IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [scim] Proposal to create a design team

Pam Dingle <pdingle@pingidentity.com> Fri, 19 October 2012 19:49 UTC

Return-Path: <pdingle@pingidentity.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 2271921F878B for <scim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:49:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BbvRPeGzRtfl for <scim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:49:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na3sys009aog124.obsmtp.com (na3sys009aog124.obsmtp.com [74.125.149.151]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21A4421F878C for <scim@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:49:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-f70.google.com ([74.125.82.70]) (using TLSv1) by na3sys009aob124.postini.com ([74.125.148.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUIGu4bl/8A3jEcrh8cg2wQ3UBATt0KqP@postini.com; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:49:55 PDT
Received: by mail-wg0-f70.google.com with SMTP id dt14so721655wgb.1 for <scim@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:49:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=SOGyTzW+0i93DGIyn0XT0LCG+Ocm0VhpW/OgaPkqZh8=; b=cT/8lJEoYp+ZuhTYZqeXjidRQ6Qj6e3eqbqhdmAR9fnv2CqSdGsHGgOyjOtQ2xZs3p f8UdGb7XxCZcRFC7NiFcu+WAn4Db2N244N9VDOy+BhNmaL7UYpxkf5bm4vTe7oUicvGO wYRjXj7tCJbOB/gJrEuTtFhQKXZVXR4fwKsY/AWx7q4AQFAJ4ZO28dYUq96ND6mW5dAZ zKoslbF/lGS2pHA/F5HwcVMllM/x7u2Nng8x/NoEUhZLEmL2vdn4WNSBFvz2NZhZSGB4 IRJBXmyPrx96dK2lYeAlBK0Ubx5ZMpFXRWbirwpBvUEBZ7behMoB3mHXFw6GNoJciHPw h7cA==
Received: by 10.14.4.201 with SMTP id 49mr3498732eej.0.1350676191731; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:49:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.14.4.201 with SMTP id 49mr3498722eej.0.1350676191598; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:49:51 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.14.218.135 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <508159AA.4080809@mnt.se>
References: <CA3B67220D628A4780D6FEB31F18A3E32379CB76@xmb-rcd-x08.cisco.com> <50766F04.6090901@gmx.net> <507691DB.1050204@mnt.se> <50802113.4040805@cisco.com> <5080FA48.40603@mnt.se> <97295FA4-5F5F-4E1B-BFF1-D5740BE93478@gmx.net> <98D0FB76-3CD2-4651-A315-9780D71B00A7@mnt.se> <00C069FD01E0324C9FFCADF539701DB32EBE9D72@ex2k10mb2.corp.yaanatech.com> <508159AA.4080809@mnt.se>
From: Pam Dingle <pdingle@pingidentity.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:49:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CANBMvsD63J4jALe6ULKREtzTZfdoebEXnvNUpQ=boJuUeqw6Fw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7b66f1cd9b58d104cc6ece03"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmuKVUOk40xxpR6l2dMp5UH3Is4ZrCq8KC9ecpx9DggghmJl1a7hU9tZwElqtm1NxWevK1i41T3urC0HKx517O0IAv8PLhZgk2RSFmk8vHlrF0iRr/hywTqnn0CxwpqjWY5sdn0
Cc: scim@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [scim] Proposal to create a design team
X-BeenThere: scim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 19:49:57 -0000

As someone who tracks this WG solely through the mailing list, I am
confused. In going through the mailing list archives, I do not see a
documented set of conversations that would directly lead me to the
conclusion that this working group as a whole has perceived that
significant changes must be made prior to a 2.0 SCIM release. It seems like
these decisions were made on a conference call, but I don't see any notes
from that conference call, assuming the call happened recently.

Could somebody just catch us up and start a new thread with a brief summary
of what exact non-trivial work has been identified as necessary prior to a
2.0 release?

My apologies if this is crystal clear to everybody else.

Thanks,

Pamela


On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 6:46 AM, Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/19/2012 03:11 PM, Michael Hammer wrote:
> > Leif,
> >
> > If you knew Hannes, you would know how funny that question sounds.
> > I don't think I know anyone more prolific.
>
> Me and Hannes know each other well :-)
>
> The question however was not made in jest. Knowing just how much
> time Hannes spends I'm curious about his ability to spend more.
>
>         Cheers Leif
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlCBWakACgkQ8Jx8FtbMZnfH+QCguS6aqfRqgTattU3q1cmXUwH1
> LEQAn0DVwLCOQqN5Js5q8MnrRkACz5pG
> =lNAp
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> scim mailing list
> scim@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim
>



-- 
*Pamela Dingle*  |  Sr. Technical Architect
*Ping**Identity*  |   www.pingidentity.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- -
*O:* 303-999-5890   *M:* 303-999-5890
*Email:* pdingle@pingidentity.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- -
*Connect with Ping*
Twitter: @pingidentity
LinkedIn Group: Ping's Identity Cloud
Facebook.com/pingidentitypage
*Connect with me*
Twitter: @pamelarosiedee

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email