rfc1218.txt

著名的RFC文档,其中有一些文档是已经翻译成中文的的.

Network Working Group                 The North American Directory Forum
Request for Comments: 1218                                    April 1991


                        A Naming Scheme for c=US

Status of this Memo

   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
   not specify an Internet standard.  Distribution of this memo is
   unlimited.

Summary

   This RFC is a near-verbatim copy of a document, known as NADF-123,
   which has been produced by the North American Directory Forum (NADF).
   The NADF is a collection of organizations which offer, or plan to
   offer, public Directory services in North America, based on the CCITT
   X.500 Recommendations.  As a part of its charter, the NADF must reach
   agreement as to how entries are named in the public portions of the
   North American Directory.  NADF-123 is a scheme proposed for this
   purpose.  The NADF is circulating NADF-123 widely, expressly for the
   purpose of gathering comments.  The next meeting of the NADF is in
   mid-July, and it is important for comments to be received prior to
   the meeting, so that the scheme may receive adequate review.


                         A Naming Scheme for c=US
                    The North American Directory Forum
                                 NADF-123
                       Supercedes: NADF-103, NADF-71
                              March 21, 1991

ABSTRACT

   This is one of a series of documents produced for discussion within
   the North American Directory Forum.  Distribution, with attribution,
   is unlimited.  This document is being circulated for comment.  The
   deadline for comments is July 1, 1991.  Comments should be directed
   to the contact given on page 16.

1.  Introduction

   Computer networks form the infrastructure between the users they
   interconnect.  For example, the electronic mail service offered by
   computer networks provides a means for users to collaborate towards
   some common goal.  In the simplest cases, this collaboration may be
   solely for the dissemination of information.  In other cases, two



NADF                                                            [Page 1]

RFC 1218                A Naming Scheme for c=US              April 1991


   users may work on a joint research project, using electronic mail as
   their primary means of communication.

   However, networks themselves are built on an underlying naming and
   numbering infrastructure, usually in the form of names and addresses.
   For example, some authority must exist to assign network addresses to
   ensure that numbering collisions do not occur.  This is of paramount
   importance for an environment which consists of multiple service
   providers.

2.  Approach

   It should be observed that there are several different naming
   universes that can be realized in the Directory Information Tree
   (DIT).  For example, geographical naming, community naming, political
   naming, organizational naming, and so on.  The choice of naming
   universe largely determines the difficulty in mapping a user's query
   into a series of Directory operations.  Although it is possible to
   simultaneously support multiple naming universes with the DIT, this
   is likely to be unnatural.  As such, this proposal focuses on a
   single naming universe.

   The naming universe in this proposal is based on civil authority.
   That is, it uses the existing civil naming infrastructure and
   suggests a (nearly) straight-forward mapping on the DIT.  There are
   four components to the naming architecture:

   (1)  civil naming and optimized civil naming, which reflects
        names assigned by civil authority;

   (2)  organizational naming, which reflects names assigned
        within organizations;

   (3)  ADDMD naming, which reflects names assigned to public
        providers within the Directory service; and,

   (4)  application naming, which reflects names assigned to OSI
        entities.

   An important characteristic is that entries should be listed wherever
   searches for them are likely to occur.  This implies that a single
   object may be listed under several entries.

2.1.  Names and User-Friendliness

   It must be emphasized that there are three distinct concepts which
   are often confused when discussing a naming scheme:




NADF                                                            [Page 2]

RFC 1218                A Naming Scheme for c=US              April 1991


   (1)  user-friendly naming: a property of a Directory which
        allows users to easily identity objects;

   (2)  user-friendly name: a technique for naming an object
        which exhibits "friendliness" according to an arbitrary
        set of user-criteria; and,

   (3)  Distinguished Name: the administratively assigned name
        for an entry in the OSI Directory.

   It must be emphasized that Distinguished Names are not necessarily
   user-friendly names, and further, that user-friendly naming in the
   Directory is a property of the Directory Service, not of
   Distinguished Names.

2.2.  Choice of RDN Names

   The key aspect to appreciate for choice of RDNs is that they should
   provide a large name space to avoid collisions: the naming strategy
   must provide enough "real estate" to accommodate a large demand for
   entries.  This is the primary requirement for RDNs.  A secondary
   requirement is that RDNs should be meaningful (friendly to people)
   and should not impede searching.

   However, it is important to understand that this second requirement
   can be achieved by using additional (non-distinguished) attribute
   values.  For example, if the RDN of an entry is

                organizationName is Performance Systems International

   then it is perfectly acceptable (and indeed desirable) to have other
   values for the organizationName attribute, e.g.,

                organizationName is PSI

   The use of these abbreviated names greatly aids searching whilst
   avoiding unnecessary Distinguished Name conflicts.

   In order to appreciate the naming scheme which follows, it is
   important to understand that it leverages, wherever possible,
   existing naming infrastructure.  That is, it relies heavily on non-
   OSI naming authorities which already exist.  Note that inasmuch as it
   relies on existing naming authorities, there is little chance that
   any "final" national decision could obsolete it.  [Footnote: Any
   naming scheme may be subject to the jurisdiction of certain national
   agencies.  For example, the US State Department is concerned with any
   impact on US telecommunications treaty obligations.] (To do so would
   require a national decision that disregards existing national and



NADF                                                            [Page 3]

RFC 1218                A Naming Scheme for c=US              April 1991


   regional infrastructure, and establishes some entirely new and
   different national naming infrastructure.)

3.  Civil Naming

   Civil naming occurs at three levels:

   (1)  the national level, which contains objects that are
        recognized throughout a country;

   (2)  the regional level, which contains objects that are
        recognized throughout a state or state-equivalent; and,

   (3)  the local level, which contains objects that are
        recognized within a populated place.

3.1.  Naming at the National Level

   At the national-level (at least) three kinds of names may be listed:

   (1)  The States and State-Equivalents

   (2)  Organizations with National Standing

   (3)  ADDMD Operators

3.1.1.  The States and State-Equivalents

   For each state or state-equivalent (the District of Columbia and the
   eight outlying areas [Footnote: i.e., American Samoa, Federated
   States of Micronesia, Guam, Marshall Islands, Northern Mariana
   Islands, Palau, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands of the US.]), an
   instance of an

               usStateOrEquivalent

          object is used.  The RDN is formed as

               localityName is <FIPS 5 name>

          e.g.,

               localityName is California

   provides the RDN for the State of California.  In addition, this
   entry would contain attributes identifying both the FIPS 5 alpha and
   numeric code for the State, e.g.,




NADF                                                            [Page 4]

RFC 1218                A Naming Scheme for c=US              April 1991


                fipsStateNumericCode is 06
                fipsStateAlphaCode is CA

   Of course, this entry could contain many other attributes such as

                stateOrProvinceName is State of California

3.1.2.  Organizations with National Standing

   There is no authority in the United States which unambiguously
   registers the alphanumeric names of organizations with national
   standing.  It is proposed that ANSI provide this registry and that
   the ANSI alphanumeric name form be used as the basis for RDNs.

   For each organization with national standing, an instance of an

               usOrganization

          object is used.  The RDN is formed as

               organizationName is <ANSI alphanumeric name form>

          e.g.,

               organizationName is Performance Systems International

   In addition, this entry would contain attributes identifying the ANSI
   Alphanumeric name form, e.g.,

                ansiOrgNumericCode is 177777

   Of course, this entry would contain many other attributes such as

                organizationName is PSI

   For the National Government, an instance of an

                organization

   object is also used, and the RDN is taken from the ANSI alphanumeric
   name form registry.

3.1.3.  ADDMD Operators

   There is no authority in the United States which unambiguously
   registers the names of ADDMD operators.  It is expected that the
   North American Directory Forum will coordinate with the US CCITT
   National Committee Study Group D to provide this registry.  (At



NADF                                                            [Page 5]

RFC 1218                A Naming Scheme for c=US              April 1991


   worst, the ADDMDs can use ANSI alphanumeric name forms for their RDN
   attribute values.)

          For each ADDMD operator, an instance of a

               nadfADDMD

          object is used.  The RDN is formed as

               addmdName is <NADF registered name>

          e.g.,

               addmdName is PSINet

3.2.  Naming within a State or State-Equivalent

   At the regional level (at least) two kinds of names may be listed:

   (1)  Populated Places

   (2)  Organizations with Regional Standing

3.2.1.  Populated Places

   For each populated place within a state or state-equivalent,
   an instance of an

               usPlace

          object is used.  The RDN is formed as

               localityName is <FIPS 55 name>

          e.g.,

               localityName is Hartford

   provides the RDN for the Hartford entry immediately subordinate to
   the usStateOrEquivalent entry for the State of Connecticut.  In
   addition, this entry would contain attributes identifying the FIPS 55
   place code, e.g.,

                usPlaceCode is 37000







NADF                                                            [Page 6]

RFC 1218                A Naming Scheme for c=US              April 1991


3.2.2.  Organizations with Regional Standing

   An organization is said to have regional standing if it is registered
   with the "Secretary of State" or similar entity within that region,
   as an entity doing business in the region.

   For each organization with regional standing, an instance of an

               organization

          object is used.  The RDN is formed as

               organizationName is <registered name of organization>

          e.g.,

               organizationName is Network Management Associates

   might provide the RDN for a business entity registered with the State
   of California.  In this case, the entry thus named would be
   immediately subordinate to the usStateOrEquivalent entry for the
   State of California.

   Note that other non-distinguished attributes, such as an ANSI numeric
   name form value, may be included in such an entry --- the
   organization object might actually be a usOrganization object.

   For the Regional Government, an instance of an

               organization

          object is also used.  The RDN is formed as:

               organizationName is Government

3.3.  Naming within a Populated Place

   At the local level (at least) three kinds of names may be listed:

   (1)  Persons

   (2)  Organizations with Local Standing

   (3)  MHS Distribution Lists







NADF                                                            [Page 7]

RFC 1218                A Naming Scheme for c=US              April 1991


3.3.1.  Naming of Persons

   Within a populated place, there is no centralized naming entity which
   registers residential persons.  It is proposed that entries for
   persons be immediately subordinate to the usPlace object which most
   accurately reflects their place of residence.

   For each person (wishing to have an entry in the Directory), an
   instance of a residentialperson

               residentialPerson

          object is used.  The RDN is usually multi-valued, formed with

               commonName is <person's full name>

   and some other attribute, such as postalCode, streetAddress, etc.
   However, because streetAddress is often considered private
   information, based on agreement with the entity managing the DMD and
   the listed person, some other, distinguishing attribute may be used,
   including a "serial number" (having no other purpose).  It should be
   noted however that this is non-helpful in regards to searching,
   unless other attribute values containing meaningful information are
   added to the entry and made available for public access.

3.3.2.  Organizations with Local Standing

   An organization is said to have local standing if it is registered
   with the County or City Clerk or similar entity within that locality
   as an entity "doing business" in that place.

   For each organization with local standing, an instance of an