Subject: RE: Refering to X.500 editions

From: "Slone, Skip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 08:13:42 -0400

Kathy,

Unless I'm mistaken, when the fourth edition was approved earlier this year,
the second edition (1993) went out of maintenance, meaning no further
defects will be processed on it.  Is there likely to be a problem
referencing an out-of-maintenance standard as the base?  

If it is a problem, we would need to check with Hoyt to confirm my
understanding of the maintenance status before making any changes. 

 -- Skip

-----Original Message-----
From: Kathy Dally [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 2:33 PM
To: ietf-ldapbis
Subject: Refering to X.500 editions

Hi All!

In RFC 2256 the X.500 reference is to 1996.  Unfortunately, this is not an
official date (see below).  Since 1997 is closer to 1996 than 1993, the
draft replacement for RFC 2256
(<draft-ietf-ldapbis-user-schema-00.txt>) refers to X.500 (1997).  In fact,
RFC 2256 includes some attributes that were introduced in X.520 (1997).
However, other LDAPv3 core RFCs refer to X.500 (1993).

In order to align the replacement RFCs, I propose to cite X.500 (1993) in
the title and references of <draft-ietf-ldapbis-user-schema-01.txt>. 
In addition, X.520 (1997) should be a separate reference in the I-D, to be
referred to when describing the new attributes.

Does this make sense?  Please let me know.

Below is material about the different X.500 editions and their ISO/IEC 9594
twins.  Credit is given to Hoyt Kesterson, ISO/IEC 9594 Editor, for most of
the information.  I hope this will be useful to the WG.

Thanks,
Kathy Dally

----------------

Although the X.500 Recommendations and ISO/IEC 9594 were aligned in the
first edition and identical ever since, the official dates on the standards
are different:
 
	*  X.500 Recs (ITU) date is the date of approval.

	*  ISO/IEC 9594 date is the date of publication.

Since a considerable amount of preparation is done between approval and
publication, the dates of the two standards have been different:

	*  first edition:  X.500 (1988) and ISO/IEC 9594:1990

	*  second edition:  X.500 (1993) and ISO/IEC 9594:1995

	*  third edition:  X.500 (1997) and ISO/IEC 9594:1998

	*  fourth edition, currently being published:  X.500 (2001) and
ISO/IEC 9594:2001, 
	   except for X.509 (2000) and ISO/IEC 9594-8:2000

Note that ISO/IEC also uses "edition" to mean the "issue number" of the part
of 9594.  This is the meaning of "Edition" on the face of ISO/IEC 9594
parts.  The key is the DATE.

The first edition (overall) includes these recommendations and standard
parts:
	
	*  X.500 - ISO/IEC 9594-1

	*  X.501 - ISO/IEC 9594-2

	*  X.509 - ISO/IEC 9594-8

	*  X.511 - ISO/IEC 9594-3

	*  X.518 - ISO/IEC 9594-4

	*  X.519 - ISO/IEC 9594-5

	*  X.520 - ISO/IEC 9594-6

	*  X.521 - ISO/IEC 9594-7

The second edition added X.525 - ISO/IEC 9594-9:1995, 1st ed.

The third edition added X.530 - ISO/IEC 9594-10:1998, 1st ed.

The fourth edition does not have any additional recommendations or parts.

---

From: Kathy Dally <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 09:55:33 -0400

Hi Skip!

The fourth edition has been approved, but not published, as far as I can
tell.  

Does out-of-maintenance mean that the second edition will not be
available from ITU and ISO/ANSI?  Removal of the approved draft text
from the OSIDirectory server is usually an accurate signal.  I think
that would be the biggest concern.

Thanks,
Kathy