Re: Are subordinate or NSSR references mandatory?

"peter (p.w.) whittaker" <pww@bnr.ca> Fri, 10 November 1995 05:09 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05270; 10 Nov 95 0:09 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05262; 10 Nov 95 0:09 EST
Received: from haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01651; 10 Nov 95 0:09 EST
Received: from bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk by haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk with local SMTP id <g.01774-0@haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 00:18:55 +0000
Received: from x400gate.bnr.ca by bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id <g.09904-0@bells.cs.ucl.ac.uk>; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 00:18:37 +0000
X400-Received: by mta bnr.ca in /PRMD=BNR/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/C=CA/; Relayed; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 19:04:19 -0500
X400-Received: by /PRMD=BNR/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/C=CA/; Relayed; Thu, 9 Nov 1995 19:03:42 -0500
X400-Received: by /PRMD=bnr/ADMD=telecom.canada/C=ca/; Relayed; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 19:03:41 -0500
X400-Received: by /PRMD=bnr/ADMD=telecom.canada/C=ca/; Relayed; Tue, 7 Nov 1995 19:03:40 -0500
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 1995 19:03:40 -0500
X400-Originator: /dd.id=1660747/g=peter/i=pw/s=whittaker/@bnr.ca
X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=BNR/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/C=CA/; <Pine.HPP.3.91.951109185444.1418]
X400-Content-Type: P2-1984 (2)
Content-Identifier: Re: Are subor...
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: "peter (p.w.) whittaker" <pww@bnr.ca>
Message-ID: <Pine.HPP.3.91.951109185444.14182N-100000@bwdlh591>
To: adelberr <@bcars735:adelberr@fhu.disa.mil>
Cc: dssig <@bcars735:dssig@nist.gov>, osi-ds <@bcars735:osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <9510098159.AA815945809@FHU.DISA.MIL>
Subject: Re: Are subordinate or NSSR references mandatory?
X-Sender: pww@bwdlh591
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

I delete section 18.4.1 as it discussed superior references, and
rearranged the rest for purposes of exposition....

On Thu, 9 Nov 1995 adelberr%fhu.disa.mil@bcars735 wrote:
>      The question is our interpretation of the minimum knowledge specified 
>      in 18.4.1 - 18.4.4.
>
>      18.4.2 Subordinate knowledge - "A DSA that is the master DSA of a 
>      naming context shall maintain subordinate or non-specific subordinate 
>      references of category master knowledge to each master DSA holding (as 
>      master) an immediately subordinate naming context."
>      
>      18.4.3 Supplier Knowledge - If the DSA consumes, supplier references 
>      are mandatory.
>      
>      18.4.4 Consumer Knowledge - If the DSA supplies, consumer references 
>      are mandatory.

Either a DSA's naming context extends to leaf entries only, or it
extends to non-leaf entries whose children are held in other
(subordinate) DSAs.

Therefore, a DSA need only have subordinate references if any of the
entries in its naming context have children in other DSAs. 

It makes no sense for a DSA to have subordinate references to other DSAs
if its naming context extends to leaf entries only.

>      Are we to assume that this translates into: If the DSA is not a 
>      centralized (solitary) DSA the subordinate OR non-specific subordinate 
>      reference are mandatory?
>      
>      Centralized DSA is define in the PICS to be: a DSA that is not capable 
>      of holding knowledge information about other DSAs.

No, I would think not, since a non-centralized DSA could be either one
which has entries whose children are elsewhere, or one whose naming
context extends to lead entries only.  In the former case, subordinate
references are required, in the latter case they are not. 

Were I a lawyer I would include some disclaimer about this being my
reading of the text, the final legal interpretation of which is up to a
judge; I'm not, so I won't.  :->

pww

Peter Whittaker      [~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~]   X.500 Specialist
pww@entrust.com      [  http://www.entrust.com  ]   Nortel Secure Networks
Ph: +1 613 765 2064  [                          ]   P.O. Box 3511, Station C
FAX:+1 613 765 3520  [__________________________]   Ottawa, Canada, K1Y 4H7