3.3. Naming Structure The name-spaces for X.500 and X.400 are completely different and are structured to meet different needs. The X.500 name-space is typically organized to allow quick, optimized searching; while the X.400 ORname is used to forward an X.400 message through several "levels" of MTAs (X.400 Message Transfer Agents). ESnet backbone sites will participate in the X.400 environment through one of two options; either participating in the ESnet Private Management Domain (PRMD) or operating a site PRMD. For most sites, utilizing the ESnet PRMD will be the simpler and preferable choice. 3.3.1. Participating in the ESnet Private Management Domain ESnet backbone sites participating in the ESnet PRMD will have an X.400 name syntax as follows: /.../O=<site>/PRMD=ESnet/ADMD= /C=US/ A few examples of a possible X.400 ORnames using the above syntax are:
/PN=Smith/OU=Computations/O=LLNL/PRMD=ESnet/ADMD= /C=US/ /PN=Jones/OU=Physics/O=PPPL/PRMD=ESnet/ADMD= /C=US/ These sites will operate an MTA at the /O=<organization> level in the name hierarchy. 3.3.2. Operating a Site Private Management Domain ESnet backbone sites which operate a PRMD will have an X.400 name syntax as follows: /.../O=<org>/PRMD=<site>/ADMD= /C=US/ A few examples of a possible X.400 ORnames using the above syntax are: /PN=Smith/O=Computations/PRMD=LLNL/ADMD= /C=US/ /PN=Jones/O=Physics/PRMD=PPPL/ADMD= /C=US/ These sites will operate an MTA at the /PRMD=<PRMD> level in the name hierarchy. This MTA will peer with the ESnet PRMD MTA. 3.3.3. Detailed Name Structure GOSIP places several limits on allowable ORnames. After the /O=<organization> name, up to four levels of /OU=<organizational_unit> names are allowed. The ORname string is then completed with the /PN=<personal_name> field. All ORname fields must use characters from the ISO printable character set. Additionally, the following name length restrictions apply: PRMD Names 16 characters Organization Names 64 characters Organizational Unit Names 32 characters Personal Names 64 characters NOTE: A 40 character limit for Personal Names is now being studied by the CCITT. Within these name constraints, the architecting of an organization's name space is a local matter. Sites are encouraged to consider ease of use and stability when determining their naming structure. 3.4. X.400 Routing In the IP environment a SMTP MTA could use the Domain Name Service
(DNS) to locate connection information for the host closest to the recipient. With X.400, MTAs must know the remote MTAs name and password along with connection information. This is because of access control requirements on some X.400 systems. In X.400 MHS this information will, at some future date, be provided by X.500. In the mean time the routing and connection process within the X.400 community is table driven. This solution requires a coordination and distribution effort to ensure a quick and reliable update of these tables. The current thinking on the problem of X.400 routing is to decompose the X.400 address space into a hierarchy, with each node in this hierarchy representing the entry point for an X.400 domain. These nodes have been commonly called Well Known Entry Points (WEPs). Each of these WEPs represent one X.400 MHS domain. For example: /O=LBL/PRMD=ESnet/ADMD= /C=US/ /O=NERSC/PRMD=ESnet/ADMD= /C=US/ /PRMD=ESnet/ADMD= /C=US/ /PRMD=ANL/ADMD= /C=US/ /PRMD=PNL/ADMD= /C=US/ To minimize the number of hops between Originators and Recipients it is the current recommendation of the X.400 community that every PRMD peer with all other PRMDs. The ESnet backbone will provide connectivity between multiple PRMDs (the ESnet PRMD and any site operated PRMDs), each with associated well-know entry point MTAs. Each of these PRMD-level MTAs must be configured with routing and mapping information about each other to enable peer-to-peer PRMD routing. These routing tables should be updated immediately upon the discovery of new/changed X.400 connectivity information. These tables will be made available to the ESnet community via the ESnet Information Server. Once placed on- line, a notification message announcing the availability of this new routing information will be sent to every WEP owner via the E-mail mechanism described in Section 3.5.1. It is recommended that WEP administrators should retrieve this new routing information and update their MTAs within 10 working days. The well-known entry point MTA for each PRMD can route down to an Organizational level MTA or laterally to the well-known entry point of a peer PRMD MTA. For example, the ESnet MTA would route a message with the address: /PN=Funk/OU=CS/O=PPPL/PRMD=ESnet/ADMD= /C=US/
to a well-known entry point for PPPL (O=PPPL). PPPL must own and operate their own X.400 MTA, and it must be configured to accept X.400 messages from the ESnet MTA. Thus, the interpretation of remaining "/PN=Funk/OU=CS" is left to the PPPL MTA to route. Mail sent from PPPL's MTA would be routed to the ESnet's MTA (PRMD) to be eventually routed to its destination. The ESnet MTA will also route to peer MTAs which are well-known entry points for other PRMDs (e.g. ESnet backbone site PRMDs, XNREN, Hughes Air Craft, NASA, CDC). For example, the ESnet MTA would route a message with the address: /PN=Smith/OU=MS/O=RL/PRMD=PNL/ADMD= /C=US/ to a well-known entry point for PNL (PRMD=PNL). PNL must own and operate their own X.400 MTA, and it must be configured to accept X.400 messages from the ESnet MTA (as well as possibly other PRMDs). Thus, the interpretation of the remaining "/PN=SMITH/OU=MS/O=RL" is left to the PNL MTA to route. Mail sent from PNL's MTA (PRMD) would be routed to the well-known entry point for the PRMD indicated in the destination address. Additionally, a site operated PRMD must be able to route mail to any other peer-PRMD within the ESnet community. 3.4.1. Responsibilities in Operating an X.400 PRMD MTA If the X.400 world were to operate exactly as the standard recommends, PRMDs would only peer with other PRMDs when connectivity is available and traffic demand is sufficient, and would utilize ADMD services to reach all other PRMDs. In reality, many PRMDs will not subscribe to an ADMD service and will only be reachable through PRMD peering. Most communities, such as the ESnet, desire the fullest PRMD interconnectivity possible to minimize the need for ADMD services. Community PRMD operational requirements stem from a policy of achieving large scale peering among PRMD operators within the community. Work is continuing in the IETF X.400 Operations Working Group to produce an RFC that specifies the operational requirements that must be implemented by X.400 Management Domains. "Requirements for X.400 Management Domains (MDs) Operating in the Global Research and Development X.400 Service", this document is listed in Appendix G. ESnet will comply with all the requirements outlined in this
document. It is the recommendation that all ESnet PRMDs follow the requirements specified in this document. As an overview, this document specifies that each PRMD will provide at least one WEP and that all PRMDs must be interconnected. There are a number of PRMDs in the International X.400 service that have different communication stack requirements. For example: Stack 1 Stack 2 Stack 3 Stack 4 ------- ------- ------- ------- Transport Layer 4 TP0 TP4 RFC-1006 TP0 Network Service 1-3 X.25 CLNS TCP/IP CONS To meet the requirement that all PRMDs must be interconnected a PRMD must support one or more of the above stacks. For stacks that are not supported the PRMD must negotiate with another PRMD or ADMD to relay messages to a Management Domain that does support the other stacks. The PRMD requirements also suggest that PRMDs support downgrading of X.400 1988 to X.400 1984. Also, the PRMD must be reachable from the Internet Mail service. This means the PRMD must maintain an Internet Mail/X.400 gateway. In all cases, members of the ESnet community who operate a PRMD should notify ESnet of the WEP and MTA information required to perform peering. 3.4.2. Responsibilities in Operating an X.400 Organizational MTA ESnet will provide PRMD service to the ESnet community. ESnet will peer with the other PRMDs in the International X.400 service and provide a WEP for the ESnet community. An Organization/site needs to decide if they are going to comply with the above PRMD requirements or act as an organization associated to the ESnet PRMD. Minimally, an organizational MTA will only have to support one of the protocol stacks provided by it associated PRMD. But in all cases, the site will need to provide a WEP and register/list their MTA(s) with ESnet. 3.5. Services Provided by ESnet ESnet will provide PRMD service to those members of the ESnet community who desire it. ESnet will peer with other PRMDs in the International community (e.g. XNREN, Hughes Air Craft, NASA, CDC) and provide a WEP for the ESnet community; the intent is to provide the fullest PRMD level X.400 services. ESnet will deploy two, PRMD level, X.400 MTAs in geographically
disperse locations. These MTAs will be able to forward mail for directly connected ESnet backbone sites, as well as to and from the peered PRMDs. 3.5.1. X.400 Operations Mailing List ESnet will provide an X.400 operations mailer for announcements and to allow the sharing of X.400 operational information in the ESnet community. General discussion: email@example.com To subscribe: firstname.lastname@example.org 3.5.2. MTA Routing Table on ESnet Information Server ESnet will maintain forwarding information about ESnet community MTAs at the /PRMD=<PRMD> or /O=<organization> levels (depending on what level the site MTA is operating). This information will be available for use in configuring directly connected ESnet site operated MTAs. This information will be made available in a machine independent format on the ESnet Information Server. 3.5.3. MTA Routing Table Format The ESnet staff will determine the details of information format, update frequency, obtaining, and disseminating the information based on operational experience and constraints. 3.5.4. Gateway Services and Multiprotocol Stack Support The ESnet MTAs will minimally support bidirectional SMTP-X.400 mail gateway capabilities, and will operate over the OSI CLNS protocol (as defined by GOSIP) and RFC-1006 stacks. Configuration and operation of mail protocol gateway functions will be governed by the ESnet staff. Backbone site MTAs which service ORnames at the /O=<site> level under the ESnet PRMD must utilize one of the ESnet PRMD supported protocol stacks. This requirement assures that all users of the ESnet PRMD will be able to communicate to one another via the ESnet PRMD MTA. Backbone site MTAs which service ORnames in PRMDs other than /PRMD=ESnet must utilize the OSI CLNS stack for GOSIP conformance. Use of the RFC-1006 stack is optional. This requirement assures that all PRMDs in the ESnet community will be able to peer with the ESnet PRMD.
3.5.5. Registering/Listing your PRMD or Organizational MTA with ESnet To provide for the connection and routing requirements in X.400 you will need to register/list your MTA with ESnet. This information will be maintained in tables on the ESnet Information Server. ESnet will also maintain information on the International X.400 service. ESnet will use the same format for information as maintained by the International X.400 service. This is described in detail in a IETF X.400 operations paper "Routing Coordination for X.400 MHS Services within a Multiprotocol/Multinetwork Environment". This paper is a working draft, see Appendix G. It describes a machine independent form for distribution of X.400 information. There are three tables that must be maintained and exchanged by the top level WEPS. 1. The Community Document 2. The WEP Document 3. The Domain Document ESnet will submit these documents to the International X.400 community on behalf of the ESnet Community. If an ESnet PRMD wishes to peer with the International PRMDs they will need to submit these documents to that community. The Community document is used to list the central coordination point and file server where all MHS documents will be stored. It also lists the communication stacks used by the MHS community. This document will be submitted to the International X.400 service by ESnet for the ESnet Community. ESnet PRMDs and Organizations do not need to submit this form to ESnet. If an ESnet PRMD wishes to peer with the International X.400 service then they must submit this form to that community. Each ESnet MHS domain will need to submit a WEP and Domain Document to ESnet. The WEP document is used to list the WEPs used by an ESnet MHS domain. It will contain all the information that is needed for MTA connection and access control. ESnet will submit the ESnet community WEP and Domain Documents to the International X.400 service. The WEP document consists of a list of WEPs, with the following information for each one: o The MTA Name o Password
o Which MTS supported o Which standard, 84 and/or 88 o Connection information outbound o Connection information inbound o Computer system information o Point of contact The Domain Document specifies all the X.400 domains managed by a site. It indicates the person responsible and which WEP services which Domain. This document contains the following information repeated for each Domain: o X.400 Domain o Point of Contact o Relaying WEP(s) 3.6. X.400 Message Routing Between ADMDS and PRMDS While ESnet will provide X.400 routing service for systems, it cannot provide routing via commercial X.400 carriers at this time. The FTS-2000 charge for routing X.400 messages is $.45 (US) plus X.25 packet charges. This could result in a charge of several dollars for large messages, a real possibility with the multi-media capacity of X.400. The payment of this fee is not within the charter of ESnet and the provision of a charging mechanism to charge member sites is not currently contemplated. 3.7. X.400 Registration Requirements It is recommended by the CCITT that all X.400 PRMD names be nationally unique. This is a current CCITT agreement and allows direct PRMD-PRMD peer routing. Since national uniqueness is required, registration should be performed through an appropriate registration authority (such as ANSI). X.400 organization names must be unique within a PRMD. There is no need for national uniqueness. Registration of an X.400 organization name should be conducted through the PRMD operator. The registration of X.400 names below the organization level are usually a local matter. Uniqueness within the context of a superior
name should always be maintained. See Section 4 for a more complete description of OSI registration issues and procedures. 3.8. Future X.400 Issues to be Considered 3.8.1. X.400 Mail Routing to International DOE Researchers Currently there are DOE researchers located in Switzerland, Japan, Germany, China and Brazil. PRMD level connectivity to these international locations does not exist presently. Since ESnet is not chartered to pay for commercial X.400 services on behalf of the ESnet community, "buying" this service is not a viable option. There are efforts taking place to provide international X.400 service over the (international) Internet. Once this becomes fully operational, further research will have to be performed to see if this provides the X.400 connectivity needed to support the DOE researchers located abroad. 3.8.2. X.400 (1984) and X.400 (1988) The ESnet MTAs will initially support the 1984 version of the X.400 standard. As the use of 1988 X.400 becomes more prevalent, support for the newer standard will need to be addressed. One important point, once the ESnet MTAs become 1988 X.400 compliant, they will also have so support "downgrading" to 1984 X.400 to ensure reliable X.400 mail delivery to the ESnet community. 3.8.3. X.400 Interaction with X.500 This is discussed in Section 2.10.2. 4. OSI Name Registration and Issues Implementing OSI services requires that certain information objects (e.g., people, information processing systems and applications) must be unambiguously identifiable on a global basis. These objects may be defined by a variety of organizations, e.g., ISO/IEC, CCITT, commercial, and government. To meet this requirement ISO/IEC and CCITT have established a hierarchical structure of names (a tree). The top level of the naming tree, shared by ISO and CCITT, represents the global naming- domain. Naming domains are managed by registration authorities. A registration authority can delegate authority for part of its naming-domain to another (lower level) registration authority, thus
forming the tree. Each object can be given a unique and unambiguous name by registering the object's name with an OSI registration authority at an appropriate level in the naming tree. OSI name registration authorities and their procedures are expected to change over time. Since names are intended to be stable, these changes (hopefully!) will have minimal impact on existing OSI name registrations. This section describes the role of OSI registration authorities, the difference between a "registration" and a "notification", and sources of nationally unique names. Information about three OSI name registration authorities; the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the General Services Administration (GSA), and the U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE); are given. Registration of a name often requires stating a "right" to that name. However, an OSI name registration does not guarantee legal name rights. Name rights should be reviewed by legal experts prior to registration. Information about the U.S. Department of Commerce, Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) (potentially useful in asserting or defending name rights) is given below. 4.1. Registration Authorities OSI names are obtained through OSI name registration authorities by a registration process. The selection of which particular registration authority to use is determined by the desired level of the OSI name in the naming hierarchy, possible restrictions on the names allocated by each registration authority, and the applicability rules (will they service your request) of each registration authority. An OSI name registration authority allocates OSI names from the particular naming-domain it controls. Every registration authority can trace its naming authority to its parent registration authority, and ultimately to the top (global) level of the naming hierarchy. 4.2. Registration Versus Notification Registering an OSI name guarantees its uniqueness and lack of ambiguity. For a name to be useful however, other parties (besides the registration authority) will need to be notified of the name and its usage. There is a clear distinction between registration (obtaining an OSI name) and notification (informing others of a name and its use).
Often the term "registration" is used to describe both activities, this is a potential source of confusion. For example, NADF and PSI (see Section 2) are not OSI registration authorities. NADF may operate state registration authorities in the future, if delegated that administrative right by the states. PSI operates an X.500 pilot project and needs to be notified of registered names when organizations join their pilot. X.400 ADMD operators are also not OSI registration authorities, although they accept notification of X.400 PRMD names used by their customers. The PTO is not an OSI registration authority. PTO names have no meaning in an OSI context. 4.3. Sources of Nationally Unique Name Registration There are four potential sources of nationally unique names which are of interest to the ESnet community. These are ANSI, GSA, U.S. DOE and the states. An overview of the ANSI, GSA, and U.S. DOE procedures are given in later sections. In order to maintain national uniqueness "constructed name syntax" is used by GSA, U.S. DOE, and the states. The form of each name is shown below, "name" is the name presented to the registration authority for registration. 1. ANSI names are of the form "name". 2. GSA names are of the form "GOV+name". 3. U.S. DOE names are of the form "GOV+USDOE+name". 4. State names are of the form "CA+name" (using California). State name registration authorities are not in operation at this time. The use of U.S. DOE as a nationally unique name registration source is not recommended due to the awkwardness of a double constructed name. 4.4. How to Apply for ANSI Organization Names ANSI is the root U.S. source of OSI recognized nationally unique organization names. ANSI registration costs $2500 and results in both an alphanumeric name and an associated numeric name. These names may be used for a variety of purposes in X.400, X.500, and other OSI services.
For ANSI OSI organization name registration forms and instructions, you should send your request to: American National Standards Institute, Inc. Attn: Beth Somerville OSI Registration Coordinator 11 West 42nd Street New York, NY 10036 Phone: (212) 642-4976 ANSI registration procedures include a 90 day public review period during which name requests can be easily challenged. There is a mechanism to forward ANSI requests to the GSA, it is discussed in the GSA section below. 4.5. How to Apply for GSA Organization Names GSA is the registration authority for government use of GOSIP, their registration services are free for federal government organizations. Names assigned by GSA always begin with the characters "GOV+" and are limited to 16 characters. By agreement with ANSI, these GSA assigned names are national unique. For GSA OSI Organization Name registration forms and instructions, you should send your request to: General Services Administration Office of Telecommunications Services Registration Services, Room 1221-L KBA 18th and F Streets, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20405 4.5.1. GSA Designated Agency Representatives When preparing the GSA registration form a designated agency representative must sign where it says "Registration Official Name and Signature". GSA will refuse requests missing this signature. The GSA designated Agency Representative for the Department of Energy is:
Steve Hackman Electronics Engineer U.S. Department of Energy AD-241.3/GTN Washington, D.C. 20585 Office Phone: (301) 903-6111 Office FAX: (301) 903-4125 E-Mail: email@example.com 4.5.2. Forwarding of ANSI Registrations to GSA ANSI registration requests can be forwarded automatically to the GSA. This is the equivalent of registering with both ANSI and GSA. The result is two nationally unique OSI name registrations, "name" from ANSI and "GOV+name" from GSA. There is no GOSIP requirement for GSA registration but many feel the additional GSA registration may be useful. Assuming your organization is a federal government organization, answer the last three questions on the ANSI registration form as shown below: 1. Do you wish the information supplied in the request to remain confidential? NO. 2. Do you wish to have your organization name registered with the U.S. GOSIP Registration Authority (a.k.a. GSA)? YES. 3. Is your organization an organization of the Federal Government? YES. You must indicate on the application form the approval of the GSA designated agency representative (Steve Hackman). He does not sign as "Signature of Requestor", but some notation of his approval must be attached or GSA will reject the forwarded application. 4.6. How to Apply for U.S. DOE Organization Names ESnet sites are encouraged to review the DOE GOSIP procedures and guidelines in planning their GOSIP activities. This document does not conflict with current DOE GOSIP policies. DOE can assign nationally unique names which are prefixed by the string "GOV+USDOE+". Use of this name source is not recommended; there is no apparent advantage in using U.S. DOE over GSA as a source of nationally unique names.
Copies of current U.S. DOE GOSIP policies, guidelines, and registration forms may be obtained through site DOE naming authorities or Steve Hackman. 4.7. Why Apply for a Trademark with the PTO? Legal issues may arise concerning the rights to use a desired name. OSI name registrations are not intended to "legally protect" name usage rights; that is not their function. Consultation with legal experts concerning the rights to use a name being registered is strongly advised, this recommendation does not offer specific legal guidance. Applying for a trademark may be considered as a means to assert or protect the rights to a name. Per the PTO trademark application instructions there may be several benefits in obtaining a trademark. o The filing date of the application is a constructive date of first use of the mark in commerce (this gives registrant nationwide priority as of the date). o The right to sue in Federal court for trademark infringement. o Constructive notice of claim of ownership. o Limited grounds for attacking a registration once it is five years old. 4.8. How to Apply for a Trademark with the PTO You should obtain a trademark application and detailed instructions from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Patent and Trademark Office. This can be done by mailing your request to the address below, or calling the PTO at the phone number below: U.S. Department of Commerce Patent and Trademark Office Washington, D.C. 20231 Phone: (703) 557-INFO NOTE: The following information is based on ESnet experience in filing for a trademark based on prior use. After you receive your application, you will need to perform the following steps. 1. Complete the written application form. If you have more than
one name you are filing, you must complete a separate form for each name. 2. Provide a black-and-white drawing of the mark. In the case where there is no artwork, only text, the text must be centered on the page in uppercase. 3. Provide a check in the amount of $175 (for each application) made payable to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks. 4. Provide three specimens showing actual use of the mark on or in connection with the goods or services. The class of goods/services associated with this trademark must be specified on the registration form. The currently defined classes of services are: 35 Advertising and business. 36 Insurance and financial. 37 Construction and repair. 38 Communication. 39 Transportation and storage. 40 Material treatment. 41 Education and entertainment. 42 Miscellaneous. So, for example, there could be two (or more) "ESnet" trademarks, with each trademark associated with a different service class. Thus, trademarks are not nationally unique. Before submitting your form, you should see if your trademark is already registered to someone else (for the service class you specified). This is typically done by your legal department through the PTO Trademark Search Library. Since the PTO form is a legal document, you must involve your legal department and the documents may only be signed by someone who is a legally recognized representative of your organization. For example, in applying for the service mark "ESnet", the "Applicant Name" was "The Regents of the University of California", and the legally recognized representative was Dr. John Nuckolls, the director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. 4.9. Future Name Registration Issues to be Considered 4.9.1. ANSI Registered ADMD and PRMD Names There are discussions in the ANSI and CCITT communities revolving
around the idea of having a formal registration of all ADMD and PRMD Names (not just ANSI Organization Names). The ideas being exchanged include having a separate ANSI national registry for these names, and having to pay a periodic "license" fee. This is just in the idea discussion phase now, but it may impact the cost of ANSI ADMD and PRMD Name registration in the near future. Glossary AA - See ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY. ADDMD - See ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTORY MANAGEMENT DOMAIN. ADMD - See ADMINISTRATION MANAGEMENT DOMAIN. ADMINISTRATION - An Administration denotes a public telecommunications administration or other organization offering public telecommunications services. ADMINISTRATION MANAGEMENT DOMAIN - An Administrative Management Domain (ADMD) is a management domain managed by an Administration; generally one of the common carriers (e.g. AT&T, MCI, U.S. Sprint, etc.). ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY - An entity which has administrative control over all entries stored within a single Directory System Agent (DSA). ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTORY MANAGEMENT DOMAIN - An Administrative Directory Management Domain (ADDMD) is a Directory Management Domain (DMD) which is managed by an administration. AE - See APPLICATION ENTITY. ALIAS - An entry of the class "alias" containing information used to provide an alternative name for an object. ANSI - The American National Standards Institute. ANSI is the official representative of the United States to ISO. AP - See APPLICATION PROCESS. APPLICATION ENTITY - An application entity is the OSI portion of an Application Process (AP). APPLICATION LAYER - The application layer is the portion of an OSI system ultimately responsible for managing communication between application processes (APs).
APPLICATION PROCESS - An application process is an object executing in a real system (computer). APPLICATION SERVICE ELEMENT - An application service element (ASE) is the building block of an application entity (AE). Each AE consists of one or more service elements, as defined by its application context. ASE - See APPLICATION SERVICE ELEMENT. ATTRIBUTE - An attribute is the information of a particular type concerning an object and appearing in an entry describing that object in the Directory Information base (DIB). ATTRIBUTE TYPE - An attribute type is that component of an attribute which indicates the class of information given by that attribute. ATTRIBUTE VALUE - An attribute value is a particular instance of the class of information indicated by an attribute type. BASE ATTRIBUTE SET - A minimum set of attributes whose values unambiguously identify a particular management domain. BODY - The body of the IP-message is the information the user wishes to communicate. CCITT - An international standards making organization specializing in international communications standards and chartered by the United Nations. "CCITT" is a french acronym meaning the International Telephone and Telegraph Consultative Committee. CHAINING - Chaining is a mode of interaction optionally used by a Directory System Agent (DSA) which cannot perform an operation itself. The DSA chains by invoking the operation of another DSA and then relaying the outcome to the original requestor. CLNP - The OSI Connectionless Network Protocol. CLNP's use is required by GOSIP. CONTENT - The piece of information that the originating User Agent (UA) wishes delivered to the recipient UA. For inter-personal messaging (IPM) UAs, the content consists of either an IP message or an IPM- status-report. COOPERATING USER AGENT - A User Agent (UA) that cooperates with another recipient's UA in order to facilitate the communication between originator and recipient.
DAP - See DIRECTORY ACCESS PROTOCOL. DELIVERY - The interaction by which the Message Transfer Agent (MTA) transfers to a recipient User Agent (UA) the content of a message plus the delivery envelope. DELIVERY ENVELOPE - The envelope which contains the information related to the delivery of the message. DESCRIPTIVE NAME - A name that denotes one and only one user in the Message Handling System (MHS). DIB - See DIRECTORY INFORMATION BASE. DIRECTORY - The Directory is a repository of information about objects and which provides directory services to its users which allow access to the information. DIRECTORY ACCESS PROTOCOL - The Directory Access Protocol (DAP) is the protocol used between a Directory user Agent (DUA) and a Directory System Agent (DSA). DIRECTORY ENTRY - A Directory Entry is a part of the Directory Information Base (DIB) which contains information about an object. DIRECTORY INFORMATION BASE - The Directory Information Base (DIB) is the complete set of information to which the Directory provides access and which includes all pieces of information which can be read or manipulated using the operations of the Directory. DIRECTORY INFORMATION TREE - The Directory Information Tree (DIT) is the Directory Information Base (DIB), considered as a tree, whose vertices (other than the root) are the Directory entries. DIRECTORY MANAGEMENT DOMAIN - A Directory Management Domain (DMD) is a collection of one or more Directory System Agents (DSAs) and zero or more Directory User Agents (DUAs) which is managed by a single organization. DIRECTORY SYSTEM AGENT - A Directory System Agent (DSA) is an OSI application process which is part of the Directory. DIRECTORY SYSTEM PROTOCOL - The Directory System Protocol (DSP) is the protocol used between two Directory System Agents (DSAs). DIRECTORY USER - A Directory user is the entity or person that accesses the Directory.
DIRECTORY USER AGENT - A Directory User Agent (DUA) is an OSI application process which represents the user in accessing the Directory. DISTINGUISHED NAME - The distinguished name of a given object is the sequence of relative distinguished names (RDNs) of an entry which represents the object and those of all of its superior entries (in descending order). DIT - See DIRECTORY INFORMATION TREE. DMD - See DIRECTORY MANAGEMENT DOMAIN. DN - See DISTINGUISHED NAME. DNS - See DOMAIN NAME SERVICE. DOMAIN NAME SERVICE - A hierarchical, distributed naming service currently used in the Internet. DNS names typically take the form of <machine.site.domain>, where <.domain> may be ".COM", ".EDU", ".GOV", ".MIL", ".NET", ".ORG" or ".<country-code>". DSA - See DIRECTORY SYSTEM AGENT. DSP - See DIRECTORY SYSTEM PROTOCOL. DUA - See DIRECTORY USER AGENT. ENCODED INFORMATION TYPE - It is the code and format of information that appears in the body of an IP-message (examples of coded information types are Telex, TIFO (Group 4 Facsimile), and voice). ENVELOPE - A place in which the information to be used in the submission, delivery and relaying of a message is contained. FIPS - Federal Information Processing Standard. FIPS are produced by NIST and specify a standard for the federal government, most FIPS reference other formal standards from ANSI, IEEE, ISO or CCITT. GOSIP - The Government Open System Interconnection (OSI) Profile. GOSIP is a FIPS which defines the elements of OSI to be required by government purchasers and how those elements should be implemented. GOSIP is based on OSI standards and OIW implementor's agreements. HEADING - The heading of an IP-message is the control information that characterizes an IP-message. INTERPERSONAL MESSAGING - Interpersonal Messaging (IPM) is communication
between persons by exchanging messages. INTERPERSONAL MESSAGING SERVICE - The set of service elements which enable users to exchange interpersonal messages. INTERPERSONAL MESSAGING SYSTEM - An Interpersonal Messaging System (IPMS) is the collection of User Agents (UAs) and Message Transfer Agents (MTAs), which provide the Interpersonal Messaging Service. IP - A non-OSI network protocol, the Internet Protocol, used extensively in the Internet. CLNP is the OSI alternative to IP. IP-MESSAGE - An IP-message carries information generated by and transferred between Interpersonal Messaging (IPM) User Agents (UAs). An IP-message contains a Heading and a Body. IPM - See INTERPERSONAL MESSAGING. IPM-STATUS-REPORT - The pieces of information generated by an Interpersonal Messaging (IPM) User Agent Entity (UAE) and transferred to another IPM UAE, either to be used by that UAE or to be conveyed to the user. IPMS - See INTERPERSONAL MESSAGING SYSTEM. ISO - An international standards making organization which, among other things, develops OSI standards. MANAGEMENT DOMAIN - The set of Message Handling System (MHS) entities managed by an Administration or organization that includes at least one Message Transfer Agent (MTA). MD - See MANAGEMENT DOMAIN. MESSAGE - In the context of Message Handling Systems (MHSs), the unit of information transferred by the Message Transfer System (MTS). It consists of an envelope and a content. MESSAGE HANDLING ADDRESS - An Originator/Recipient (O/R) address which is comprised of an Administrative Management Domain (ADMD), a country name, and a set of user attributes. MESSAGE HANDLING SYSTEM - The set of User Agents (UAs) plus the Message Transfer System (MTS). MESSAGE TRANSFER AGENT - The functional component that, together with the other Message Transfer Agents (MTAs), constitutes the Message Transfer System (MTS). The MTAs provide message transfer service
elements by: (1) interacting with originating User Agents (UAs) via the submission dialogue, (2) relaying messages to other MTAs based upon recipient designations, and (3) interacting with recipient UAs via the delivery dialogue. MESSAGE TRANSFER AGENT ENTITY - The Message Transfer Agent Entity (MTAE) is an entity, located in an MTA, that is responsible for controlling the Message Transfer Layer (MTL). It controls the operation of the protocol to other peer entities in the MTL. MESSAGE TRANSFER LAYER - The Message Transfer Layer (MTL) is a layer in the Application layer that provides Message Transfer System (MTS) service elements. These services are provided by means of the services of the layer below plus the functionality of the entities in the layer, namely the Message Transfer Agent Entities (MTAEs) and the Submission and Delivery Entities (SDEs). MESSAGE TRANSFER PROTOCOL - The Message Transfer Protocol (P1) is the protocol which defines the relaying of messages between Message Transfer Agents (MTAs) and other interactions necessary to provide Message Transfer layer (MTL) services. MESSAGE TRANSFER SERVICE - The Message Transfer Service is the set of optional service elements provided by the Message Transfer System (MTS). MESSAGE TRANSFER SYSTEM - The Message Transfer System (MTS) is the collection of Message Transfer Agents (MTAs), which provide the Message Transfer Service elements. MHS - See MESSAGE HANDLING SYSTEM. MTA - See MESSAGE TRANSFER AGENT. MTAE - See MESSAGE TRANSFER AGENT ENTITY. MTL - See MESSAGE TRANSFER LAYER. MTS - See MESSAGE TRANSFER SYSTEM. MULTICASTING - Multicasting is a mode of interaction which may optionally be used by a Directory System Agent (DSA) which cannot perform an operation itself. The DSA multicasts the operation (i.e. it invokes the operation of several other DSAs (in series or in parallel) and passes an appropriate outcome to the original requestor). NAME - A name is a construct that singles out a particular object from
all other objects. A name must be unambiguous (i.e. denote just one object); however, it need not be unique (i.e. be the only name which unambiguously denotes the object). NIST - The national institute of standards, a government organization which develops, endorses, and promulgates standards for use by the U.S. government. O/R ADDRESS - See ORIGINATOR/RECIPIENT ADDRESS. O/R NAME - See ORIGINATOR/RECIPIENT NAME. OBJECT (OF INTEREST) - Anything in some "world", generally the world of telecommunications and information processing or some part thereof, which is identifiable (i.e. can be named), and which it is of interest to hold information on in the Directory Information Base (DIB). OIW - The OSI Implementors workshop. OIW is one of three regional workshops (OIW, EWOS, AOW), which specifies implementation agreements for base OSI standards. OIW's participants are mostly from the Americas and the OIW is jointly sponsored by the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers) and NIST. OPEN SYSTEMS INTERCONNECTION - A term referring to the capability of interconnecting different systems. ORIGINATING USER AGENT - The Originating User Agent (UA) is a UA that submits to the Message Transfer System (MTS) a message to be transferred. ORIGINATOR - A user, a human being or computer process, from whom the Message Handling System (MHS) accepts a message. ORIGINATOR/RECIPIENT ADDRESS - A descriptive name for a User Agent (UA) that contains certain characteristics which help the Message Transfer System (MTS) to locate the UA's point of attachment. An Originator/Recipient (O/R) address is a type of O/R name. ORIGINATOR/RECIPIENT NAME - The Originator/Recipient Name (O/R Name) is the descriptive name for a User Agent (UA). OSI - See OPEN SYSTEMS INTERCONNECTION. PRDMD - See PRIVATE DIRECTORY MANAGEMENT DOMAIN. PRIMITIVE NAME - A name assigned by a naming authority. Primitive names are components of descriptive names.
PRIVATE DIRECTORY MANAGEMENT DOMAIN - A Private Directory Management Domain (PRDMD) is a Directory Management Domain which is managed by an organization other than an administration. PRIVATE MANAGEMENT DOMAIN - A Private Management Domain (PRMD) is a management domain managed by a company or non-commercial organization. PRMD - See PRIVATE MANAGEMENT DOMAIN. RDN - See RELATIVE DISTINGUISHED NAME. RECIPIENT - A user, a human being or computer process, who receives a message from the Message Handling System (MHS). RECIPIENT USER AGENT - A User Agent (UA) to which a message is delivered or that is specified for delivery. REFERRAL - A referral is an outcome which can be returned by a Directory System Agent (DSA) which cannot perform an operation itself, and which identifies one or more other DSAs more able to perform the operation. RELATIVE DISTINGUISHED NAME - A Relative Distinguished Name (RDN) is a set of attribute value assertions, each of which is true, concerning the distinguished values of a particular entry. RELAYING - The interaction by which one Message Transfer Agent (MTA) transfers to another MTA the content of a message plus the relaying envelope. RELAYING ENVELOPE - The envelope which contains the information related to the operation of the Message Transfer System (MTS) plus the service elements requested by the originating User Agent (UA). RFC - Request for Comments. The RFC's are documents used to propose or specify internet community standards. ROOT - The vertex that is not the final vertex of any arc is referred to as the root vertex (or informally as the root) of the tree. SCHEMA - The Directory Schema is the set of rules and constraints concerning the Directory Information Tree (DIT) structure, object class definitions, attribute types, and syntaxes which characterize the Directory Information base (DIB). SDE - See SUBMISSION AND DELIVERY ENTITY.
SMTP - Simple Mail Transfer Protocol. An e-mail protocol frequently used by the Internet community. SUBMISSION - The interaction by which an originating User Agent (UA) transfers to a Message Transfer Agent (MTA) the contents of a message plus the submission envelope. SUBMISSION AND DELIVERY ENTITY - The Submission and Delivery Entity (SDE) is an entity located in the Message Transfer Layer (MTL), co-resident with a User Agent (UA) and not with a Message Transfer Agent (MTA), and responsible for controlling the submission and delivery interactions with a Message Transfer Agent Entity (MTAE). SUBMISSION AND DELIVERY PROTOCOL - The Submission and Delivery Protocol (P3) is the protocol which governs communication between a Submission and Delivery Entity (SDE) and a Message Transfer Agent Entity (MTAE). SUBMISSION ENVELOPE - The envelope which contains the information the Message Transfer System (MTS) requires to provide the requested service elements. TCP - A non-OSI transport protocol, the Transmission Control Protocol, used extensively in the Internet. TP4 is the OSI alternative to TCP. TP0 - An OSI transport protocol specified by GOSIP and generally used with connection-oriented networks. TP4 - An OSI transport protocol specified by GOSIP and generally used with connectionless networks such as CLNP. TREE - A tree is a set of points (vertices), and a set of directed lines (arcs); each arc leads from a vertex V to a vertex V'. The vertices V and V' are said to be the initial and final vertices of an arc a from V to V'. In a tree, several different arcs may have the same initial vertex, but not the same final vertex. UA - See USER AGENT. UAE - See USER AGENT ENTITY. UAL - See USER AGENT LAYER. USER - A person or computer application or process who makes use of a Message Handling System (MHS). USER AGENT - Typically, the User Agent (UA) is a set of computer
processes (for example, an editor, a file system, a word processor) that are used to create, inspect, and manage the storage of messages. There is typically one user per User Agent (UA). During message preparation, the originator communicates with his UA via an input/output (I/O) device (for example, a keyboard, display, printer, facsimile machine, and/or telephone). Also by means of these devices, the UA communicates to its user messages received from the Message Transfer System (MTS). To send and receive messages, the UA interacts with the MTS via the submission and delivery protocol. USER AGENT ENTITY - A User Agent Entity (UAE) is an entity in the User Agent Layer (UAL) of the Application Layer that controls the protocol associated with cooperating UAL services. It exchanges control information with the Message Transfer Agent Entity (MTAE) or the Submission and Delivery Entity (SDE) in the layer below. The control information is the information the Message Transfer layer (MTL) requires to create the appropriate envelope and thus provide the desired message transfer service elements. USER AGENT LAYER - The User Agent Layer (UAL) is the layer that contains the User Agent Entities (UAEs). X.25 - A packet switched network standard often used by public providers and optional in GOSIP. Appendix A: Current Activities in X.500 NOTE: The following are edited excerpts from the IETF Directory Services Monthly reports as well as a few IETF scope documents. Effort has been taken to make sure this information is current as of late 1991. At the end of each section are lists of anonymous FTP and/or an e-mail address if more information is desired. IETF DISI (Directory Information Services Infrastructure Working Group) The Directory Information Services (pilot) Infrastructure Working Group is chartered to facilitate the deployment in the Internet of Directory Services based on implementations of the X.500 standards. It will facilitate this deployment by producing informational RFCs intended to serve as a Directory Services "Administrator's Guide". These RFCs will relate the current usage and scope of the X.500 standard and Directory Services in North America and the world, and will contain information on the procurement, installation, and operation of various implementations of the X.500 standard. As the various implementations of the X.500 standard work equally well over TCP/IP and CLNP, the DISI working group shall not mandate specific
implementations or transport protocols. DISI is an offshoot of the OSI Directory Services group, and, accordingly, is a combined effort of the OSI Integration Area and User Services Area of the IETF. The current OSIDS working group was chartered to smooth out technical differences in information storage schema and difficulties in the interoperability and coherence of various X.500 implementations. The DISI group is concerned solely with expanding the Directory Services infrastructure. As DISI will be providing information to facilitate the building of infrastructure with an eye towards truly operational status, DISI will need to form liaisons with COSINE, PARADISE, and perhaps the RARE WG3. As a final document, the DISI working group shall write a charter for a new working group concerned with user services, integration, maintenance and operations of Directory Services, the Operations and Infrastructure of Directory Services (OIDS) Group. One particular DISI document you may be interested in is a catalogue of the various X.500 implementations: Title : Catalog of Available X.500 Implementations Author(s) : R. Lang, R. Wright Filename : rfc1292.txt Pages : 103 This document is available on the ESnet Information Server in the [ANONYMOUS.RFCS] directory. Mailing list address: General Discussion: firstname.lastname@example.org To Subscribe: email@example.com Anonymous FTP site address: (e-mail archive is here) merit.edu IETF OSI-DS (OSI Directory Service Working Group) The OSI-DS group works on issues relating to building an OSI Directory Service using X.500 and its deployment on the Internet. Whilst this group is not directly concerned with piloting, the focus is practical, and technical work needed as a pre-requisite to deployment of an open Directory will be considered. The major goal of this WG is to provide the technical framework for a Directory Service infrastructure on the Internet. This infrastructure should be based on the OSI Directory (X.500). It is intended that this infrastructure can be used by many applications. Whilst this WG is not directly concerned with operation of services,
close liaison is expected with those groups which do operate pilots and services. Liaisons have been established with RARE WG3, NIST, CCITT/ISO IEC, North American Directory Forum. X.500 (1984) / ISO 9594 does not have sufficient functionality for full deployment on the Internet. This group identifies areas where extensions are required. It is a basic aim of the group to be aligned to appropriate base standards and functional standards. Any activity should be undertaken in the light of ongoing standardization activity. Areas which should be examined include: o Replication o Knowledge Representation o Schema Management o Access Control o Authentication o Distributed operations for partially connected DSAs o Presentation Address Handling Mailing list address: General Discussion: firstname.lastname@example.org To Subscribe: email@example.com Anonymous FTP site address: (all OSI-DS documents and e-mail archive cs.ucl.ac.uk are here) FOX (Field Operational X.500 Project) The FOX project is a DARPA funded effort to provide a basis for operational X.500 deployment in the NREN/Internet. This work is being carried out at Merit, NYSERnet/PSI, SRI and ISI. ISI is the main contractor and responsible for project oversight. There are two primary thrusts of the FOX project: 1. X.500 Infrastructure: It is important that multiple interoperable platforms be available for deployment. FOX plans to examine and test the interoperability of the QUIPU and NIST-X.500 (Custos) implementations, and DNANS-X.500 if
possible. In addition, FOX will explore X.500 interfaces to conventional database systems (one target is Sybase), an alternate OS platform (VM) for X.500 servers, and X-window based user interfaces. 2. X.500 Applications: A long-range goal is to facilitate the use of X.500 for real Internet applications. FOX will first focus on making network infrastructure information available through X.500. This includes network and AS site contacts, topology information, and the NIC WHOIS service. A centrally managed X.500 version will be the first phase of a WHOIS service. Providing an X.500 version of a well-known widely-used service should promote the use of X.500 by Internet users. In addition, this effort will provide experience in designing X.500 applications. However, the manageability of this scheme will be short-lived, so the next step will be a design for a distributed version of WHOIS. Finally, it is critical for Internet X.500 efforts to be aligned with directory service efforts that are ongoing in other communities. FOX participants are involved in, or are otherwise tracking these efforts, and information about FOX activities will be publicly available. NADF (North American Directory Forum) The North American Directory Forum (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. The NADF has produced a document, NADF-175, "A Naming Scheme for c=US", which has been issued as RFC-1255. The NADF-175 document proposes the use of existing civil infrastructure for naming objects under c=US. This has the advantage of using existing registration authorities and not establishing any new ones (the document simply maps names assigned by existing authorities into different portions of the c=US DIT). The document is intended as the basis for X.500 names in the U.S. for the long- term; it is important that interested parties get a copy, review it, and return comments. A second output, which is still undergoing development, is NADF-128, a preliminary draft on "Mapping the DIT onto Multiple ADDMDs". This describes how the c=US portion of the DIT is mapped onto DSAs and what service-providers must minimally share in order to achieve a working public directory. The next revision of this document will
likely be ASCII-ized and published as an informational RFC. NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) NIST is involved in several X.500 activities: standards, pilot deployment, and development of an X.500 implementation, Custos. The objective is to see X.500 widely deployed and used in the U.S. Government. X.500 is expected to be in the next release of the U.S. Government OSI Profile (GOSIP). In the standards efforts, emphasis is on access control and replication; the other activities are described in some detail below. o NIST/GSA X.500 Pilot Deployment: NIST and GSA are collaborating in the creation of a U.S. Government X.500 pilot deployment. To date, two meetings have been held. At the second, held on April 25th at NIST, significant progress was made towards refining an initial draft schema developed by NIST. A number of government agency requirements will be included in the next schema revision. Once the schema is defined, agencies will begin collecting data for loading into the directory. Initially, NIST will offer to host agency data on Custos DSAs running at NIST. Eventually, agencies are expected to obtain and operate DSAs. o CUSTOS: The NIST X.500 public-domain implementation, Custos, is implemented on ISODE, although it otherwise bears no relation to QUIPU. One of its more interesting features is that the DBMS interface is SQL, and we provide a simple DBMS as part of Custos to support the DSA. Information can be optionally loaded into memory, and the memory usage is reasonably efficient on a per-entry basis. OIW (OSI Implementor's Workshop) The OSI Implementor's Workshop (OIW) is an open public forum for technical issues, concerned with the timely development of implementation agreements based on emerging international OSI standards. The Workshop accepts as input the specifications of emerging standards for protocols, and produces as output agreements on the implementation and testing particulars of these protocols. This process is expected to expedite the development of OSI protocols and to promote interoperability of independently manufactured data communications equipment. The Workshop organizes its work through Special Interest Groups (SIGs) that prepare technical documentation. The SIGs are encouraged to coordinate with standards organizations and user groups, and to seek widespread technical consensus on implementation agreements
through international discussions and liaison activities. The Directory SIG of the Workshop produces agreements on the implementation of Directory protocols based on ISO 9594 and CCITT X.500 Recommendations. There are three major areas that the SIG is working on for 1991: access control, replication, and distributed operations. Mailing list address: General Discussion: firstname.lastname@example.org To Subscribe: email@example.com PARADISE Project The PARADISE project is based at the Department of Computer Science, University College London (UCL). PARADISE is a sub-project of the broader COSINE project sponsored under the umbrella of EUREKA by eighteen participating countries and aimed at promoting OSI to the academic, industrial and governmental research and development organizations in Europe. The countries involved are those of the EC, EFTA plus Yugoslavia; that is: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Holland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and Yugoslavia. The partners funded by PARADISE besides UCL are: o The Networks Group at the University of London Computer Centre (ULCC), which is a service-oriented organization providing a range of facilities to the academic community in London and the entry point into the UK for IXI, the COSINE international X.25 backbone; o X-Tel Services Ltd, a software company based in Nottingham which currently provides service support to the UK Academic X.500 pilot; and o PTT Telematic Systems from the Netherlands, which in turn has subcontracted the Swiss and Finnish PTTs, and whose involvement is to create a forum for discussion on X.500 among the European carrier administrations. The project also aims to have representation from all the participating countries, which in the majority of cases are the existing X.500 national pilots. Of the 18 countries involved, at least 12 are registered in the White
Pages Pilot Project. Most countries are using the QUIPU implementation developed at UCL. However, a French group has developed PIZARRO, which will form the basis of the emerging French pilot. In Italy, a Torino-based company Systems Wizards are using DirWiz, which is currently the sole representative from Italy in the tree. Mailing list address: firstname.lastname@example.org PSI White Pages Pilot Project The White Pages Pilot Project is the first production-quality field test of the OSI Directory (X.500). The pilot currently has a few hundred organizations (more each month) and is based on OSI TP4 over TCP/IP (RFC-1006). Anonymous FTP site address: (Most X.500 pilot project software is uu.psi.com here as well as more information) ANSI ASC X3T5.4 (Directory Ad Hoc Group) The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Accredited Standards Committee (ASC) X3T5.4. This group reviews the Proposed Draft Amendments (PDAMs) for extensions to the International Consultative Committee for Telegraphy and Telephony (CCITT) X.500 Recommendations/International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 9594.