Re: [scim] SCIM: Questions regarding Error handling for Bulk operations

Phil Hunt <phil.hunt@oracle.com> Mon, 20 August 2018 20:40 UTC

Return-Path: <phil.hunt@oracle.com>
X-Original-To: scim@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: scim@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89F05128BAC for <scim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 13:40:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.321
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.321 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=1.989, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1Uo-CUtqGpgk for <scim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 13:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from userp2130.oracle.com (userp2130.oracle.com [156.151.31.86]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12D561277CC for <scim@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 13:40:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w7KKdK3e021534; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 20:40:19 GMT
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=from : message-id : content-type : mime-version : subject : date : in-reply-to : cc : to : references; s=corp-2018-07-02; bh=fmJMf4nOr18KaG71oz7AibZ5sufBmJet9Qg9pH1CYoU=; b=a+W7X0hyWHUG8VUu7oqoZNfHuaL11So8pmlI0oHtbtZqG9ZHv1ch2chvxpvoYtxhxDLW 7yjJkxdI93Ab1vbve0l03+mmp8qO7N4UbEcCuzGDonVLire8IWV0Pyw8/fg+vF9a7pKQ iRI3xx4vV11F0d8CC/nwpcw5iWrWkFag3B1z668fYvs1CU7V9iY9qUxZRkt+BnobsNmr VUKMMDoREfU5EikElJEVqRB8xFmk6Zgu5vicj31NstgPU+1MY49K4vIQQTGDRbu0Se0J GferhRE2sSk52hxcq1YGQrMIpG0gPFcIqcLlIiByEkN6gwynv0NKMWQhrcR1PTgdnxj/ KQ==
Received: from userv0021.oracle.com (userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2kxavtgspk-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 20 Aug 2018 20:40:19 +0000
Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by userv0021.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id w7KKeIWe028731 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 20 Aug 2018 20:40:19 GMT
Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w7KKeIfV022032; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 20:40:18 GMT
Received: from [10.0.1.37] (/24.86.190.97) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 20 Aug 2018 13:40:17 -0700
From: Phil Hunt <phil.hunt@oracle.com>
Message-Id: <CC6F3050-9D57-440B-8D92-7C8996C25472@oracle.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6CCA92E9-47C1-4646-8C4B-B3B149C0834B"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2018 13:40:15 -0700
In-Reply-To: <8D8C033A-0429-436E-BB75-25754B74C2D7@cisco.com>
Cc: "Jena, Jayadeba" <jjena@paypal.com>, Chuck Mortimore <cmortimore@salesforce.com>, "scim@ietf.org" <scim@ietf.org>
To: "Morteza Ansari (moransar)" <moransar=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
References: <DD67ADED-A7C4-467D-94BB-8527666FE8EC@paypalcorp.com> <8D8C033A-0429-436E-BB75-25754B74C2D7@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=8991 signatures=668707
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1808200210
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/scim/8EZMkQ9waSDnfDaoBJxagxBt5x4>
Subject: Re: [scim] SCIM: Questions regarding Error handling for Bulk operations
X-BeenThere: scim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: Simple Cloud Identity Management BOF <scim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/scim>, <mailto:scim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/scim/>
List-Post: <mailto:scim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:scim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim>, <mailto:scim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2018 20:40:26 -0000

Morteza/Jena,

The IDCS (Identity Cloud Service) bulk endpoint returns an overall 200 and then 409 for each resource operation that failed (due to cycle or any other reason) and a 200/201 for those that succeed.

Phil

Oracle Corporation, Identity Cloud Services Architect
@independentid
www.independentid.com <http://www.independentid.com/>phil.hunt@oracle.com <mailto:phil.hunt@oracle.com>

> On Aug 20, 2018, at 12:11 PM, Morteza Ansari (moransar) <moransar=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi Jena,
>  
> Best option for getting clarification on SCIM spec is to reach out to the WG mailing list: scim@ietf.org <mailto:scim@ietf.org>. Many more eyes will see it there.
>  
> As to your specific question, I am actually not 100% sure. Re-reading the spec seems to be a bit ambiguous there and I haven’t actually implemented bulk myself. I believe the answer to both scenarios is returning 200 responses with operation responses of 409 for the failed.
>  
> Phil, others, do you have a better answer? Have we clarified this somewhere else in the doc that I am missing?
>  
>  
> Cheers,
> Morteza
>  
> From: "Jena, Jayadeba" <jjena@paypal.com <mailto:jjena@paypal.com>>
> Date: Friday, August 17, 2018 at 5:32 PM
> To: "morteza.ansari@cisco.com <mailto:morteza.ansari@cisco.com>" <morteza.ansari@cisco.com <mailto:morteza.ansari@cisco.com>>, Chuck Mortimore <cmortimore@salesforce.com <mailto:cmortimore@salesforce.com>>
> Subject: SCIM: Questions regarding Error handling for Bulk operations
>  
> Hi,
>  
> I’m from PayPal and trying to understand the SCIM bulk specification and have questions around the error handling with “failOnError” not specified in the request. As an example, I was reading through the section (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7644#section-3.7.1 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__tools.ietf.org_html_rfc7644-23section-2D3.7.1&d=DwMGaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=na5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA&m=pyJbcSIML-m5QRPAfMRPW1D5vOwW3y_KWQo_pX0bJh0&s=rd-Tvkl4RlzRIcibzydGY6X7AR9lv3FOPuTCB6MNgZ8&e=>) - which says that we need to return the error code 409 when the circular dependency couldn’t be resolved by the server. The behavior of the bulk server wrt is not clear to me when we have the “FailOnError” flag is not specified. Please help clarify if the following behavior is correct and as per the specification.
>  
> Scenario1: When there’s a bulk request body with 2 items, failOnErrors flag is not specified in the request- The server while processing the bulk requests, discovers circular dependency that it couldn’t resolve, what would be the bulk response? Should the bulk server return a top level 409 response or a 200 response with operation response for each failed items (i.e 2 operation responses with 409 as the code for each).
> Scenario2: When there’s a bulk request body with 3 items, failOnErrors flag is not specified in the request- The server while processing the bulk requests, discovers circular dependency that it couldn’t resolve for the first 2 items, while the 3rd items could be processed successfully, what would be the bulk response? Should it be a  200 response with operation response for each failed items (i.e 2 operation responses with 409 as the code for each) and then it also contains the successful response for the 3rd item
>  
> Thanks,
> Jayadeba
>  
> _______________________________________________
> scim mailing list
> scim@ietf.org <mailto:scim@ietf.org>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_scim&d=DwICAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=na5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA&m=pyJbcSIML-m5QRPAfMRPW1D5vOwW3y_KWQo_pX0bJh0&s=Qd2Np4bHIUk6wz2YbFfR1mQ9xfEPtgGxHm40luqoUjg&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_scim&d=DwICAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=na5FVzBTWmanqWNy4DpctyXPpuYqPkAI1aLcLN4KZNA&m=pyJbcSIML-m5QRPAfMRPW1D5vOwW3y_KWQo_pX0bJh0&s=Qd2Np4bHIUk6wz2YbFfR1mQ9xfEPtgGxHm40luqoUjg&e=>