Browse Prior Art Database

Use of an X.500/LDAP directory to support MIXER address mapping (RFC2164)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000002721D
Original Publication Date: 1998-Jan-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-13
Document File: 11 page(s) / 15K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

S. Kille: AUTHOR

Abstract

Status of this Memo

This text was extracted from a ASCII document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 18% of the total text.

Network Working Group S. Kille

Request for Comments: 2164 Isode Ltd.

Obsoletes: 1838 January 1998

Category: Standards Track

Use of an X.500/LDAP directory to support MIXER address mapping

Status of this Memo

This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the

Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for

improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet

Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state

and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved.

1 MIXER X.400/RFC 822 Mappings

MIXER (RFC 2156) defines an algorithm for use of a set of global

mapping between X.400 and RFC 822 addresses [4]. This specification

defines how to represent and maintain these mappings (MIXER

Conformant Global Address Mappings of MCGAMs) in an X.500 or LDAP

directory. Mechanisms for representing OR Address and Domain

hierarchies within the DIT are defined in [5, 2]. These techniques

are used to define two independent subtrees in the DIT, which contain

the mapping information. The benefits of this approach are:

1. The mapping information is kept in a clearly defined area which

can be widely replicated in an efficient manner. The tree is

constrained to hold only information needed to support the

mapping. This is important as gateways need good access to the

entire mapping.

2. It facilitates migration from a table-based approach.

3. It handles the issues of "missing components" in a natural

manner.

An alternative approach which is not taken is to locate the

information in the routing subtrees. The benefits of this

would be:

o It is the "natural" location, and will also help to

ensure correct administrative authority for a mapping

definition.

o The tree will usually be accessed for routing, and so it

will be efficient for addresses which are being routed.

This is not done, as the benefits of the approach proposed are

greater.

MCGAMs are global. A MIXER gateway may use any set of MCGAMs. A key

use of the directory is to enable MIXER gateways to share MCGAMs and

to share the effort of maintaining and publishing MCGAMs. This

specification and MIXER also recognise that there is not a single

unique location for publication of all MCGAMs. This specification

allows for mult...