Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) Bulk Update/Replication Protocol (LBURP)
RFC 4373

5.4.1.  OperationResults

   When a response element is included in an LBURPUpdateResponse
   message, it contains the BER-encoding of the following ASN.1:

       OperationResults ::= SEQUENCE OF OperationResult

       OperationResult ::= SEQUENCE {
          operationNumber    INTEGER,
          ldapResult         LDAPResult
       }

   An OperationResult is included for each operation from the
   UpdateOperationList that failed during processing.

5.4.1.1.  operationNumber

   The operationNumber identifies the LDAP update operation from the
   UpdateOperationList of the LBURPUpdateRequest that failed.
   Operations are numbered beginning at 1.

5.4.1.2.  ldapResult

   The ldapResult included in the OperationResult is the same ldapResult
   that would be sent for the update operation that failed if it had
   failed while being processed as a normal LDAP update operation.
   LDAPResult is defined in [RFC2251], section 4.1.10.

5.5.  EndLBURPRequest

   The requestName of the EndLBURPRequest is the OID 1.3.6.1.1.17.3.

   The requestValue contains the BER-encoding of the following ASN.1:

        EndLBURPRequestValue::= SEQUENCE {
            sequenceNumber INTEGER (1 .. maxInt)
        }

5.5.1.  sequenceNumber

   The value in sequenceNumber is one greater than the last
   LBURPUpdateRequest.sequenceNumber in the update stream.  It allows
   the server to know when it has received all outstanding asynchronous
   LBURPUpdateRequests.

Harrison, et al.             Informational                     [Page 10]
RFC 4373         LDAP Bulk Update/Replication Protocol      January 2006

5.6.  EndLBURPResponse

   The responseName of the EndLBURPResponse is the OID 1.3.6.1.1.17.4.

   There is no response element in the EndLBURPResponse message.

6.  Semantics of the Incremental Update Style

   The initial state of entries in the consumer's DIT plus the
   LBURPUpdateRequest messages in the update stream collectively
   represent the desired final state of the consumer's DIT.  All LDAP
   update operations defined in [RFC2251]--Add, Modify, Delete, and
   Modify DN--are allowed in the incremental update stream.  All of the
   semantics of those operations are in effect, so for instance, an
   attempt to add an entry that already exists will fail just as it
   would during a normal LDAP Add operation.

7.  General LBURP Semantics

   The consumer server may take any action required to efficiently
   process the updates sent via LBURP, as long as the final state is
   equivalent to that which would have been achieved if the updates in
   the update stream had been applied to the DIT using normal LDAP
   update operations.

   The LBURPUpdateRequest messages that form the update stream MAY be
   sent asynchronously by the supplier to the consumer.  This means that
   the supplier need not wait for an LBURPUpdateResponse message for one
   LBURPUpdateRequest message before sending the next LBURPUpdateRequest
   message.

   When the LBURP update stream contains a request that affects multiple
   Directory System Agents (DSAs), the consumer MAY choose to perform
   the request or return a resultCode value of affectsMultipleDSAs.  As
   with any LDAP operation, a consumer MAY send a resultCode value of
   referral as part of the OperationResult element for any operation on
   an entry that it does not contain.  If the consumer is configured to
   do so, it MAY chain on behalf of the supplier to complete the update
   operation instead.

   While a consumer server is processing an LBURP update stream, it may
   choose not to service LDAP requests on other connections.  This
   provision is designed to allow implementers the freedom to implement
   highly-efficient methods of handling the update stream without being
   constrained by the need to maintain a live, working DIT database
   while doing so.

Harrison, et al.             Informational                     [Page 11]
RFC 4373         LDAP Bulk Update/Replication Protocol      January 2006

   If a consumer chooses to refuse LDAP operation requests from other
   suppliers during LBURP update, it is RECOMMENDED that the consumer
   refer those requests to another server that has the appropriate data
   to complete the operation.

   Unless attribute values specifying timestamps are included as part of
   the update stream, updates made using LBURP are treated the same as
   other LDAP operations wherein they are deemed to occur at the
   present.  Consumers MAY store timestamp values sent by suppliers but
   are not required to do so.

   Implementations may choose to perform the operations in the update
   stream with special permissions to improve performance.

   Consumer implementations should include functionality to detect and
   terminate connections on which an LBURP session has been initiated
   but information (such as the EndLBURPRequest) needed to complete the
   LBURP session is never received.  A timeout is one mechanism that can
   be used to accomplish this.

8.  Security Considerations

   Implementations should ensure that a supplier making an LBURP request
   is properly authenticated and authorized to make the updates
   requested.  There is a potential for loss of data if updates are made
   to the DIT without proper authorization.  If LBURP is used for
   replication, implementers should note that unlike other replication
   protocols, no existing replication agreement between supplier and
   consumer is required.  These risks increase if the consumer server
   also processes the update stream with special permissions to improve
   performance.  For these reasons, implementers should carefully
   consider which permissions should be required to perform LBURP
   operations and take steps to ensure that only connections with
   appropriate authorization are allowed to perform them.

   The data contained in the update stream may contain passwords and
   other sensitive data.  Care should be taken to properly safeguard
   this information while in transit between supplier and consumer.  The
   StartTLS [RFC2830] operation is one mechanism that can be used to
   provide data confidentiality and integrity services for this purpose.

   As with any asynchronous LDAP operation, it may be possible for an
   LBURP supplier to send asynchronous LBURPUpdateRequest messages to
   the consumer faster than the consumer can process them.  Consumer
   implementers should take steps to prevent LBURP suppliers from
   interfering with the normal operation of a consumer server by issuing
   a rapid stream of asynchronous LBURPUpdateRequest messages.

Harrison, et al.             Informational                     [Page 12]
RFC 4373         LDAP Bulk Update/Replication Protocol      January 2006

9.  IANA Considerations

   Registration of the following values has been made by the IANA
   [RFC3383].

9.1.  LDAP Object Identifier Registrations

   The IANA has registered LDAP Object Identifiers identifying the
   protocol elements defined in this technical specification.  The
   following registration template was provided:

   Subject: Request for LDAP OID Registration
   Person & email address to contact for further information:
       Roger Harrison
       rharrison@novell.com
   Specification: RFC 4373
   Author/Change Controller: IESG
   Comments:
   Seven delegations will be made under the assigned OID.  The
   following 6 OIDs are Protocol Mechanism OIDs of type "E"
   (supportedExtension):

   1.3.6.1.1.17.1 StartLBURPRequest LDAP ExtendedRequest message
   1.3.6.1.1.17.2 StartLBURPResponse LDAP ExtendedResponse message
   1.3.6.1.1.17.3 EndLBURPRequest LDAP ExtendedRequest message
   1.3.6.1.1.17.4 EndLBURPResponse LDAP ExtendedResponse message
   1.3.6.1.1.17.5 LBURPUpdateRequest LDAP ExtendedRequest message
   1.3.6.1.1.17.6 LBURPUpdateResponse LDAP ExtendedResponse message

   The following 1 OID is a Protocol Mechanism OID of type "F"
   (supportedFeature):

   1.3.6.1.1.17.7 LBURP Incremental Update style OID

Harrison, et al.             Informational                     [Page 13]
RFC 4373         LDAP Bulk Update/Replication Protocol      January 2006

10.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key Words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC2251]  Wahl, M., Howes, T., and S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory
              Access Protocol (v3)", RFC 2251, December 1997.

   [RFC3383]  Zeilenga, K., "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)
              Considerations for the Lightweight Directory Access
              Protocol (LDAP)", BCP 64, RFC 3383, September 2002.

   [X.680]    ITU-T Recommendation X.680 (07/2002) | ISO/IEC 8824-1:2002
              "Information Technology - Abstract Syntax Notation One
              (ASN.1): Specification of basic notation"

   [X.690]    ITU-T Rec. X.690 (07/2002) | ISO/IEC 8825-1:2002,
              "Information technology - ASN.1 encoding rules:
              Specification of Basic Encoding Rules (BER), Canonical
              Encoding Rules (CER) and Distinguished Encoding Rules
              (DER)", 2002.

11.  Informative References

   [RFC2830]  Hodges, J., Morgan, R., and M. Wahl, "Lightweight
              Directory Access Protocol (v3): Extension for Transport
              Layer Security", RFC 2830, May 2000.

Harrison, et al.             Informational                     [Page 14]
RFC 4373         LDAP Bulk Update/Replication Protocol      January 2006

Authors' Addresses

   Roger Harrison
   Novell, Inc.
   1800 S. Novell Place
   Provo, UT 84606

   Phone: +1 801 861 2642
   EMail: rharrison@novell.com

   Jim Sermersheim
   Novell, Inc.
   1800 S. Novell Place
   Provo, UT 84606

   Phone: +1 801 861 3088
   EMail: jimse@novell.com

   Yulin Dong

   EMail: yulindong@gmail.com

Harrison, et al.             Informational                     [Page 15]
RFC 4373         LDAP Bulk Update/Replication Protocol      January 2006

Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).

Harrison, et al.             Informational                     [Page 16]