CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_ Reported by Tim Howes/University of Michigan Minutes of the Access/Synchronization of the Internet Directories Working Group (ASID) ASID met once at the 31st IETF on Tuesday, 6 December. Agenda Review/Changes The agenda was reviewed and accepted with the change that the WPS group was given an agenda slot to report on their progress, since they did not have a regular working group slot scheduled at this IETF meeting. UFN: Review of New Draft Steve Kille produced an updated version of ``Using the OSI Directory to achieve User Friendly Naming.'' This draft corrects some small errors in the current RFC. There was no discussion, and the group recommended that this draft be progressed as soon as possible. Tim Howes is to submit the UFN draft to the ADs for progression. DN String: Review Of New Draft Steve Kille produced an updated version of ``A String Representation of Distinguished Names.'' This draft corrects some small errors in the current RFC. There was no discussion, and the group recommended that this draft be progressed as soon as possible. Tim Howes is to submit the string DN draft to the ADs for progression. LDAP: Review of New Drafts New versions of the two LDAP drafts were produced, fixing several editorial and BNF errors, and fixing one small protocol error with the ModifyRDN operation in the previous documents. The group decided to progress these documents to Draft Standard as soon as possible, pending confirmation that there exists at least two server-side implementations of LDAP. Tim Howes is to confirm the existence of two independent LDAP server implementations and then submit the two drafts to the ADs for progression. CLDAP: Final Review of Draft The CLDAP draft was reviewed on the list and submitted for Proposed Standard. The IESG had one comment concerning addition of language describing potential retry algorithms. This text was added to the draft and it has been resubmitted for Proposed Standard. CENTIPEDE Pilot - Brief Report on What's Happening Chris Weider gave a brief report of a meeting held in Paris in October amongst some WHOIS++, SOLO and LDAP developers, as well as various other parties interested in using the WHOIS++ centroids concept as a general distributed indexing service. The goal of the group is to develop a centroids-passing protocol that is independent of any end-user directory service protocol, and to launch an Internet-wide pilot of this technology, focusing initially on white pages directory service. The group expects to hold a BOF at the upcoming Danvers, MA IETF meeting. WHOIS++: Final Review of Drafts Chris Weider explained that in light of the centipede pilot, there would be changes to the centroid portion of the WHOIS++ specification. Therefore, the group decided to progress the non-centroids WHOIS++ documents as Proposed Standards. The centroids document will be revised by Chris Weider and resubmitted for progression by the next IETF meeting. Tim Howes is to submit the two non-centroid WHOIS++ drafts to the ADs for progression to Proposed Standard. SOLO: Latest Developments and Draft A new version of the SOLO draft ``Simple Object Look-up protocol (SOLO)'' was released in October, just before the centipede meeting. Christian Huitema suggested that the draft be split into two parts, similar to the way the WHOIS++ drafts are split. One part would talk about the query language, information model, etc., while the other would talk about navigation and the use of centroids. The goal here would be to progress the query language draft, while revising the centroids navigation draft in light of the centipede experiments. The group agreed. It was also noted that the solo draft should be given a name under draft-ietf-asid-*. Christian Huitema is to split the SOLO draft and submit new versions through the ASID Working Group. X.500 Schema Management - Review Latest Draft A new version of the ``Schema Publishing in X.500 Directory'' draft was submitted since the last IETF. The only comment on this version was some concern that the draft does not adequately address the issue of schema publishing support in the 1993 X.500 standard, and how this draft relates to it. The general feeling was that this draft provides some capability that the 1993 standard does not (ability to look up an unknown object by OID), and provides an interim solution for the schema publishing problem. The authors agreed to add some text to the draft better explaining this, and then to submit the draft as an Experimental RFC. Glenn Mansfield is to revise the schema draft and submit it as an Experimental RFC. X.500 LabeledURL Draft - Review Latest Draft Mark Smith produced a draft on storing URL information in X.500 and LDAP directories via a labeledURL attribute. In his absence, Tim Howes read a message from Mark detailing outstanding questions. The group overwhelmingly rejected the notion of putting more structure into the attribute (it is currently a simple string). The group also rejected the requirement of including URL: in the syntax, though a note about implementors tolerating such a thing might be added to the draft. Several members of the URI Working Group were present and suggested that the attribute might more properly be called labeledURI, so that it might hold URLs, URNs, and any other UR? that might come along. There was general agreement that this would be a good thing. Mark Smith (in absentia) is to revise the labeledURL draft in light of the working group's input. Ph to X.500 Gateway Roland Hedberg gave a presentation on a CCSO Nameserver to X.500 gateway he has developed. The gateway brings up issues such as schema mapping, and the fact that there is no formal specification for the CCSO protocol. It would be helpful in developing this and other gateways if such a specification existed. The group agreed that the CCSO people should be approached about documenting their protocol in an ``existing practice'' RFC, much like was done with the Gopher protocol. Roland Hedberg is to contact the CCSO people about this. OID Assignments in RFCs - Request From the RFC Editor via Erik A discussion was held on the ``oid in RFCs'' problem raised by the RFC editor. The problem has two aspects. First, should OIDs defined in Internet Standards all be under some predefined IANA-managed OID arc? If so, how should this arc be managed? Second, what should be done about the existing illegal OIDs that have found their way into RFC 1274, the Internet X.500 schema document. In answer to the first question, the group felt that there should be such an arc, and that there should be a procedure by which people can easily obtain OIDs under it. It was agreed that OIDs should not be moved to this arc for existing objects, or objects previously considered experimental. This was thought to create a needless transition problem. There was no real answer to the second question, except that it was noted that Colin Robbins had produced a draft on how to handle this problem via an OID aliasing mechanism. Colin's scheme is specific to the QUIPU implementation of X.500, but might be adapted to other implementations. Next Meeting The meeting concluded early and the group planned to meet again at the upcoming IETF meeting in Danvers, MA.