over an existing relational database, will be of prime importance. In many respects DSAs will just be different, rather than better or worse. However, all other things being equal, the look-up speed of a DSA is very obviously measurable, and there is a substantial number of questions on the speed of the various X.500 operations, and in particular on the look-up operations. Throughout this document, some of the questions posed are annotated with a square-bracketed points score and an explanation as to how the points should be allocated. For example, a question might beBarker & Hedberg [Page 2] RFC 1564 DSA Metrics January 1994 appended with "[2 if yes]", indicating score 2 points for an affirmative answer to that question. These points scores should be collated in Table 1 at the end of the document. The questions on DSA performance are judged to be important enough to have a separate table for those results: they appear in Table 2 (and optionally Table 3). Together, these tables constitute a measure of the DSA. The metrics are on a section by section basis, which should help the reader who is seeking, for example, a DSA with fast look-up capabilities and extensive access control facilities, to focus on the critical aspects of a DSA for their particular requirement. No conclusions should be inferred from adding the scores together into one overall grand total and comparing such totals for different DSAs, as no attempt is made to assign weights to the different characteristics. Whilst much of this document should usually be completed by the developers or suppliers of an implementation, the section on performance could be completed by anyone running the implementation. Indeed, it will be beneficial if several sets of performance figures can be gathered for each implementation, for a variety of hardware platforms.2. General Information This section contains general information about the implementation under discussion. 1. Name of the information provider ................................ .................................................................... 2. Name of the implementation ...................................... 3. Version number of the DSA described in this document ............ 4. Are there plans to implement the additional features describe in the 1992/3 standard? [6 for full implementation, 4 if both access control and replication to be implemented, 2 for some 1992 features] .................................................. 5. Name and address of supplier or person to contact ............... .................................................................... .................................................................... .................................................................... .................................................................... .................................................................... ....................................................................Barker & Hedberg [Page 3] RFC 1564 DSA Metrics January 1994 6. Describe the hardware and software platforms supported by the DSA [up to 4 points may be awarded for this question] (a) Hardware (If appropriate, can summarise as, for example "generic UNIX platform") .................................. (b) O/S (state version if critical) i. UNIX) (be sure to indicate which flavour - e.g., SYSV [1], BSD [1], SUNOS, etc) .......................... ii. VMS) [1] ................................................ iii. MS-DOS [1] .............................................. iv. Macintosh [1] ........................................... v. Other) [1] .............................................. 7. Name any other software required to run the system which is not supplied with the operating system or with the DSA software itself. Examples might include a database package, or communications software ......................................... .................................................................... 8. Is this DSA an integrated part of a software package, and in such case which ? ................................................... .................................................................... 9. Is the software free? If the DSA needs other packages, are these also freely available? [3 if completely free, 1 if requires commercial software package] .................................... .................................................................... 10. Is commercial support available for this implementation? [3] ... 11. Is free, best effort support available from the developers? [2]. 12. Is free support available via user groups or email lists? [2] ..3. Conformance to OSI Standards3.1 Directory protocols 13. Does the DSA implement DAP? (a) Read ASE? [2] ...............................................Barker & Hedberg [Page 4] RFC 1564 DSA Metrics January 1994 (b) Search ASE? [2] ............................................. (c) Modify ASE? [2] ............................................. 14. Does the DSA implement DSP? (a) Chained read ASE? [2] ....................................... (b) Chained search ASE? [2] ..................................... (c) Chained modify ASE? [2] ..................................... 15. Statement requirements according to section 9.2.1 in X.519. (a) Supported application-contexts? ............................ (b) Capable of acting as first-level DSA? [1] ................... (c) Chained mode supported? [1] ................................ (d) Security-level(s) supported? [1 for strong + 1 for protected simple + 1 for simple authentication] ....................... (e) All attribute types according to X.520? [1] ................ (f) All object classes according to X.521? [1] ................. 16. Does the implementation meet the conformance clauses in section 9.2.2 and 9.2.3 of X.519? Static requirements [2 if yes on all] (a) Abstract syntaxes of application contexts ................... (b) Abstract syntaxes of information framework .................. (c) Minimal knowledge ........................................... (d) Support of root context ..................................... (e) Abstract syntax - attribute types ........................... (f) Abstract syntax - object classes ............................ Dynamic requirements [2 if yes on all] (a) Mapping onto underlying services ............................ (b) Distributed operations - referrals ..........................Barker & Hedberg [Page 5] RFC 1564 DSA Metrics January 1994 (c) DirectoryAccessAC - referrals ............................... (d) DirectorySystemAC - referrals ............................... (e) Chained mode ................................................ 17. Please list all conformance testing work applied to the implementation (specify conformance test version number). [2 if any testing]⌨️ 快捷键说明
复制代码
Ctrl + C
搜索代码
Ctrl + F
全屏模式
F11
切换主题
Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键
?
增大字号
Ctrl + =
减小字号
Ctrl + -