Re: [scim] Common Attribute "schemas" Characteristics

Phillip Hunt <> Fri, 13 March 2020 17:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 353F43A0D35 for <>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:10:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KjKDoUPZKCSY for <>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:10:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CA673A0F20 for <>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:10:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id g2so2044546plo.3 for <>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:10:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=UtERYICu8uzhypDKY0gjy8w5OrQa+FEvDKuBraahatE=; b=b/jZ4fE0+bvtit3mtgbKzJIbB0yRs8fYkkSkzv+EZTalFz61yj8GMmA+0enwcWFrUY LvPQrAbj0nLJEPFeDTJ0BT0Q3Vhl1ERoQGE669jIyl6o14bWH93Wp7EZVZ8W0U2k6MSp Hf+4pSZtsUSsafN1neYCB9lGLIB5l+KsP/qzwWvZtl78g0d9n8jl2GyOjQMxzEsA4BAx Vv8ccIeqqWL60KCDbNZbyWnt3K1Y8Tpp59O7PACzyEY/Uu3q2piquLT1MkF4IJ/S+7bv X82MTlHhKdGchnosCqDfh9/pQKvrL/3qOIIfgwfZLxCA/xF6L48AmRxwcWxMJPuAAP1X 8RtA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=UtERYICu8uzhypDKY0gjy8w5OrQa+FEvDKuBraahatE=; b=W5w31/c3Pq7WCmU2K6TH0wQP9O8MQ0NWASG/EWtGGArHR+VhxWrooZL4gfu9m30U57 aX5Oui7G7K+GpiNxiC0eDVMuEt/ea/5jUNHGqEEJRh5V1FfVbeG1Loc2hd3/OFWhp5/k erCxoGad47pcobVE/OkPdBbFMv68YtNApRHpahWna7R/NlghHh60XmcUwcI+aVhQSuEH dUiGfMSBKaRbRpFmSoJ9+eGGBKlSyvPnkS9RugMNfRNox8AtxhQsUm/G7IAtJwPFDQgl F5Q8j4CdbhYd5tw5N39NjqtgaSCXNoiwWOL1e+KKCe8BAPUbuEKl5fSsgO7zeWDqAtfe /NMg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0Ge+3OzwrNGHbaLPxA1VY1XB09CmiYE8z9+ItyBx8K5V/e8OA0 Es+GmMDQdhzTHlMjHa9p6LvAkqeBxpyXYw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: =?utf-8?q?ADFU+vtL1vmaaUxnJ462vDY8lDO+irMvuyh2kZxuqDw0?= =?utf-8?q?9NAvLVFQGbVe5EitwsNcSi4PU7+aGqRU+g=3D=3D?=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:c301:: with SMTP id g1mr10743101pjt.173.1584119402409; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:10:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:569:7a71:1d00:2462:8c2f:9c84:faea? ( [2001:569:7a71:1d00:2462:8c2f:9c84:faea]) by with ESMTPSA id d206sm245744pfd.160.2020. (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:10:02 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-CD877E00-0EAF-4EC9-887A-0371B1C194F4
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Phillip Hunt <>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 10:10:01 -0700
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
To: Shelley <>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17C54)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [scim] Common Attribute "schemas" Characteristics
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Simple Cloud Identity Management BOF <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 17:10:11 -0000


In practical/pragmatic insensitive. 

I treat as case insensitive since it is unlikely and unwise if two separate schemas only differentiated by case. 

I would also expect iana process to reject “overlapping” registrations differentiated only by case. 


> On Mar 13, 2020, at 9:16 AM, Shelley <> wrote:
> What are the characteristics for the "schemas" [1] attribute?
> Here is my attempt at defining these characteristics using the Schema definitions:
> "type" is "reference"
> "referenceTypes" is ["uri"]
> "required" is "true"
> "multiValued" is "true"
> "uniqueness" is "none"
> "caseExact" as "true" (since this is a "reference" type)
> "mutability" of "immutable" (although none of the mutability values seems like a perfect fit)
> "returned" characteristic of "default"
> Although "schemas" and the "Common Attributes" don't define their own schemas, it would be nice to have all of these attributes' characteristics clearly defined in the spec using the Schema definition to help provide a clear/common definition, particularly, since these characteristics are not intended to be modified/defined by SPs..
> In particular, in my SCIM implementation, I have been considering whether to evaluate "schemas" in resource representations case-sensitively (exact case as defined in the ResourceType), case-insensitively (any case allowed), or using lexical equivalence (e.g. for URNs, case-insensitive schema and NID, case-sensitive NSS, and some components ignored). The RFC doesn't seem to clearly prescribe this, but based on the fact that the implied type is "reference" which (debatably [2]) has "caseExact" as "true" and the fact that the attribute "MUST only contain values defined as "schema" and "schemaExtensions"", I'm under the assumption that this attribute is case-sensitive.
> Please confirm. Thanks!
> [1]
> [2]
> _______________________________________________
> scim mailing list