ACP 137
ACP 137
ACP 137
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
UNCLASSIFIED<br />
<strong>ACP</strong> <strong>137</strong><br />
that the correct version of the schema has been used for directory data being shared over<br />
Griffin, a schema version number will be specified in the control information passed between<br />
nations. If this option is not used it is assumed that the nations have agreed upon a common<br />
schema through external means.<br />
325. Since it may take some time to get final approval for <strong>ACP</strong> 133(C) for international<br />
use Chapter 6 Annex A defines a subset schema which should be supported by early<br />
implementations of the Griffin DS to allow the development and use of MM as well as the<br />
currently used informal email transport mechanisms.<br />
326. This subset will include the object classes supported by the Griffin Interim DS:<br />
a. Organizational Unit.<br />
b. Organizational Person.<br />
c. Organizational Role.<br />
327. These object definitions will be extended to support X.400 addressing and other<br />
auxiliary object classes and attributes required to support the MM service, such as O/R<br />
Address and plaUser<strong>ACP</strong>127.<br />
328. In addition, new Object Classes are required including:<br />
a. Address List (used to send military messages to a predefined list of message<br />
recipients).<br />
LARGE DATA VOLUME REQUIREMENTS<br />
329. It was stated previously that much larger data volumes are envisaged by the nations<br />
for use with the Griffin DS. One nation has estimated potential data up to 100Mb (possible<br />
worst case). Current limits on the X.400 MM service are assumed to be a maximum message<br />
size of between 2 and 8Mb, and even if this were increased, it is unlikely that a messaging<br />
service is the best choice for data volumes this large:<br />
a. It is not clear that these sizes are necessarily accurate, rather being a worst case<br />
estimate. Even so, it is accepted that volumes are likely to be much larger than a 2Mb<br />
limit.<br />
b. Only one nation is likely to send volumes of this magnitude. Other nation’s<br />
data will be much less, although it is not certain that existing maximum message sizes<br />
would necessarily be adequate for other nations.<br />
c. A full transfer is only required initially and when synchronisation is lost.<br />
Otherwise, data transfers are limited to changes only, which are likely to result in<br />
much smaller files. A solution which could handle large volumes poorly but smaller<br />
volumes more efficiently may be acceptable.<br />
3-6<br />
UNCLASSIFIED<br />
Original
Change language