💾 Archived View for gemini.bortzmeyer.org › rfc-mirror › rfc3944.txt captured on 2022-01-08 at 18:16:40.
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Network Working Group T. Johnson
Request for Comments: 3944 U. of North Carolina
Category: Informational S. Okubo
Waseda University
S. Campos
ITU-T
December 2004
H.350 Directory Services
Status of this Memo
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does
not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this
memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).
Abstract
The International Telecommunications Union Standardization Sector
(ITU-T) has created the H.350 series of Recommendations that specify
directory services architectures in support of multimedia
conferencing protocols. The goal of the architecture is to
'directory enable' multimedia conferencing so that these services can
leverage existing identity management and enterprise directories. A
particular goal is to enable an enterprise or service provider to
maintain a canonical source of users and their multimedia
conferencing systems, so that multiple call servers from multiple
vendors, supporting multiple protocols, can all access the same data
store.
Because SIP is an IETF standard, the contents of H.350 and H.350.4
are made available via this document to the IETF community. This
document contains the entire normative text of ITU-T Recommendations
H.350 and H.350.4 in sections 4 and 5, respectively. The remaining
sections are included only in this document, not in the ITU-T
version.
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 1]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
Table of Contents
1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. H.350 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1.1. Design Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1.2. Extending the Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2. commURIObject Definition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.1. commURIObject. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.2. commURI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.3. CommObject Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3.1. commObject . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3.2. commUniqueId . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3.3. commOwner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.3.4. commPrivate. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.4. CommObject LDIF Files . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.4.1. LDIF for commURIObject . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.4.2. LDIF for commObject. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.5. H.350 Annex A Indexing Profile. . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5. H.350.4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.1.1. Extending the schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.2. Object class definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.2.1. SIPIdentity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.2.2. SIPIdentitySIPURI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.2.3. SIPIdentityRegistrarAddress. . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.2.4. SIPIdentityProxyAddress. . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.2.5. SIPIdentityAddress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.2.6. SIPIdentityPassword. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.2.7. SIPIdentityUserName. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5.2.8. SIPIdentityServiceLevel. . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.3. SIPIdentity LDIF Files. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
5.4. H.350.4 Annex A Indexing profile. . . . . . . . . . . . 26
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
8. References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
8.1. Normative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
8.2. Informative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
9. Relationship to Other Specifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
10. Authors' Addresses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Full Copyright Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 2]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
1. Scope
The International Telecommunications Union Standardization Sector
(ITU-T) has created the H.350 series of Recommendations that specify
directory services architectures in support of multimedia
conferencing protocols. The goal of the architecture is to
'directory enable' multimedia conferencing so that these services can
leverage existing identity management and enterprise directories. A
particular goal is to enable an enterprise or service provider to
maintain a canonical source of users and their multimedia
conferencing systems, so that multiple call servers from multiple
vendors, supporting multiple protocols, can all access the same data
store.
H.350 architectures are not intended to change the operation of
multimedia conferencing protocols in any way. Rather, they are meant
to standardize the way the already defined protocol elements are
stored in a directory, so that they can be accessed in a standardized
manner.
In the H.350 series, Recommendation H.350 specifies the base
architecture and object classes, while subordinate Recommendations
specify elements that are specific to individual protocols.
Currently, the Recommendations include:
H.350 - Directory Services Architecture for Multimedia Conferencing
H.350.1 - Directory Services Architecture for H.323
H.350.2 - Directory Services Architecture for H.235
H.350.3 - Directory Services Architecture for H.320
H.350.4 - Directory Services Architecture for SIP
H.350.5 - Directory Services Architecture for Non-Standard Protocols
Because SIP is an IETF standard, the contents of H.350 and H.350.4
are made available via this document to the IETF community.
2. Terminology
The following terms are used throughout the document:
* call server: a protocol-specific signalling engine that routes
video or voice calls on the network. In H.323 this entity is a
gatekeeper. In SIP, this entity is a SIP Proxy Server. Note that
not all signalling protocols use a call server.
* endpoint: a logical device that provides video and/or voice media
encoding/decoding, and signalling functions. Examples include:
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 3]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
* a group teleconferencing appliance that is located in a
conference room
* an IP telephone.
* a software program that takes video and voice from a camera and
microphone and encodes it and applies signalling using a host
computer.
* enterprise directory: A canonical collection of information about
users in an organization. Typically this information is collected
from a variety of organizational units to create a whole. For
example, Human Resources may provide name and address,
Telecommunications may provide the telephone number, Information
Technology may provide the email address, etc. For the purposes
of this architecture, it is assumed that an enterprise directory
is accessible via LDAP.
* White Pages: An application that allows end users to look up the
address of another user. This may be web-based or use some other
user interface.
3. Conventions used in this document
Conventions in this document conform to ITU-T guidelines. In this
Recommendation, the following conventions are used:
"Shall" indicates a mandatory requirement.
"Should" indicates a suggested but optional course of action.
"May" indicates an optional course of action rather than a
recommendation that something take place.
References to clauses, sub clauses, annexes and appendices refer to
those items within this Recommendation unless another specification
is explicitly listed.
4. H.350
The normative text of H.350 is reproduced in this section.
4.1. Scope
This Recommendation describes a directory services architecture for
multimedia conferencing using LDAP. Standardized directory services
can support association of persons with endpoints, searchable white
pages, and clickable dialling. Directory services can also assist in
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 4]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
the configuration of endpoints, and user authentication based on
authoritative data sources. This document describes a standardized
LDAP schema to represent endpoints on the network and associate those
endpoints with users. It discusses design and implementation
considerations for the inter-relation of video and voice-specific
directories, enterprise directories, call servers and endpoints.
The use of a common, authoritative data source for call server,
endpoint, user, authentication and white pages information is an
important aspect of large scale multimedia conferencing environments.
Without a common data source, service providers must create separate
processes to manage each of these functions. By standardizing the
LDAP schema used to represent the underlying data, products from
different system vendors can be deployed together to create an
overall application environment. For example, a white pages search
engine developed by one provider could serve directory information to
IP telephones produced by a second provider, with signalling managed
by a call server produced by yet a third provider. Each of these
disparate systems can access the same underlying data source,
reducing or eliminating the need to coordinate separate management of
each system. A significant benefit to the user is that the
management of this data can be incorporated into existing customer
management tools, allowing for quick and flexible scaling up of
applications. Indeed, many technology providers have already
incorporate LDAP into their products, but have been forced to do so
without benefit of a standardized schema. This Recommendation
represents an effort to standardize those representations to improve
interoperability and performance.
While URLs are already standardized for several conferencing
protocols, their representation in a directory is not. This
Recommendation supports a standardized way for URLs to be searched
and located. This is a necessary step to support 'clickable
dialling'.
Management of endpoint configurations can be improved if the correct
settings are stored by the service provider in a location that is
accessible to both service provider and endpoint. LDAP provides a
convenient storage location that can be accessed by both call server
and endpoint; thus it is possible to use the directory to support
endpoint configuration, which is important for simplified operation
and supporting user mobility. Note that other technologies also
support endpoint configuration, notably the use of SNMP for complete
configuration and SRV records for obtaining registration server
addresses. Therefore, H.350 should be viewed not as an authoritative
endpoint configuration architecture, but rather one tool that can
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 5]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
assist with this task. Note that the use of H.350 has as a feature
endpoint specific configuration, where it is desirable that each
endpoint has a unique configuration.
This architecture uses a generic object class, called commObject, to
represent attributes common to any video or voice protocol. Auxiliary
classes represent specific protocols, such as H.323, H.235, or H.320,
as described in the H.350.x series of Recommendations. Multiple
H.350.x classes can be combined to represent endpoints that support
more than one protocol. For example, endpoints that support H.323,
H.235 and H.320 would include H.350, H.350.1, H.350.2, and H.350.3 in
their LDAP representations. Further, each entry should contain
commObject to serve as the entry's structural object class.
There are two basic components in the architecture. The commURI
object is a class whose only purpose is to link a person or resource
to a commObject. By placing a commURI 'pointer' in an individual's
directory entry, that individual becomes associated with the
particular targeted commObject. Similarly, commObject contains a
pointer, called commOwner, which points to the individual or resource
that is associated with the commObject. In this way, people or
resources can be associated with endpoints. The only change required
in the enterprise directory is the addition of the simple object
class commURI. CommObject data may be instantiated in the same or in
entirely separate directories, thus allowing flexibility in
implementation.
4.1.1. Design Goals
Large-scale deployments of IP video and voice services have
demonstrated the need for complementary directory services
middleware. Service administrators need call servers that are aware
of enterprise directories to avoid duplication of account management
processes. Users need 'white pages' to locate other users with whom
they wish to communicate. All of these processes should pull their
information from canonical data sources in order to reduce redundant
administrative processes and ensure information accuracy. The
following design criteria are established for this architecture. The
architecture will:
1) enable endpoint information to be associated with people.
Alternately it enables endpoint information to be associated
with resources such as conference rooms or classrooms;
2) enable online searchable "white pages" where dialling
information (e.g., endpoint addresses) can be found, along with
other "traditional" directory information about a user, such as
name, address, telephone, email, etc.;
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 6]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
3) enable all endpoint information to be stored in a canonical data
source (the Directory), rather than local to the call server, so
that endpoints can be managed through manipulations of an
enterprise directory, rather than by direct entry into the call
server;
4) support the creation of very large-scale distributed
directories. These include white pages "portals" that allow
searching for users across multiple institutional directories.
In this application, each enterprise directory registers itself
with (or is unknowingly discovered by) a directory of
directories that is capable of searching across multiple LDAP
directories;
5) be able to support multiple instances of endpoints per user or
resource;
6) represent endpoints that support more than one protocol, for
example, endpoints that are both H.320 and H.323;
7) store enough information about endpoint configuration so that
correct configuration settings can be documented to end users on
a per-endpoint basis, as a support tool, or loaded automatically
into the endpoint;
8) be extendible as necessary to allow implementation-specific
attributes to be included;
9) be non-invasive to the enterprise directory, so that support for
multimedia conferencing can be added in a modular fashion
without significant changes to the enterprise directory.
The scope of this Recommendation does not include extensions of
functionality to protocols as defined within the protocols
themselves. It is not the intent of the Recommendation to add
features, but merely to represent existing protocol attributes. The
exception to this case is when functionality is implied by the
directory itself, such as the commPrivate attribute.
4.1.2. Extending the Schema
H.350 object classes may be extended as necessary for specific
implementations. For example, a class may be extended to support
billing reference codes. Extensions to the schema are not considered
as part of the Recommendation and do not signify compliance.
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 7]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
In some cases it may be necessary to extend the H.350 schemas in
order to represent more information than is supported by the
Recommendations. This may be important for developers that implement
proprietary endpoint functionality that needs to be represented by
attributes in the directory. It may also be important for enterprise
applications. For example 'modelNumber', and 'accountNumber' are
examples of attributes that are not defined in the Recommendation but
may be useful if implemented. Adding attributes to this architecture
must be done in a way that does not break compatibility with this
Recommendation.
A full discussion of schema design and extension is beyond the scope
of this Recommendation. See IETF RFC 2252 for details. Two basic
approaches to schema extension that do not break compatibility with
this Recommendation, are extension through subclass and extension
through the use of auxiliary classes.
4.1.2.1. Extension Through Subclass
It is possible to create a subclass of an existing predefined object
class in order to add new attributes to it. To create a subclass, a
new object class must be defined, that is a subclass of the existing
one, by indicating in the definition of the new class that the
existing class is its superior. Once the subclass is created, new
attributes can be defined within it.
The following example shows how the commObject class can be
subclassed in order to add an attribute to represent a billing
account and a billing manager.
objectclass ( BillingInfo-OID
NAME 'BillingInfo'
DESC 'Billing Reference Information'
SUP commObject STRUCTURAL
MAY ( BillingAccount $ BillingManager $ )
)
Note that BillingInfo-OID must be replaced by an actual OID. Also
note that, whenever a structural class is extended, its subclass must
also be structural.
The following sample entry shows the newly created attributes. This
example also uses ITU-T Rec. H.350.1 for h323Identity.
dn: commUniqueId=2000,ou=h323identity, dc=company, dc=com
objectclass: top
objectclass: commObject
objectclass: h323Identity
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 8]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
objectclass: BillingInfo
commUniqueId: 2000
BillingAccount: 0023456
BillingManager: John Smith
Note that this example and approach demonstrate extension of the
general commObject object class, and not any individual H.350.x
classes. If it is desired to extend an H.350.x auxiliary class, then
that should be accomplished through the definition of additional
auxiliary classes that support the desired attributes, as described
in section 4.1.2.2.
4.1.2.2. Extension Through The Use Of Auxiliary Classes
It is possible to add attributes to an LDAP entry by defining an
auxiliary class containing the new attributes and applying those
attributes to instantiated values in the directory. The auxiliary
class will not be subclassed from any existing object class. Note
that it should have the special class top as its superior. The
following example creates the same billing account and billing
manager attributes as the previous example, but does so by defining
them in their own auxiliary class.
objectclass ( BillingInfo-OID
NAME 'BillingInfo'
DESC 'Billing Reference Information'
SUP top AUXILIARY
MAY ( BillingAccount $ BillingManager $ )
)
Note how the superior was changed from commObject to top and the
object class changed from being a structural to auxiliary.
It is recommended that all attributes in the auxiliary class be
optional rather than mandatory. In this way, the auxiliary object
class itself can be associated with an entry regardless of whether
any values for its attributes are present.
The following example shows a sample endpoint that utilizes the new
auxiliary class and attributes. This example also uses H.350.1 for
h323Identity.
dn: commUniqueId=2000,ou=h323identity, dc=company, dc=com
objectclass: top
objectclass: commObject
objectclass: BillingInfo
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 9]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
commUniqueId: 2000
BillingAccount: 0023456
BillingManager: John Smith
4.1.2.3. Object Identifiers
An attribute's Object Identifier (OID) is a unique numerical
identifier usually written as a sequence of integers separated by
dots. For example, the OID for the commUniqueId is
0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.1. All attributes must have an OID. OIDs can be
obtained from anyone who has one and is willing to delegate a portion
of it as an arc, keeping a record of the arc to avoid duplication.
Further, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) gives out
OIDs to any organization that asks.
4.2. commURIObject Definition
Auxiliary object class that contains the commURI attribute. This
attribute is added to a person or resource object to associate one or
more commObject instances with that object. Its values are LDAP URIs
that point to the associated commObjects, for example, to a user's
H.323 conferencing station and SIP IP phone. Note that multiple
instances of commURI need not point to the same commObject directory.
In fact, each commURI instance could point to an endpoint managed by
a different service provider.
4.2.1. commURIObject
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.1.2.1
objectclasses: (0.0.8.350.1.1.1.2.1
NAME 'commURIObject'
DESC 'object that contains the URI attribute type'
SUP top AUXILIARY
MAY ( commURI )
)
4.2.2. commURI
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.1.1.1
attributetypes:( 0.0.8.350.1.1.1.1.1
NAME 'commURI'
DESC 'Labeled URI format to point to the distinguished name of the
commUniqueId'
EQUALITY caseExactMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
Application utility class
Standard
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 10]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
Number of values
multi
Definition
Labelled URI containing an LDAP URL identifying the directory
containing the referenced commObject instance. The search filter
specified by this LDAP URL shall specify an equality search of the
commUniqueId attribute of the commObject class.
Permissible values (if controlled)
Notes
Used to find the endpoint of the user in question. The label
field may be used to represent the function of the endpoint, such as
'home IP phone' or 'desktop video' for user interface display
purposes.
Note that the label portion of the field may contain spaces as
in the example below showing 'desktop video'.
Semantics
Example applications for which this attribute would be useful
Example (LDIF fragment)
commURI:
ldap://directory.acme.com/dc=acme,dc=com??sub?(commUniqueId=bob)
desktop video
4.3. CommObject Definition
Abstraction of video or voice over IP device. The commObject class
permits an endpoint (H.323 endpoint or SIP user agent or other
protocol endpoint) and all their aliases to be represented by a
single entry in a directory. Note that every directory entry should
contain commObject as the entry's structural object class. That
entry may also contain H.350.x auxiliary classes.
4.3.1. commObject
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.2.2.1
objectclasses: (0.0.8.350.1.1.2.2.1
NAME 'commObject'
DESC 'object that contains the Communication attributes'
SUP top STRUCTURAL
MUST commUniqueId
MAY ( commOwner $ commPrivate )
)
4.3.2. commUniqueId
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.1
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.1
NAME 'commUniqueId'
DESC 'To hold the endpoints unique Id'
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 11]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
SUBSTR caseIgnoreIA5SubstringsMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
Application utility class
standard
Number of values
multi
Definition
The endpoint's unique ID.
Permissible values (if controlled)
Notes
This is the RDN of this object. In practice, there will always
be one and only one commUniqueId for every endpoint. This attribute
uniquely identifies an endpoint in the commObject directory. It must
be unique within that directory, but need not be unique globally.
This attribute has no relationship to the enterprise directory.
Semantics
Example applications for which this attribute would be useful
Example (LDIF fragment)
commUniqueId: bob
4.3.3. commOwner
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.2
attributetypes: 0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.2
NAME 'commOwner'
DESC 'Labeled URI to point back to the original owner'
EQUALITY caseExactMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
Application utility class
Standard
Number of values
multi
Definition
Labelled URI format to point back to the person or resource
object associated with this entry.
Permissible values (if controlled)
Notes
Used as a reverse entry finder of the owner(s). This attribute
may point to groups. Note that this URI can point to a cn, but in
applications where it is desired to bind authentication information
across both the commObject and enterprise directories, it may be
desirable that commOwner points to a dn rather than a cn, thus
uniquely identifying the owner of the commObject.
Semantics
Example applications for which this attribute would be useful
Example (LDIF fragment)
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 12]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
commOwner:
ldap://directory.acme.com/dc=acme,dc=com??sub?(cn=bob%20smith)
commOwner: uid=bob,ou=people,dc=acme,dc=com
4.3.4. commPrivate
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.3
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.3
NAME 'commPrivate'
DESC 'To decide whether the entry is visible to world or not'
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
Application utility class
Standard
Number of values
multi
Definition
To be used by the user and indicate privacy options for an
endpoint, i.e., unlisted number.
Permissible values (if controlled)
Notes
This attribute is defined as Boolean. Future version of this
Recommendation may develop a controlled vocabulary for this
attribute to accommodate multiple types of privacy.
Semantics
Example applications for which this attribute would be useful
Example (LDIF fragment)
commPrivate: true
4.4. CommObject LDIF Files
This section contains a schema configuration file for commURIObject
and commObject that can be used to configure an LDAP server to
support these classes.
4.4.1. LDIF for commURIObject
# Communication Object Schema
#
# Schema for Representing Communication Objects in an LDAP Directory
#
# Abstract
#
# This document defines the schema for representing Communication
# objects in an LDAP directory [LDAPv3]. It defines schema elements
# to represent a communication object URI [commURIObject].
#
#
#
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 13]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
# .1 = Communication related work
# .1.1 = commURIObject
# .1.1.1 = attributes
# .1.1.2 = objectclass
# .1.1.3 = syntax
#
# Attribute Type Definitions
#
# The following attribute types are defined in this document:
#
# commURI
dn: cn=schema
changetype: modify
#
# if you need to change the definition of an attribute,
# then first delete and re-add in one step
#
# if this is the first time you are adding the commObject
# objectclass using this LDIF file, then you should comment
# out the delete attributetypes modification since this will
# fail. Alternatively, if your ldapmodify has a switch to continue
# on errors, then just use that switch -- if you're careful
#
delete: attributetypes
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.1.1.1 NAME 'commURI' )
-
#
# re-add the attributes -- in case there is a change of definition
#
#
add: attributetypes
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.1.1.1
NAME 'commURI'
DESC 'Labeled URI format to point to the distinguished name of
the commUniqueId'
EQUALITY caseExactMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
-
# Object Class Definitions
#
# The following object classes are defined in this document:
#
# commURIObject
#
# commURIObject
#
# This auxiliary object class represents a URI attribute type
#
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 14]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
#
delete: objectclasses
objectclasses: (0.0.8.350.1.1.1.2.1 NAME 'commURIObject' )
-
add: objectclasses
objectclasses: (0.0.8.350.1.1.1.2.1
NAME 'commURIObject'
DESC 'object that contains the URI attribute type'
SUP top AUXILIARY
MAY ( commURI )
)
-
#
# end of LDIF
#
4.4.2. LDIF for commObject
# Communication Object Schema
#
# Schema for Representing Communication Objects in an LDAP Directory
#
# Abstract
#
# This document defines the schema for representing Communication
# objects in an LDAP directory [LDAPv3]. It defines schema elements
# to represent a communication object [commObject].
#
#
# .1 = Communication related work
# .1.2 = commObject
# .1.2.1 = attributes
# .1.2.2 = objectclass
# .1.2.3 = syntax
#
#
# Attribute Type Definitions
#
# The following attribute types are defined in this document:
#
# commUniqueId
# commOwner
# commPrivate
dn: cn=schema
changetype: modify
#
# if you need to change the definition of an attribute,
# then first delete and re-add in one step
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 15]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
#
# if this is the first time you are adding the commObject
# objectclass using this LDIF file, then you should comment
# out the delete attributetypes modification since this will
# fail. Alternatively, if your ldapmodify has a switch to continue
# on errors, then just use that switch -- if you're careful
#
delete: attributetypes
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.1 NAME 'commUniqueId' )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.2 NAME 'commOwner' )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.3 NAME 'commPrivate' )
-
#
# re-add the attributes -- in case there is a change of definition
#
#
add: attributetypes
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.1
NAME 'commUniqueId'
DESC 'To hold the endpoints unique Id'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
SUBSTR caseIgnoreIA5SubstringsMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.2
NAME 'commOwner'
DESC 'Labeled URI to point back to the original owner'
EQUALITY caseExactMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.2.1.3
NAME 'commPrivate'
DESC 'To decide whether the entry is visible to world or not'
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
-
# Object Class Definitions
#
# The following object classes are defined in this document:
#
# commObject
#
# commObject
#
#
delete: objectclasses
objectclasses: (0.0.8.350.1.1.2.2.1 NAME 'commObject' )
-
add: objectclasses
objectclasses: (0.0.8.350.1.1.2.2.1
NAME 'commObject'
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 16]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
DESC 'object that contains the Communication attributes'
SUP top STRUCTURAL
MUST commUniqueId
MAY ( commOwner $ commPrivate )
)
-
#
# end of LDIF
#
4.5. H.350 Annex A Indexing Profile
Indexing of attributes is an implementation-specific activity and
depends upon the desired application. Non-indexed attributes can
result in search times sufficiently long to render some applications
unusable. Notably, user and alias lookup should be fast. The Annex
A Indexing Profile describes an indexing configuration for commObject
directories that will be optimized for use in directory of
directories applications. Use of this profile is optional.
commURI: no recommendation
commUniqueId: equality
commOwner: presence
commPrivate: presence
5. H.350.4
The normative text of H.350 is reproduced in this section.
5.1. Scope
This Recommendation describes an LDAP directory services architecture
for multimedia conferencing using SIP. In particular, it defines an
LDAP schema to represent SIP User Agents (UAs) on the network and
associate those endpoints with users.
This Recommendation is intended to supplement the CommObject
directory architecture as discussed in ITU-T Rec. H.350, and not
intended to be used as a stand-alone architecture. The
implementation of this LDAP schema, together with the use of the
H.350 CommObject architecture, facilitates the integration of SIP
User Agents and conferencing devices into existing Enterprise
Directories, thus allowing the user to perform white page lookups and
access clickable dialling supported by SIP devices. The primary
reasons for implementing this schema include those listed in ITU-T
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 17]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
Rec. H.350 (the CommObject class definition) as they apply
specifically to the use of SIP UAs, and to facilitate vendors making
SIP services more readily available to their users.
The scope of this Recommendation includes recommendations for the
architecture to integrate endpoint information for endpoints using
SIP into existing enterprise directories and white pages.
The scope of this Recommendation does not include normative methods
for the use of the LDAP directory itself or the data it contains. The
purpose of the schema is not to represent all possible data elements
in the SIP protocol, but rather to represent the minimal set required
to accomplish the design goals enumerated in ITU-T Rec. H.350.
Note that SIP provides well-defined methods for discovering registrar
addresses and locating users on the network. Some of the attributes
defined here are intended for more trivial or manual implementations
and may not be needed for all applications. For example,
SIPIdentityRegistrarAddress and SIPIdentityAddress may not be needed
for many applications, but are included here for completeness. Thus,
SIPIdentitySIPURI is the primary attribute of interest that will be
served out, especially for white page directory applications.
5.1.1. Extending the schema
The SIPIdentity classes may be extended as necessary for specific
implementations. See the base of ITU-T Rec. H.350 for a discussion
on schema extension.
5.2. Object class definitions
The SIPIdentity object class represents SIP User Agents (UAs). It is
an auxiliary class and is derived from the commObject class, which is
defined in the ITU-T Rec. H.350.
5.2.1. SIPIdentity
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.6.2.1
objectclasses: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.2.1
NAME 'SIPIdentity'
DESC 'SIPIdentity object'
SUP top AUXILIARY
MAY ( SIPIdentitySIPURI $ SIPIdentityRegistrarAddress $
SIPIdentityProxyAddress $ SIPIdentityUserName $
SIPIdentityPassword $ SIPIdentityServiceLevel $
userSMIMECertificate )
)
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 18]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
5.2.2. SIPIdentitySIPURI
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.1
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.1
NAME 'SIPIdentitySIPURI'
DESC 'Universal Resource Indicator of the SIP UA'
EQUALITY caseExactMatch
SUBSTR caseExactSubstringsMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
Application utility class
standard
Number of values
multi
Definition
Uniform Resource Identifier that identifies a communication
resource in SIP. Usually contains a user name and a host name and is
often similar in format to an email address.
Permissible values (if controlled)
Notes
This URI may institute SIP or SIPS (secure). In the event that
SIPS is instituted, the URI must reflect that it is using SIPS as
opposed to SIP. See Examples below.
Semantics
Example applications for which this attribute would be useful
Online representation of most current listing of a user's
SIP(S) UA.
Example
SIPIdentitySIPURI: sip:alice@foo.com // SIP example
SIPIdentitySIPURI: sip:alice@152.2.158.212 // SIP example
SIPIdentitySIPURI: sips:bob@birmingham.edu // SIPS example
5.2.3. SIPIdentityRegistrarAddress
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.2
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.2
NAME 'SIPIdentityRegistrarAddress'
DESC 'specifies the location of the registrar'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
Application utility class
Standard
Number of values
multi
Definition
Address for the domain to which the server that handles
REGISTER requests and forwarding to the location server for a
particular domain belongs.
Permissible values (if controlled)
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 19]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
Notes
Note that RFC 3261 states that user agents can discover their
registrar address by configuration, using the address-of-record, or
by multicast. The first scenario, by configuration, is noted as out
of scope for RFC 3261. This attribute may be used for the first
scenario. It can be accomplished manually, (e.g., a web page that
displays a user's correct registrar address) or automatically with
an H.350.4 aware user agent.
Semantics
Example applications for which this attribute would be useful
white pages, a web page that displays a user's correct
configuration information.
Example (LDIF fragment)
SIPIdentityRegistrarAddress: 152.2.15.22 //IP address example
SIPIdentityRegistrarAddress: sipregistrar.unc.edu //FQDN example
5.2.4. SIPIdentityProxyAddress
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.3
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.3
NAME 'SIPIdentityProxyAddress'
DESC 'Specifies the location of the SIP Proxy'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
Application utility class
Standard
Number of values
multi
Definition
Address which specifies the domain location of SIP proxy within
a domain. RFC 3261 defines the role of the SIP proxy.
Permissible values (if controlled)
Notes
SIP User Agents are not REQUIRED to use a proxy, but will in
many cases.
Semantics
Example applications for which this attribute would be useful
white pages, a web page that displays a user's correct
configuration information.
Example (LDIF fragment)
SIPIdentityProxyAddress: 172.2.13.234 //IP address example
SIPIdentityProxyAddress: sipproxy.unc.edu //FQDN example
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 20]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
5.2.5. SIPIdentityAddress
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.4
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.4
NAME 'SIPIdentityAddress'
DESC 'IP address or FQDN of the UA'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
Application utility class
standard
Number of values
multi
Definition
Specifies the IP address or fully qualified domain name of the
UA.
Permissible values (if controlled)
Notes
This attribute may be useful for applications in which UA to UA
communication is direct, not involving a proxy or registrar.
Example applications for which this attribute would be useful
A web page that displays a user's proper user agent
configuration information.
Example (LDIF fragment)
SIPIdentityAddress: 152.2.121.36 // IP address example
SIPIdentityAddress: ipPhone.foo.org // FQDN example
5.2.6. SIPIdentityPassword
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.5
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.5
NAME 'SIPIdentityPassword'
DESC 'The user agent SIP password '
EQUALITY octetStringMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.40 )
Application utility class
Standard
Number of values
multi
Definition
The SIP user agent's password, used for the HTTP digest
authentication scheme as defined in RFC 2617.
Permissible values (if controlled)
Notes
Because RFC 2069, which was made obsolete by RFC 2617, was used
as the basis for HTTP Digest in RFC 2543, any SIP servers supporting
RFC 2617 must ensure backward compatibility with RFC 2069.
This SIPIdentityUserName, together with SIPIdentityPassword,
are reserved for the purpose of use with Digest Access
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 21]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
Authentication, and not intended for use with Basic Authentication
methods.
LDAP provides one method to store user passwords for reference.
If passwords are stored in LDAP it makes the LDAP server a
particularly valuable target for attack. Implementors are encouraged
to exercise caution and implement appropriate security procedures
such as encryption, access control, and transport layer security for
access to this attribute.
Semantics
Example applications for which this attribute would be useful
Example (LDIF fragment)
SIPIdentityPassword: 36zxJmCIB18dM0FVAj
5.2.7. SIPIdentityUserName
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.6
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.6
NAME 'SIPIdentityUserName'
DESC 'The user agent user name.'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch
SUBSTR caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
Application utility class
Standard
Number of values
multi
Definition
The SIP user agent's user name, used for the HTTP digest
authentication scheme as defined in RFC 2617.
Permissible values (if controlled)
Notes
Because RFC 2069, which was made obsolete by RFC 2617, was used
as the basis for HTTP Digest Authentication in RFC 2543, any SIP
servers supporting HTTP Digest Authentication as defined in RFC 2617
must ensure backward compatibility with RFC 2069.
This SIPIdentityUserName, together with SIPIdentityPassword,
are reserved for the purpose of use with Digest Access
Authentication, and not intended for use with Basic Authentication
methods.
Note that in many cases the user name will be parsed from the
user@proxy.domain portion of the SIP URI. In that case it may not be
necessary to populate this attribute.
Semantics
Example applications for which this attribute would be useful
Example (LDIF fragment)
SIPIdentityUserName: nelkhour
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 22]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
5.2.8. SIPIdentityServiceLevel
OID: 0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.7
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.7
NAME 'SIPIdentityServiceLevel'
DESC 'To define services that a user can belong to.'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
SUBSTR caseIgnoreIA5SubstringsMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
Application utility class
Standard
Number of values
multi
Definition
This describes the level of services a user can belong to.
Permissible values (if controlled)
Notes
This attribute does not represent a data element found in SIP.
SIP itself does not support distinctions in service levels. Instead,
this attribute provides a mechanism for the storage of service level
information directly in LDAP. This mapping allows service providers
to adapt to an existing LDAP directory without changing the values
of the SIPIdentityServiceLevel instances in the directory.
Semantics
Example applications for which this attribute would be useful
Example (LDIF fragment)
SIPIdentityServiceLevel: premium
5.3. SIPIdentity LDIF Files
This clause contains a schema configuration file for SIPIdentity
that can be used to configure an LDAP server to support this class.
# SIPIdentity Object Schema
#
# Schema for representing SIPIdentity Object in an LDAP Directory
#
# Abstract
#
# This Recommendation defines the schema for representing
SIPIdentity
# object in an LDAP directory [LDAPv3]. It defines schema elements
# to represent an SIPIdentity object [SIPIdentity].
#
# .1 = Communication related work
# .1.6 = SIPIdentity
# .1.6.1 = attributes
# .1.6.2 = objectclass
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 23]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
# .1.6.3 = syntax
#
#
#
# Attribute Type Definitions
#
# The following attribute types are defined in this
Recommendation:
#
# SIPIdentitySIPURI
# SIPIdentityRegistrarAddress
# SIPIdentityProxyAddress
# SIPIdentityAddress
# SIPIdentityPassword
# SIPIdentityUserName
# SIPIdentityServiceLevel
dn: cn=schema
changetype: modify
#
# if you need to change the definition of an attribute,
# then first delete and re-add in one step
#
# if this is the first time you are adding the SIPIdentity
# objectclass using this LDIF file, then you should comment
# out the delete attributetypes modification since this will
# fail. Alternatively, if your ldapmodify has a switch to continue
# on errors, then just use that switch -- if you are careful
#
delete: attributetypes
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.1 NAME 'SIPIdentitySIPURI' )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.2 NAME 'SIPIdentityRegistrarAddress')
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.3 NAME 'SIPIdentityProxyAddress')
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.4 NAME 'SIPIdentityAddress' )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.5 NAME 'SIPIdentityPassword' )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.6 NAME 'SIPIdentityUserName' )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.7 NAME 'SIPIdentityServiceLevel')
-
#
# re-add the attributes -- in case there is a change of definition
#
#
add: attributetypes
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.1
NAME 'SIPIdentitySIPURI'
DESC 'Universal Resource Indicator of the SIP UA'
EQUALITY caseExactMatch
SUBSTR caseExactSubstringsMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 24]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.2
NAME 'SIPIdentityRegistrarAddress'
DESC 'specifies the location of the registrar'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.3
NAME 'SIPIdentityProxyAddress'
DESC 'Specifies the location of the SIP Proxy'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.4
NAME 'SIPIdentityAddress'
DESC 'IP address of the UA'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.5
NAME 'SIPIdentityPassword'
DESC 'The user agent SIP password '
EQUALITY octetStringMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.40 )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.6
NAME 'SIPIdentityUserName'
DESC 'The user agent user name.'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch
SUBSTR caseIgnoreSubstringsMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )
attributetypes: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.1.7
NAME 'SIPIdentityServiceLevel'
DESC 'To define services that a user can belong to.'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
SUBSTR caseIgnoreIA5SubstringsMatch
SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26 )
-
# Object Class Definitions
#
# The following object class is defined in this Recommendation:
#
# SIPIdentity
#
# SIPIdentity
#
#
delete: objectclasses
objectclasses: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.2.1 NAME 'SIPIdentity' )
-
add: objectclasses
objectclasses: (0.0.8.350.1.1.6.2.1
NAME 'SIPIdentity'
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 25]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
DESC 'SIPIdentity object'
SUP top AUXILIARY
MAY ( SIPIdentitySIPURI $ SIPIdentityRegistrarAddress $
SIPIdentityProxyAddress $ SIPIdentityAddress $
SIPIdentityPassword $ SIPIdentityUserName $
SIPIdentityServiceLevel $ userSMIMECertificate )
)
-
#
# end of LDIF
#
5.4. H.350.4 Annex A Indexing profile
Indexing of attributes is an implementation-specific activity and
depends upon the desired application. Non-indexed attributes can
result in search times sufficiently long to render some applications
unusable. Notably, user and alias lookup should be fast. The Annex
A Indexing Profile describes an indexing configuration for
SIPIdentity directories that will be optimized for use in directory
of directories applications. Use of this profile is optional.
SIPIdentitySIPURI: equality
SIPIdentityRegistrarAddress: no recommendation
SIPIdentityProxyAddress: no recommendation
SIPIdentityAddress: equality
SIPIdentityUserName: equality
SIPIdentityPassword: no recommendation
SIPIdentityServiceLevel: equality
6. Acknowledgments
We are grateful to numerous colleagues for reaching across multiple
boundaries of standards bodies, research networks, academia and
private industry in order to produce an architecture that works
toward integrating multimedia conferencing deployments. In
particular, standards from both IETF and ITU-T were drawn from
extensively, and the architecture is meant to serve all communities.
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 26]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
This work developed out of the Video Conferencing Middleware
(VidMid-VC) working group, a joint effort of Internet2
(www.internet2.edu) and the Video Development Initiative
(www.vide.net). The architecture was developed in response to
deployment challenges discovered in the ViDeNet
(https//:videnet.unc.edu) academic test bed providing video and voice
over IP infrastructure across research networks internationally.
This work was supported in part by a grant from the United States
National Science Foundation contract number ANI-0222710.
7. Security Considerations
This section is not present in the ITU-T standard, but gives
information for the IETF community. Its content has the consensus of
the ITU-T Study Group 16.
H.350 does not alter the security architectures of any particular
protocol. However, it does offer a standardized place to store
authentication credentials where appropriate. It should be noted
that both H.323 and SIP support shared secret authentication (H.235
Annex D and HTTP Digest, respectively). These approaches require
that the call server have access to the password. Thus, if the call
server or H.350 directory is compromised, passwords also may become
compromised. These weaknesses may be due to weaknesses in the
systems (H.350 directory or call servers) and their operation rather
than in H.350 per se.
The userSMIMECertificate attribute is defined in RFC 2798 (section
2.8) as a part of inetOrgPerson. The SIP user agent's X.509
certificate can be stored in this attribute. When the certificate is
present, it can be employed with S/MIME to provide authentication,
integrity, and confidentiality as specified in RFC 3261 [5].
It is strongly encouraged that call servers and an H.350 directory
mutually authenticate each other before sharing information.
Further, it is strongly encouraged that communications between H.350
directories and call servers or endpoints happen over secure
communication channels such as SSL or TLS.
Finally, access control lists on LDAP servers are a matter of policy
and are not a part of the standard. System administrators are
advised to use common sense when setting access control on H.350
attributes. For example, password attributes should only be
accessible by the authenticated user, while address attributes might
be publicly available.
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 27]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[1] Hodges, J. and R. Morgan, "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
(v3): Technical Specification", RFC 3377, September 2002.
[2] ITU-T Recommendation H.350, "Directory services architecture for
multimedia conferencing", 2003.
[3] ITU-T Recommendation H.350.4, "Directory services architecture
for SIP", 2003.
[4] Franks, J., Hallam-Baker P., Hostetler, J., Lawrence, S., Leach,
P., Luotonen, A., and L. Stewart, "HTTP Authentication: Basic
and Digest Access Authentication", RFC 2617, June 1999.
[5] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A.,
Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. Schooler, "SIP:
Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, June 2002.
[6] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "Session Initiation Protocol
(SIP): Locating SIP Servers", RFC 3263, June 2002.
[7] Smith, M., "Definition of the inetOrgPerson LDAP Object Class",
RFC 2798, April 2000.
8.2. Informative References
[8] ITU-T Recommendation H.350.1, "Directory services architecture
for H.323", 2003.
[9] ITU-T Recommendation H.350.2, "Directory services architecture
for H.235", 2003.
[10] ITU-T Recommendation H.350.3, "Directory services architecture
for H.320", 2003.
[11] ITU-T Recommendation H.350.5, "Directory services architecture
for Non-Standard Protocols", 2003.
[12] ITU-T Recommendation H.350.6, "Directory services architecture
for Call Forwarding and Preferences", 2004.
[13] Howes T. and M. Smith, "Understanding And Deploying LDAP
Directory Services", New Riders Publishing, ISBN: 1578700701,
1999.
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 28]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
[14] Howes T. and M. Smith, "LDAP Programming Directory-Enabled
Applications with Lightweight Directory Access Protocol", New
Riders Publishing, ISBN: 1578700000, 1997.
9. Relationship to Other Specifications
This specification is an RFC publication of an ITU-T publication [4],
without textual changes within the standard itself (Section 4). The
present section appears in the RFC publication only. In order for
this specification to be implemented properly, a number of standards
pertaining to LDAP [1], [7], H.350 [2],[3], and SIP [4], [5], [6],
[7], need to be implemented in whole or in part by the implementor.
For some background information on the ITU and IETF directory service
protocols, reading [8], [9], [10], [11], and [12] is valuable, and
[13] and [14] are recommended books.
10. Authors' Addresses
Tyler Johnson
Editor, H.350
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC 27599
Phone: +1.919.843.7004
EMail: Tyler_Johnson@unc.edu
Sakae Okubo
Rapporteur for Q.4/16, ITU-T SG16
Waseda University
YRP Ichibankan, 3-4 Hikarinooka
Yokosuka-shi, 239-0847 Japan
Phone: +81 46 847 5406
EMail: sokubo@waseda.jp
Simao Ferraz de Campos Neto
Counsellor, ITU-T SG 16
International Telecommunication Union
Place des Nations
Geneva CH1211 - Switzerland
Phone: +41-22-730-6805
EMail: simao.campos@itu.int
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 29]
RFC 3944 H.350 Directory Services December 2004
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and at www.rfc-editor.org, 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/SHE 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 ISOC's procedures with respect to rights in ISOC 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.
Johnson, et al. Informational [Page 30]