Re: [scim] [EXTERNAL] Re: Feedback and adoption readiness for draft-zollner-scim-roles-entitlements-extension

This caught my eye because Chad mentioned Apache SCIMple, so I took a quick
pass at hacking up what this would look like in SCIMple.

That generated a few questions, forgive me if these were already covered
somewhere else:

1. The Role and Entitlement schemas look identical, except for minor
changes in the descriptions.  Should both these new resources make use of a
common schema?
2. Section 4.1 calls out a ServiceProviderConfig Extension.  I didn't see
anything in rfc7643 on how this would work.  Would this be a new 3rd schema
that is added to the ServiceProviderConfig response? Or is this
mechanism defined somewhere else?
3. Each Role/Entitlement can have an id, value, display, and type.
  a. What is the difference between `type` and `value`?
  b. While I probably agree `display` _should_ be unique to the "server",
is this an actual requirement?  I could potentially see attributes "value"
and "display" being mapped to some implementation's "name" and
"description" (respectively), where "description" _may_ not have a unique
requirement.
4. nit: the schema names should use a singular form of the nouns (to be
consistent with the Core Schemas),
i.e. urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:2.0:Entitlement
and urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:2.0:Role
 - Potentially starting with `urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:extension:` to
use similar naming pattern as the EnterpriseUser schema (though this
doesn't seem required rfc7643 section 10)

Thanks!
-Brian

On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 5:32 PM Danny Zollner <Danny.Zollner=
40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> Hi Chad,
>
>
>
> I recall receiving this same feedback previously and in the next version
> of the draft (perhaps the first new version post-adoption?) language will
> be added to explicitly call out the use of common attributes. If I were to
> split hairs here, I’d argue that even without the draft explicitly calling
> them out, the text in 7643 3.1 states that those attributes are required to
> exist on all resource types including new extensions like the ones in this
> draft. It is a mistake to not explicitly call out the correct usage of
> those attributes in this draft, though, so it will be fixed.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> *Danny Zollner* (He/Him)
>
> *From:* scim <scim-bounces@ietf.org> *On Behalf Of * Chad Vincent
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 3, 2022 4:09 PM
> *To:* scim@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: [scim] Feedback and adoption readiness for
> draft-zollner-scim-roles-entitlements-extension
>
>
>
> Some people who received this message don't often get email from
> chad.vincent@crashplan.com. Learn why this is important
> <https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
>
> I love this - we use roles currently and having a more formal spec and
> ability for the client to read what's available could come in very handy in
> the future.  So mark me down as a 5.
>
>
>
> However, these resources not including the common attributes set mandated
> by RFC 7643 section 3.1 should be explained/clarified in the RFC.  The
> Apache SCIMple library will have to handle these resources as special-cases
> since they won't have the required "id" field, for example.  That seems
> major enough to justify a paragraph.
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Nancy Cam-Winget (ncamwing)" <ncamwing@cisco.com>
> To: SCIM WG <scim@ietf.org>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 23:40:10 +0000
> Subject: [scim] Feedback and adoption readiness for
> draft-zollner-scim-roles-entitlements-extension
>
> Hello SCIMers,
>
>
>
> We need feedback on to gauge support and adoption readiness of:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zollner-scim-roles-entitlements-extension/ <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-zollner-scim-roles-entitlements-extension%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cdanny.zollner%40microsoft.com%7Ca11aede3fdb54846b08b08dabddfa397%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638031065521821498%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=rh2rD2ai4JphkRpxltG1sVgpXPy5ZuOs8xr4FSmvAl0%3D&reserved=0>
>
> Please respond to this thread on the following:
>
>
>
>
>
>   1.  You have read the draft and believe it is ready to be adopted by the working group. Any other feedback on the content of the draft is welcomed too.
>
>   2.  You are willing to be an active contributor or reviewer of the document
>
>   4.  You support the draft and plan to implement
>
>   5.  You support the draft but have no time or plans to implement now, but can provide feedback
>
>   6.  You have no interest in the draft
>
>
>
> Please provide your feedback by November 28th.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>    Nancy
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Paul Lanzi <paul@remediant.com>
> To: SCIM WG <scim@ietf.org>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 16:50:26 -0700
> Subject: Re: [scim] Feedback and adoption readiness for
> draft-zollner-scim-roles-entitlements-extension
>
> #4 for me.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Paul
>
> ᐧ
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2022 at 4:40 PM Nancy Cam-Winget (ncamwing) <ncamwing=
> 40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>
> Hello SCIMers,
>
>
>
> We need feedback on to gauge support and adoption readiness of:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zollner-scim-roles-entitlements-extension/ <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-zollner-scim-roles-entitlements-extension%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cdanny.zollner%40microsoft.com%7Ca11aede3fdb54846b08b08dabddfa397%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638031065521821498%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=rh2rD2ai4JphkRpxltG1sVgpXPy5ZuOs8xr4FSmvAl0%3D&reserved=0>
>
> Please respond to this thread on the following:
>
>
>
>
>
>   1.  You have read the draft and believe it is ready to be adopted by the working group. Any other feedback on the content of the draft is welcomed too.
>
>   2.  You are willing to be an active contributor or reviewer of the document
>
>   4.  You support the draft and plan to implement
>
>   5.  You support the draft but have no time or plans to implement now, but can provide feedback
>
>   6.  You have no interest in the draft
>
>
>
> Please provide your feedback by November 28th.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>    Nancy
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> scim mailing list
> scim@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fscim&data=05%7C01%7Cdanny.zollner%40microsoft.com%7Ca11aede3fdb54846b08b08dabddfa397%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638031065521821498%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=4otD1jdaBdQwRKUTMXObgdBmvi%2Fb2dAOQ3n7Zr1HkA0%3D&reserved=0>
>
> _______________________________________________
> scim mailing list
> scim@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fscim&data=05%7C01%7Cdanny.zollner%40microsoft.com%7Ca11aede3fdb54846b08b08dabddfa397%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638031065521821498%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=4otD1jdaBdQwRKUTMXObgdBmvi%2Fb2dAOQ3n7Zr1HkA0%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Chad Vincent (he/him) | Software Engineer, Senior - CrashPlan
>
> chad.vincent@crashplan.com
>
> 400 S 4th St Suite 410 PMB 31083 Minneapolis, MN 55415-1419
>
>
>
>
> <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcrashplan.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cdanny.zollner%40microsoft.com%7Ca11aede3fdb54846b08b08dabddfa397%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638031065521821498%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=5WxnnaHSXPH1DLp87goymJj9%2Flo%2BxVQlUsCUw%2FNJK2s%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> scim mailing list
> scim@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim
>