Re: [scim] Issue#25 consensus call

Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se> Thu, 11 April 2013 16:19 UTC

Return-Path: <leifj@mnt.se>
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 44AC221F91BC for <scim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:19:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.045
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.045 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.311, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BP6E8udO1-a9 for <scim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:19:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-la0-x22c.google.com (mail-la0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C77521F8D00 for <scim@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:19:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-la0-f44.google.com with SMTP id fr10so1671980lab.17 for <scim@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:19:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=HFosFFtLWmWUQ2qXUGQ0srMDqfiyq5XJsCQan0BtVHI=; b=OfrfefgxIUyfEYMDDKxP7cvFbGAIDxBht2vsfLDi6UPPQbypiO6RPEtANohdYMLGqg 0+3DfvJO2O/4N1Ww5Drp4mNASkW4VF2UTYsZPyyxsrLa9R2fwWGrdJQ2ABRW6cPJB5m/ lLJrvQ9bd521DYlo+sCusuJ75X4Nvm7BAalZphmzOeSmrmYsLMWoH6cBlM6NuYAkGzsj 1Ej28mLHRGq8KtuDVWcm5CmzT/zleI9RxgJ85HVttvRWzf53xXmhS9KFAw+kL0+Qwuf+ ceo+7KCEbcBJV3nim9DTVAxRR8gevAr2dQeEv7ZoEqHeaPJquIssBsyQY3gDReT1LbDr oBhg==
X-Received: by 10.152.111.67 with SMTP id ig3mr3546919lab.41.1365697183216; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:19:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.244] (tb62-102-145-131.cust.teknikbyran.com. [62.102.145.131]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id xx3sm1946004lbb.14.2013.04.11.09.19.41 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:19:42 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5166E29B.5010804@mnt.se>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:19:39 +0200
From: Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130308 Thunderbird/17.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Kelly Grizzle <kelly.grizzle@sailpoint.com>
References: <5165AEC0.5000008@mnt.se> <56C3C758F9D6534CA3778EAA1E0C34375C3CE9D3@BLUPRD0412MB643.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <56C3C758F9D6534CA3778EAA1E0C34375C3CE9D3@BLUPRD0412MB643.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlglHNaiXhFOuZsVkPmm5YgNEYxz8UkC1cCaodP/3ob1AicVONbQtE71+7IhSF/ELs7BqCI
Cc: scim WG <scim@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [scim] Issue#25 consensus call
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: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 16:19:45 -0000

On 04/11/2013 06:08 PM, Kelly Grizzle wrote:
> I agree with everything in the proposal except for one thing:
>
>   Queries MAY be performed against a SCIM:
>   <list>
>     <t>Resource (e.g. /Users/{userid}),</t>
>     <t>Resource Type endpoint (e.g. /Users or /Groups), or</t>
>     <t>Server Root (e.g. /).</t>
>   </list>
>
> IMO querying against the server root should be optional and that SP's should declare support in ServiceProviderConfig.  For directory-backed datastores, this will be easy to support.  However, if the SP is using a relational database backed datastore, this could be difficult to implement in a way that scales.
I suggest you update the ticket so that the proposal is clear - I
believe this was
already covered in Orlando though.
>
> --Kelly
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: scim-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:scim-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Leif Johansson
> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 1:26 PM
> To: scim WG
> Subject: [scim] Issue#25 consensus call
>
>
> Folks,
>
> At Orlando we polled the room and there was clear consensus for closing
> 25 as suggested in the issue tracker.
>
> This email serves as a confirmation for that consensus call - speak up now if you disagree.
>
>         Leif & Morteza
> _______________________________________________
> scim mailing list
> scim@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim
>
>