RFC 1384: Naming Guidelines for Directory Pilots
This RFC has been replaced. Do not implement against it for new work — it was formally obsoleted by RFC 1617.
Current version: RFC 1617 — Naming and Structuring Guidelines for X.500 Directory Pilots
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document defines a number of naming guidelines. Alignment to these guidelines is recommended for directory pilots. This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC1384
- Published
- January 1993
- Authors
- P. Barker; S.E. Hardcastle-Kille
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- app
- Pages
- 12
- Also known as
- —
- Obsoleted by:
- RFC 1617
Topics
Referenced by
One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 1430A Strategic Plan for Deploying an Internet X.500 Directory ServiceCurrent
February 1993
- RFC 1431DUA Metrics (OSI-DS 33 (v2))Current
February 1993
- RFC 1484Using the OSI Directory to achieve User Friendly Naming (OSI-DS 24 (v1.2))Obsoleted
July 1993
- RFC 1485A String Representation of Distinguished Names (OSI-DS 23 (v5))Obsoleted
July 1993
- RFC 1487X.500 Lightweight Directory Access ProtocolObsoleted
July 1993
- RFC 1488The X.500 String Representation of Standard Attribute SyntaxesObsoleted
July 1993
- RFC 1564DSA Metrics (OSI-DS 34 (v3))Current
January 1994
- RFC 1777Lightweight Directory Access ProtocolObsoleted
March 1995
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?