RFC 3384 (rfc3384) - Page 2 of 31

Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (version 3) Replication Requirements

RFC 3384            LDAPv3 Replication Requirements         October 2002


   7    References....................................................13
   A    Appendix A - Usage Scenarios..................................15
   A.1  Extranet Example..............................................15
   A.2  Consolidation Example.........................................15
   A.3  Replication Heterogeneous Deployment Example..................16
   A.4  Shared Name Space Example.....................................16
   A.5  Supplier Initiated Replication................................16
   A.6  Consumer Initiated Replication................................17
   A.7  Prioritized attribute replication.............................17
   A.8  Bandwidth issues..............................................17
   A.9  Interoperable Administration and Management...................18
   A.10 Enterprise Directory Replication Mesh.........................18
   A.11 Failure of the Master in a Master-Slave Replicated Directory..19
   A.12 Failure of a Directory Holding Critical Service Information...19
   B    Appendix B - Rationale........................................20
   B.1  Meta-Data Implications........................................20
   B.2  Order of Transfer for Replicating Data........................20
   B.3  Schema Mismatches and Replication.............................21
   B.4  Detecting and Repairing Inconsistencies Among Replicas........22
   B.5  Some Test Cases for Conflict Resolution in Multi-Master
        Replication...................................................23
   B.6  Data Confidentiality and Data Integrity During Replication....27
   B.7  Failover in Single-Master Systems.............................27
   B.8  Including Operational Attributes in Atomic Operations.........29
        Authors' Addresses............................................30
        Full Copyright Statement......................................31

1  Introduction

   Distributing directory information throughout the network provides a
   two-fold benefit: (1) it increases the reliability of the directory
   through fault tolerance, and (2) it brings the directory content
   closer to the clients using the data.  LDAP's success as an access
   protocol for directory information is driving the need to distribute
   LDAP directory content within the enterprise and Internet.
   Currently, LDAP does not define a replication mechanism, and mentions
   LDAP shadow servers (see [RFC 2251]) in passing.  A standard mechanism
   for directory replication in a multi-vendor environment is critical
   to the continued success of LDAP in the market place.

   This document sets out the requirements for replication between
   multiple LDAP servers.  While RFC 2251 and RFC 2252 [RFC 2252] set
   forth the standards for communication between LDAP clients and
   servers there are additional requirements for server-to-server
   communication.  Some of these are covered here.

   This document first introduces the terminology to be used, then
   presents the different replication models being considered.



Stokes, et. al.              Informational