draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names-00.txt   draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names-01.txt 
NETWORK WORKING GROUP N. Williams NETWORK WORKING GROUP N. Williams
Internet-Draft Sun Internet-Draft Sun
Expires: December 30, 2004 July 2004 Expires: April 19, 2006 October 16, 2005
GSS-API Domain-Based Service Names and Name Type GSS-API Domain-Based Service Names and Name Type
draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names-00.txt draft-ietf-kitten-gssapi-domain-based-names-01.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
RFC 3668. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Internet-Drafts. Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 30, 2004. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 19, 2006.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
Abstract Abstract
This document describes domainname-based service principal names and This document describes domainname-based service principal names and
the corresponding name type for the Generic Security Service the corresponding name type for the Generic Security Service
Application Programming Interface (GSS-API). Application Programming Interface (GSS-API).
Domain-based service names are similar to host-based service names, Domain-based service names are similar to host-based service names,
but using a domain name (not necessarily and Internat domain name) but using a domain name (not necessarily and Internat domain name)
instead of or in addition to a hostname. The primary purpose of instead of or in addition to a hostname. The primary purpose of
domain-based service names is to provide a way to name clustered domain-based service names is to provide a way to name clustered
services after the domain which they service, thereby allowing their services after the domain which they service, thereby allowing their
clients to authorize the service's servers based on authentication of clients to authorize the service's servers based on authentication of
their names. their names.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Name Type OID and Symbolic Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Name Type OID and Symbolic Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Query and Display Syntaxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Query and Display Syntaxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.1 Normative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7.1. Normative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.2 Informative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7.2. Informative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 10 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 11
1. Conventions used in this document 1. Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
2. Introduction 2. Introduction
The use of hostbased principal names for domain-wide services The use of hostbased principal names for domain-wide services
skipping to change at page 4, line 28 skipping to change at page 4, line 28
clients could not tell which service is authorized to serve which clients could not tell which service is authorized to serve which
directory, not without assuming a secure method for finding LDAP directory, not without assuming a secure method for finding LDAP
servers (e.g., DNSSEC). This is a significant, and oft-unstated servers (e.g., DNSSEC). This is a significant, and oft-unstated
restriction on users of LDAP. restriction on users of LDAP.
Domain based names can eliminate this problem by allowing LDAP Domain based names can eliminate this problem by allowing LDAP
service names to indicate which LDAP directory they are authorized to service names to indicate which LDAP directory they are authorized to
serve. serve.
A domain-based name consists of three required elements: A domain-based name consists of three required elements:
o a service name o a service name
o a domain name o a domain name
o a hostname o a hostname
3. Name Type OID and Symbolic Name 3. Name Type OID and Symbolic Name
The new name type has an OID of The new name type has an OID of
[NOTE: OID assignment to be made with IANA.] [NOTE: OID assignment to be made with IANA.]
{iso(1) org(3) dod(6) internet(1) security(5) nametypes(6) {iso(1) org(3) dod(6) internet(1) security(5) nametypes(6) gss-
gss-domain-based(5)} domain-based(5)}
The recommended symbolic name for this GSS-API name type is The recommended symbolic name for this GSS-API name type is
"GSS_C_NT_DOMAINBASED_SERVICE". "GSS_C_NT_DOMAINBASED_SERVICE".
4. Query and Display Syntaxes 4. Query and Display Syntaxes
There is a single name syntax for domain-based names. There is a single name syntax for domain-based names.
The syntax is: The syntax is:
domain-based-name := domain-based-name :=
| <service> '@' <domain> '@' <hostname> | <service> '@' <domain> '@' <hostname>
Note that for Internet domain names the trailing '.' is not and MUST Note that for Internet domain names the trailing '.' is not and MUST
NOT be included in the domain name (or hostname) parts of the display NOT be included in the domain name (or hostname) parts of the display
form GSS-API domain-based MNs. form GSS-API domain-based MNs.
5. Examples 5. Examples
o ldap@example.tld@ds1.example.tld o ldap@example.tld@ds1.example.tld
o kadmin@example.tld@kdc1.example.tld o kadmin@example.tld@kdc1.example.tld
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
Use of GSS-API domain-based names may not be negotiable by some Use of GSS-API domain-based names may not be negotiable by some GSS-
GSS-API mechanisms, and some acceptors may not support GSS-API API mechanisms, and some acceptors may not support GSS-API domain-
domain-based names. In such cases initiators are left to fallback on based names. In such cases initiators are left to fallback on the
the use of hostbased names, in which case the initiators MUST also use of hostbased names, in which case the initiators MUST also verify
verify that the acceptor's hostbased name is authorized to provide that the acceptor's hostbased name is authorized to provide the given
the given service for the domain that the initiator had wanted. service for the domain that the initiator had wanted.
The above security consideration also applies to all GSS-API The above security consideration also applies to all GSS-API
initiators who lack support for domain-based service names. initiators who lack support for domain-based service names.
7. References 7. References
7.1 Normative 7.1. Normative
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2743] Linn, J., "Generic Security Service Application Program [RFC2743] Linn, J., "Generic Security Service Application Program
Interface Version 2, Update 1", RFC 2743, January 2000. Interface Version 2, Update 1", RFC 2743, January 2000.
7.2 Informative 7.2. Informative
[RFC1964] Linn, J., "The Kerberos Version 5 GSS-API Mechanism", RFC [RFC1964] Linn, J., "The Kerberos Version 5 GSS-API Mechanism",
1964, June 1996. RFC 1964, June 1996.
[RFC2222] Myers, J., "Simple Authentication and Security Layer [RFC2222] Myers, J., "Simple Authentication and Security Layer
(SASL)", RFC 2222, October 1997. (SASL)", RFC 2222, October 1997.
[RFC3377] Hodges, J. and R. Morgan, "Lightweight Directory Access [RFC3377] Hodges, J. and R. Morgan, "Lightweight Directory Access
Protocol (v3): Technical Specification", RFC 3377, Protocol (v3): Technical Specification", RFC 3377,
September 2002. September 2002.
Author's Address Author's Address
Nicolas Williams Nicolas Williams
Sun Microsystems Sun Microsystems
5300 Riata Trace Ct 5300 Riata Trace Ct
Austin, TX 78727 Austin, TX 78727
US US
EMail: Nicolas.Williams@sun.com Email: Nicolas.Williams@sun.com
Intellectual Property Statement Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 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 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
skipping to change at page 10, line 41 skipping to change at page 11, line 41
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Copyright Statement Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). This document is subject
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
Acknowledgment Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society. Internet Society.
 End of changes. 22 change blocks. 
35 lines changed or deleted 43 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.27, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/