upstream/openldap
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://git.openldap.org/openldap/openldap.git synced 2025-12-30 19:49:35 -05:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

rev 1

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Kurt Zeilenga 1999-11-22 01:21:59 +00:00
parent 72e2d53143
commit 3b6b609369
1 changed files with 270 additions and 268 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

538
doc/drafts/draft-lachman-laser-ldap-mail-routing-xx.txt
View file

@ -1,9 +1,8 @@
Network Working Group H. Lachman
INTERNET-DRAFT Netscape Communications Corp.
Intended Category: Standards Track May 1999
Expires: November 1999
Filename: draft-lachman-laser-ldap-mail-routing-00.txt
INTERNET-DRAFT H. Lachman
Intended Category: Standards Track Netscape Communications Corp.
Filename: draft-lachman-laser-ldap-mail-routing-01.txt G. Shapiro
Sendmail, Inc.
Expires: April 2000 October 1999
LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing
@ -35,6 +34,9 @@ Status of this Memo
along with an archive of back messages is available at
<http://playground.sun.com/laser/>.
[[Section X will be removed before the document is submitted to the
IESG.]]
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
@ -46,20 +48,22 @@ Abstract
to designate an LDAP entry as one that represents a local (intra-
organizational) email recipient, to specify the recipient's email
address(es), and to provide routing information pertinent to the
Lachman [Page 1]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
recipient. This is intended to support SMTP [2] message transfer
agents in routing RFC 822-based email [3] within a private enterprise
only, and is not to be used in the process of routing email across
the public Internet.
1. Background and Motivation
Lachman, et. al. [Page 1]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing October 1999
1. Conventions Used in this Document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY" and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [10].
2. Background and Motivation
LDAP-based directory services are currently being used in many
organizations as a repository of information about users and other
@ -92,23 +96,20 @@ INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
various MTAs in an organization may have been developed by different
implementors, so a common schema is desirable for such attributes.
2. Overview
3. Overview
The 'inetLocalMailRecipient' object class and associated attributes
identify an LDAP entry as representing an SMTP mail recipient (in the
sense "recipient" is used in RFC 821). A recipient may be a mail
user, a mailing list, an auto-responder of some kind (e.g., a mailing
list subscription program), a network device such as a printer or fax
sense "recipient" is used in [2]). A recipient may be a mail user, a
mailing list, an auto-responder of some kind (e.g., a mailing list
subscription program), a network device such as a printer or fax
machine, or other recipient type. Address attributes and routing
attributes are provided to aid SMTP MTAs in routing mail within an
organization to the appropriate target MTA for each recipient.
Lachman, et. al. [Page 2]
Lachman [Page 2]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing October 1999
Once on the target MTA, a message is handled as per the recipient
type and options (which may be specified using other auxiliary object
@ -121,108 +122,114 @@ INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
recipient in question, as we are considering routing of mail only
among the SMTP MTAs within an organization.
The target MTA checks to see if the destination domain of the
recipient address is one that it is responsible for LDAP-based
routing. If so, checks for matching e-mail addresses in LDAP by
looking up the envelope recipient address in LDAP using the object
class described in section 4.1 and the attribute discussed in section
4.2. If it gets back an unambiguous match, it interprets the routing
attributes as described in section 4.3.
Routing of mail between different organizations across the public
Internet is outside the scope of this document, as the mechanism for
this is already standardized [5,6]. An 'inetLocalMailRecipient'
entry represents a mail recipient that is local to the organization
in question, not recipients in other organizations. This means that
the domain names that appear within the 'mail',
'mailAlternateAddress', 'mailHost', and 'mailRoutingAddress'
attribute values in an 'inetLocalMailRecipient' entry must be DNS
domain names that are within the administrative authority of the
organization in question (i.e., the organization within which MTAs
are accessing such entries and using these attributes for mail
the domain names that appear within the 'mailLocalAddress' and
'mailHost' attribute values in an 'inetLocalMailRecipient' entry must
be DNS domain names that are within the administrative authority of
the organization in question (i.e., the organization within which
MTAs are accessing such entries and using these attributes for mail
routing).
LDAP entries that are not 'inetLocalMailRecipient' entries should be
ignored by MTAs for the purpose of routing. Such entries may contain
a 'mail' attribute since this attribute is used in other object
classes. An example is a conference room whose LDAP entry contains
contact information (e.g., email address and telephone number) for
the person who books reservations for the room; the conference room
is not a mail recipient, and can safely be ignored by MTAs doing
route determination based on recipient address.
ignored by MTAs for the purpose of routing. An example is a
conference room whose LDAP entry contains contact information (e.g.,
email address and telephone number) for the person who books
reservations for the room; the conference room is not a mail
recipient, and can safely be ignored by MTAs doing route
determination based on recipient address.
3. Object Class and Attribute Definitions
4. Object Class and Attribute Definitions
The 'inetLocalMailRecipient' object class and associated attributes
are defined (using syntaxes given in [7]) as follows.
3.1 The inetLocalMailRecipient Object Class
Lachman, et. al. [Page 3]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing October 1999
4.1 The inetLocalMailRecipient Object Class
( 2.16.840.1.113730.3.2.[[TBD]]
NAME 'inetLocalMailRecipient'
SUP top
AUXILIARY
MAY ( mail $ mailAlternateAddress $
MAY ( mailLocalAddress $
mailHost $ mailRoutingAddress
)
)
Lachman [Page 3]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
The 'inetLocalMailRecipient' object class signifies that the entry
represents an entity within the organization that can receive SMTP
mail, such as a mail user or a mailing list.
mail, such as a mail user or a mailing list. In any case of an entry
containing the 'inetLocalMailRecipient' object class, attributes
defined in this document MUST be interpreted as specified in this
document.
3.2 Address Attributes
4.2 Address Attribute
( 0.9.2342.19200300.100.1.3
NAME 'mail'
( 2.16.840.1.113730.3.1.13
NAME 'mailLocalAddress'
DESC 'RFC 822 email address of this recipient'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
SYNTAX '1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26{256}'
)
The attribute name 'mail' is a synonym for 'rfc822Mailbox', as
defined earlier in [8]. This attribute specifies the recipient's
"primary" or "advertised" email address, i.e., that which might
appear on a business card; for example, "user@example.com". The
address conforms to the syntax of an 'addr-spec' as defined in RFC
822.
The 'mailLocalAddress' attribute is used to specify email addresses,
for the recipient; for example, "nickname@example.com". The address
conforms to the syntax of an 'addr-spec' as defined in [3].
( 2.16.840.1.113730.3.1.13
NAME 'mailAlternateAddress'
DESC 'alternate RFC 822 email address of this recipient'
EQUALITY caseIgnoreIA5Match
SYNTAX '1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.26{256}'
)
The 'mailLocalAddress' attribute MUST contain all addresses that
represent each recipient of the target MTA. Commonly, the value of
the 'mail' attribute should also be among the addresses listed in
the 'mailLocalAddress' attribute if it is expected to be used for
LDAP mail routing.
The 'mailAlternateAddress' attribute is used to specify alternate
email addresses, if any, for the recipient; for example,
"nickname@example.com". The address conforms to the syntax of an
'addr-spec' as defined in RFC 822.
When determining the disposition of a given message, an MTA may
search the directory for an entry with object class
'inetLocalMailRecipient' and a 'mail' or 'mailAlternateAddress'
When determining the disposition of a given message, MTAs using LDAP
(directly or indirectly) to route mail MUST search for an entry
with object class 'inetLocalMailRecipient' and a 'mailLocalAddress'
attribute matching the message's recipient address. If exactly one
matching entry is found, the MTA may regard the message as being
matching entry is found, MTAs MUST regard the message as being
addressed to the entity that is represented by the directory entry.
The 'mailAlternateAddress' attribute may also be used to represent a
"wildcard domain" address, e.g., "@example.org", meaning that if mail
arrives for "someone@example.org", and there is no recipient with
that address specified as 'mail' or 'mailAlternateAddress', then the
recipient with the wildcard domain address should receive the mail.
If multiple entries are found, but all share an identical match for
both mailRoutingAddress and mailHost (e.g., their presence or absence
is the same as well as their values if present), the MTA MAY treat
this as a single match. Duplicate entries that return different
routing attributes or contradict each other are errors, however, and
should be handled by the MTA in some locally-appropriate way, such as
returning a DSN [11] to the sender.
In short, address attributes may be used by an LDAP entry to answer
the question "what is/are this account's email address(es)?"
Lachman, et. al. [Page 4]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing October 1999
If there is no match found by the above, MTAs SHOULD have the
capability of searching for the recipient domain against the
'mailLocalAddress' attribute using the "wildcard domain" address
"@<full-local-domain>" , e.g., "@example.org". In other words, if
mail arrives for "someone@example.org", and there is no recipient
with that address specified as 'mailLocalAddress', then the recipient
with the wildcard domain address should receive the mail.
MTAs MAY do other searches but only after the above are done.
Lachman [Page 4]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
In short, the address attribute 'mailLocalAddress' may be used by an
LDAP entry to answer the question "what is/are this account's email
address(es)?"
3.3 Routing Attributes
4.3 Routing Attributes
( 2.16.840.1.113730.3.1.18
NAME 'mailHost'
@ -234,11 +241,21 @@ INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
)
The 'mailHost' attribute indicates which SMTP MTA considers the
recipient's mail to be locally handlable. This information can be
recipient's mail to be locally handleable. This information can be
used for routing, in that an intermediary MTA may take it to be the
destination for messages addressed to this recipient. The hostname
is specified as a fully-qualified DNS hostname with no trailing dot
(e.g., "host42.example.com").
destination for messages addressed to this recipient. Normal mail
routing requirements (i.e., use of MX records) apply to the specified
hostname unless overridden by local conventions. In other words, the
mail should be sent to the specified host without changing the
recipient address. The hostname is specified as a fully-qualified
DNS hostname with no trailing dot (e.g., "host42.example.com").
If the 'inetLocalMailRecipient' object class is present, the
'mailHost' attribute for each entry MAY contain a value. If it does,
that value MUST be the fully qualified name of the server containing
the host MTA for this person. If 'mailHost' is present then it MUST
be taken as the host for this user, and all mail to this user MUST be
routed to this machine.
( 2.16.840.1.113730.3.1.47
NAME 'mailRoutingAddress'
@ -249,40 +266,37 @@ INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
SINGLE-VALUE
)
Lachman, et. al. [Page 5]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing October 1999
The 'mailRoutingAddress' attribute indicates a routing address for
the recipient. The address conforms to the syntax of an 'addr-spec'
in RFC 822. An intermediary MTA may use this information to route
the message to the MTA that handles mail for this recipient. This is
the recipient. The address MUST conform to the syntax of an
'addr-spec' in [3]. An intermediary MTA MUST use this information to
route the message to the MTA that handles mail for this recipient,
e.g., the envelope address MUST be rewritten to this value. This is
useful in cases where, for a given recipient, the target MTA prefers
a particular address to appear as the recipient address in the SMTP
envelope. So, 'mailRoutingAddress' may be used as an alternative to
envelope. 'mailRoutingAddress' MAY be used as an alternative to
'mailHost', and is intended to have the same effect as 'mailHost'
except that 'mailRoutingAddress' suggests an address for rewriting
the envelope. With 'mailHost', the envelope address either is not
except that 'mailRoutingAddress' is an address for rewriting the
envelope. With 'mailHost', the envelope address either is not
rewritten, or is rewritten according to implementation-specific rules
and/or configuration.
If both 'mailHost' and 'mailRoutingAddress' are present, the
suggested interpretation is that messages are to be routed to the
host indicated by 'mailHost', while rewriting the envelope as per
If both 'mailHost' and 'mailRoutingAddress' are present, MTAs MAY
interpret it to mean that messages are to be routed to the host
indicated by 'mailHost', while rewriting the envelope as per
'mailRoutingAddress'. In theory, there could be peculiar cases where
this is necessary, but this is not normally expected.
Absense of both 'mailHost' and 'mailRoutingAddress' should be
considered an error, unless "location-independent" recipient types
Lachman [Page 5]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
are supported by the various MTAs within the organization. This
would allow any MTA in the organization to handle the processing of
mail for, say, a mailing list. This presumes that the various MTAs
all recognize the recipient type in question, suggesting a need to
standardize recipient types that could be "location-independent".
Absence of both 'mailHost' and 'mailRoutingAddress' MAY be considered an
error, unless "location-independent" recipient types are supported by
the various MTAs within the organization. This would allow any MTA in
the organization to handle the processing of mail for, say, a mailing
list. This presumes that the various MTAs all recognize the recipient
type in question, suggesting a need to standardize recipient types that
could be "location-independent".
In short, routing attributes may be used by an LDAP entry to answer
the question "how should MTAs route mail to this account?"
@ -295,7 +309,39 @@ INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
sendmail ".forward" file). Such options are outside the scope of the
'inetLocalMailRecipient' schema definition.
4. Examples
The following possibilities exist as a result of an LDAP lookup on an
address:
mailHost is mailRoutingAddress is Results in
----------- --------------------- ----------
set to a set mail routed to
"local" host mailRoutingAddress
set to a not set delivered to
"local" host original address
Lachman, et. al. [Page 6]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing October 1999
set to a set MAY relay to mailHost
remote host using mailRoutingAddress
set to a not set original address
remote host relayed to mailHost
not set set mail routed to
mailRoutingAddress
not set not set error or
"location-independent"
The term "local" host above means the host specified is one that the
local (target) MTA considers to be a local delivery. The local MTA
MAY rewrite the original address when mailRoutingAddress is not set
if local conventions warrant the change.
5. Examples
The following examples illustrate possible uses of the
'inetLocalMailRecipient' object class.
@ -303,38 +349,35 @@ INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
Here is an example of an LDAP entry representing a mail user:
dn: uid=joe,o=Example Corp,c=US
objectclass: top
objectclass: person
objectclass: organizationalPerson
objectclass: inetOrgPerson
objectclass: inetLocalMailRecipient
objectclass: nsMessagingServerUser
objectClass: top
objectClass: person
objectClass: organizationalPerson
objectClass: inetOrgPerson
objectClass: inetLocalMailRecipient
objectClass: nsMessagingServerUser
cn: Joe User
sn: User
uid: joe
userpassword: {crypt}y2KxtbzMYnApU
userPassword: {crypt}y2KxtbzMYnApU
mail: joe@example.com
mailhost: nsmail1.example.com
maildeliveryoption: mailbox
mailquota: 1000000
mailforwardingaddress: mary@example.com
mailLocalAddress: joe@example.com
mailLocalAddress: joe@another.example.com
mailHost: nsmail1.example.com
mailDeliveryOption: mailbox
mailQuota: 1000000
mailForwardingAddress: mary@example.com
Joe User is a user of a hypothetical mail system called NS Messaging.
Let's say mail arrives on an MTA called "mx.example.com", addressed
to "joe@example.com". The MTA searches the directory for a mail
recipient with that address, using an LDAP search filter [9] such as:
to "joe@example.com". That MTA searches the directory for a mail
recipient with that address, using an LDAP search filter [8] such as:
(&(objectClass=inetLocalMailRecipient)
(|(mail=joe@example.com)
(mailLocalAddress=joe@example.com))
Lachman, et. al. [Page 7]
Lachman [Page 6]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
(mailAlternateAddress=joe@example.com)))
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing October 1999
It finds Joe's LDAP entry, and routes the message to the target MTA
"nsmail1.example.com", while not rewriting the SMTP envelope
@ -345,89 +388,85 @@ INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
configuration (in this case, the message is delivered to a mailbox,
and forwarded to another recipient).
Note that this document does not specify what search filters are to
be used by MTAs (although the one above is recommended), nor does it
specify the rules an MTA is to use to ascertain whether or not it is
the target MTA for a given recipient (it could check the recipient's
'mailHost' value against its own hostname, or check the recipient's
'mailRoutingAddress', or check the MTA configuration, or some
combination of these), nor does it specify how and when MTAs should
rewrite envelopes (it may depend on the MTA configuration).
Note that this document does not specify the rules an MTA is to use
to ascertain whether or not it is the target MTA for a given
recipient (it could check the recipient's 'mailHost' value against
its own hostname, or check the recipient's 'mailRoutingAddress', or
check the MTA configuration, or some combination of these).
Here is another example of an LDAP entry representing a mail user:
dn: uid=john,o=Example Corp,c=US
objectclass: top
objectclass: person
objectclass: organizationalPerson
objectclass: inetOrgPerson
objectclass: inetLocalMailRecipient
objectclass: xyzMailUser
objectClass: top
objectClass: person
objectClass: organizationalPerson
objectClass: inetOrgPerson
objectClass: inetLocalMailRecipient
objectClass: xyzMailUser
cn: John Doe
sn: Doe
uid: john
userpassword: {crypt}y2KxtbzMYnApU
userPassword: {crypt}y2KxtbzMYnApU
mail: john@example.com
mailroutingaddress: John_Doe@xyz-gw.example.com
xyzpostofficename: PO_1
xyzclusternumber: 3
xyzmessagestoreid: 9
mailLocalAddress: john@example.com
mailRoutingAddress: John_Doe@xyz-gw.example.com
xyzPostOfficeName: PO_1
xyzClusterNumber: 3
xyzMessageStoreId: 9
John Doe is a user of a hypothetical mail system called XYZ Mail.
Let's say mail arrives on an MTA called "mx.example.com", addressed
to "john@example.com". The MTA searches the directory for a mail
to "john@example.com". That MTA searches the directory for a mail
recipient with that address, and routes the message to "xyz-
gw.example.com", rewriting the SMTP envelope recipient address to
"John_Doe@xyz-gw.example.com", as per the 'mailRoutingAddress'. On
"xyz-gw.example.com", the message is gatewayed into the XYZ Mail
system and then dealt with as per other attributes.
Lachman, et. al. [Page 8]
Lachman [Page 7]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing October 1999
Here is an example of an LDAP entry representing a mailing list:
dn: cn=Scuba Group,o=Example Corp,c=US
objectclass: top
objectclass: groupOfUniqueNames
objectclass: inetLocalMailRecipient
objectclass: mailGroup
objectClass: top
objectClass: groupOfUniqueNames
objectClass: inetLocalMailRecipient
objectClass: mailGroup
cn: Scuba Group
mail: scuba@example.com
mailhost: host42.example.com
mgrprfc822mailmember: joe@example.com
mgrprfc822mailmember: john@example.com
mailLocalAddress: scuba@example.com
mailHost: host42.example.com
mgrpRFC822MailMember: joe@example.com
mgrpRFC822MailMember: john@example.com
The Scuba Group is a mail group (mailing list) that includes two
members. A message addressed to "scuba@example.com" is routed to
"host42.example.com" where it is then resent to the mailing list
members. The 'mailGroup' object class is specified elsewhere [10].
members. The 'mailGroup' object class is specified elsewhere [9].
Here is an example of an LDAP entry representing a forwarding alias:
dn: cn=Jane Roe Forwarding Alias,o=PU,c=US
objectclass: top
objectclass: inetLocalMailRecipient
objectclass: mailForwardingAlias
mail: janeroe@pu.edu
mailhost: mail.pu.edu
mailforwardingaddress: janeroe@elsewhereville.edu
dn: cn=Jane Roe Forwarding Alias,o=Example,c=US
objectClass: top
objectClass: inetLocalMailRecipient
objectClass: mailForwardingAlias
mail: janeroe@example.org
mailLocalAddress: janeroe@example.org
mailHost: mail.example.org
mailForwardingAddress: janeroe@elsewhere.example.com
cn: Jane Roe Forwarding Alias
This entry uses a hypothetical object class 'mailForwardingAlias'
that is not specified here, but is used as an example of how an LDAP
entry might represent such a recipient type. A message addressed to
"janeroe@pu.edu" is routed to "mail.pu.edu" where it is then
forwarded. In this case, Jane Roe may be a former student of a
university called PU, and they are forwarding her mail to her new
"janeroe@example.org" is routed to "mail.example.org" where it is
then forwarded. In this case, Jane Roe may be a former member of the
Example Organization, and they are forwarding her mail to her new
address elsewhere.
5. Security Considerations
6. Security Considerations
As in all cases where account information is stored in an LDAP-based
directory service, network administrators must be careful to ensure
@ -437,14 +476,11 @@ INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
outside the organization, since it is intended for use only by MTAs
within the organization.
6. Acknowledgements
Lachman, et. al. [Page 9]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing October 1999
Lachman [Page 8]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
7. Acknowledgments
The 'inetLocalMailRecipient' object class is based on an earlier
design done by the Netscape Messaging and Directory Server teams,
@ -457,10 +493,10 @@ INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
BOF, including, from Sun Microsystems, John Beck, Anil Srivastava,
and Darryl Huff.
7. References
8. References
[1] W. Yeong, T. Howes, S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory Access
Protocol", RFC 1777, March 1995.
[1] M. Wahl, T. Howes, S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory Access
Protocol (v3)", RFC 2251, December 1997.
[2] J. Postel, "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", STD 10, RFC 821,
August 1982.
@ -482,83 +518,73 @@ INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
Directory Access Protocol (v3): Attribute Syntax Definitions", RFC
2252, December 1997.
[8] P. Barker, S. Kille, "The COSINE and Internet X.500 Schema", RFC
1274, November 1991.
[9] T. Howes, "The String Representation of LDAP Search Filters",
[8] T. Howes, "The String Representation of LDAP Search Filters",
RFC 2254, December 1997.
[10] B. Steinback, "Using LDAP for SMTP Mailing Lists and Aliases",
[9] B. Steinback, "Using LDAP for SMTP Mailing Lists and Aliases",
Internet-Draft (work in progress).
[11] G. Good, "The LDAP Data Interchange Format (LDIF) - Technical
Specification", Internet-Draft (work in progress).
[10] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[11] K. Moore, "SMTP Service Extension for Delivery Status
Notifications", RCP 1891, January 1996.
Lachman, et. al. [Page 10]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing October 1999
Lachman [Page 9]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
[12] M. Smith, "The inetOrgPerson Object Class", Internet-Draft
(work in progress).
8. Author's Address
9. Authors' Addresses
Hans Lachman
Netscape Communications Corp.
501 East Middlefield Road
Mountain View, CA 94043
Phone: (650) 254-1900
EMail: lachman@netscape.com
Gregory Neil Shapiro
Sendmail, Inc.
6603 Shellmound Street
Emeryville, CA 94608-1042
Phone: +1 510-594-5522
Fax: +1 510-594-5411
EMail: gshapiro@sendmail.org
X. Change Summary
X.1.1 Substantive changes between
draft-lachman-laser-ldap-mail-routing-00.txt and
draft-lachman-laser-ldap-mail-routing-01.txt
(i) Added Gregory Neil Shapiro as another author.
(ii) Changed Draft heaer.
(iii) Added "Conventions Used in this Document" section.
(iv) Replaced RFC mentions with reference numbers.
(v) Add new MUST/SHOULD/MAY sections to bring more in line with
RFC documents.
(vi) Clarify job of MTA in Overview by adding third paragraph.
(vii) mailRoutingAddress can be outside of administrative control.
(viii) Eliminated use of 'mail' attribute for mail routing.
(ix) Changed name of 'mailAlternateAddress' to 'mailLocalAddress'.
(x) Remove "routable" from 'mailLocalAddress' description.
(xi) Clarify which addresses MUST be in 'mailLocalAddress'.
(xii) Allow for multiple responses if they all have the same
routing attribute values.
(xiii) Clarify use of MX records on routing attributes.
(xiv) Add a table to clarify use of 'mailHost' and
'mailRoutingAddress'.
(xv) Remove document weakening statements from section 5.
(xvi) Only use reserved domains (example.com, example.org) in
examples.
(xvii) Clean up references
(xviii) Added section X to list the changes between draft versions.
Lachman, et. al. [Page 11]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing October 1999
Lachman [Page 10]
INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
9. Full Copyright Statement
10. Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
@ -586,28 +612,4 @@ INTERNET-DRAFT LDAP Schema for Intranet Mail Routing May 1999
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Lachman Expires: November 1999 [Page 11]
Lachman, et. al. [Page 12]