Multiple O values in an entry...

Colin Robbins </I=c/S=robbins/O=nexor/PRMD=nexor/ADMD=mark400/C=GB/@cs.ucl.ac.uk> Wed, 17 February 1993 15:51 UTC

X400-Received: by mta haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk in /PRMD=uk.ac/ADMD=gold 400/C=gb/; Relayed; Wed, 17 Feb 1993 14:28:04 +0000
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1993 14:28:04 +0000
X400-Originator: osi-ds-request@cs.ucl.ac.uk
X400-Recipients: non-disclosure:;
X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=uk.ac/ADMD=gold 400/C=gb/; haig.cs.uc.263:17.01.93.14.28.04]
Priority: Non-Urgent
DL-Expansion-History: osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk ; Wed, 17 Feb 1993 14:28:04 +0000;
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Colin Robbins </I=c/S=robbins/O=nexor/PRMD=nexor/ADMD=mark400/C=GB/@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <"4716 Wed Feb 17 14:27:20 1993"@nexor.co.uk>
To: osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Subject: Multiple O values in an entry...

As some of you might have noticed, the "X-Tel Services Ltd, GB" entry
in the DIT has now been renamed "NeXor Ltd, GB".  

To allow searches for "X-Tel" and derivatives to still work, the NeXor
entry has the following alternate organisation values:

        o= XTel Services Ltd
        o= xtel
        o= X-Tel Services Ltd
        o= X-Tel

The potential for misuse here is enourmous.
Within the various X.500 pilots around there is a lot of
effort going on into how best to choose the RDN for an organisation,
be it listing, registering or whatever.  
But is anyone considering the registration of alternate values?

For example, (I appologise for the semi-advertisement but I want to
use a real example) we offer ISODE support services.  So what is to
stop us (apart from ethics) of adding

        o= ISODE

to our NeXor entry.  In this case, it would be a positive win with the
UFN algorithm.  The "ISODE Consortium" entry does not have such an
organastion name entry.  So a UFN of the form "SALES, ISODE, GB" would 
*exactly* match below our part of the DIT, and not the IC.  Taking it
further, why don't we add:

	o= IBM
	o= Sun

etc (please please don't get me wrong, I have no intention of doing
any of this, just pointing out the danger exists).  

Should be be considering ways of controlling these high level
attributes (please don't turn this into a debate about the merits of
UFN - we've done that one several times!!!)


Any comments?


Colin

-------------------------------------------------------------------------   
Please be aware that NeXor was previously known as X-Tel Services Ltd.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Multiple O values in an entry... Christian Huitema
Multiple O values in an entry... Colin Robbins