comments.infotree-04.txt
Allan Cargille <cargille@cs.wisc.edu> Thu, 07 April 1994 19:13 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11552;
7 Apr 94 15:13 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11548;
7 Apr 94 15:13 EDT
Received: from mercury91.udev.cdc.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa21704;
7 Apr 94 15:13 EDT
Received: by mercury.udev.cdc.com; Thu, 7 Apr 94 13:13:36 -0500
X-From: cargille@cs.wisc.edu Thu Apr 7 13:13 CDT 1994
Received: from cdsmail.cdc.com by mercury.udev.cdc.com;
Thu, 7 Apr 94 13:11:51 -0500
Received: from calypso.cs.wisc.edu by cdsmail.cdc.com id
SMTP-0012da44cd7003488; Thu, 7 Apr 94 13:11:37 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Allan Cargille <cargille@cs.wisc.edu>
Message-Id: <9404071811.AA20395@calypso.cs.wisc.edu>
Received: by calypso.cs.wisc.edu; Thu, 7 Apr 94 13:11:32 -0500
Subject: comments.infotree-04.txt
To: mhs-ds@mercury.udev.cdc.com
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 1994 13:11:30 -0500 (CDT)
Organization: Univ of Wisconsin
Phone: +1 608 262-5084
Fax: +1 608 262-9777
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 3309
draft-ietf-mhsds-infotree-04.txt,ps
Representing the O/R Address hierarchy in the Directory Information
Tree
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet Draft. Internet Drafts are working
documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its Areas,
and its Working Groups. Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet Drafts.
>>> Break, indent, or wrap text.
Internet Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months.
Internet Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other
documents at any time. It is not appropriate to use Internet Drafts
as reference material or to cite them other than as a ``working
draft'' or ``work in progress.''
>>> Break, indent, or wrap text.
Please check the I-D abstract listing contained in each Internet Draft
directory to learn the current status of this or any other Internet
Draft.
....
@ @
C=GB @ @ Numeric-C=234
@ @
___________________________@R_oeS.............
| Country | _____S
|__aeaeHH___ |
aaee H H H ADMD=Gold 400
ADMD=" "aaee H H H
________aeae=_ ______H_HHj_
|ADMD | | ADMD |
|____Q_Q_Q__| |_____@@____ |
Q QQPRMD=UK.AC @ @ PRMD=UK.AC
__Q_QQs_____ @ @
| PRMD ________________@@R_oe_SS.............|
|___________ |
O=UCL
____________
| MHS-Org |
|______Q_Q__ |
Q Q
Q QOU=CS
QQ
_____QQs____
| MHS-OU |
|___________ |
Figure 1: Example O/R Address Tree
>>> Does this picture say what you want in ASCII? If not, we should
delete it or replace it with a better picture.
....
11. Where an O/R Address has a valid Printable String and T.61 form,
both must be present, with one as an alias for the other. When
both are present in the O/R Address, either may be used to
construct the distinguished name.
>>> Why do both need to be present?
....
O/R_Address__Object_Class_______________Naming_Attribute________________
C mHSCountry countryName
or
mHSNumericCountryName
A aDMD aDMDName
P pRMD pRMDName
O mHSOrganization mHSOrganizationName
OU/OU1/OU2 mHSOrganizationalUnit mHSOrganizationalUnitName
OU3/OU4
PN mHSPerson personName
CN mHSNamedObject mHSCommonName
X121 mHSX121 mHSX121Address
T-ID mHSTerminalID mHSTerminalIDName
UA-ID mHSNumericUserIdentifier mHSNumericUserIdentifierName
DDA mHSDomainDefinedAttribute mHSDomainDefinedAttributeType
and
mHSDomainDefinedAttributeValue
>>> Why are we supporting "OU" -- why not just use OU1/2/3/4 ?
- comments.infotree-04.txt Allan Cargille