Re: [scim] /ServiceProviderConfig vs. /ServiceProviderConfigs
Phillip Hunt <phil.hunt@independentid.com> Wed, 26 February 2020 22:05 UTC
Return-Path: <phil.hunt@independentid.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 553583A088C for <scim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:05:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
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: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=independentid-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 tK9wl2qiNkdD for <scim@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:05:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62b.google.com (mail-pl1-x62b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D6583A08C4 for <scim@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:05:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62b.google.com with SMTP id g6so247436plp.6 for <scim@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:05:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=independentid-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=17hT/Et4+P8b2E1IDiBoKlSiiuYydoLjr34GPTXKitc=; b=gv5vEbvbag2v8YzA89Rp8441rz2yi/cOa++sAKjELFILYgla4jY0+m0XVXccMMy68f VixiZPewifNl97tF4K96HMHPosXJT3u9ASApFFGj8Zf1uL3DGFU/3zpEfugxcry7sb6I AqAHWtfffWKiKyk9x0/2WdmjTVfFTPWtJ+QtJnt8ddSBHSGWOZ4A8+EzepAAnT5kkqZe Jastj1HS4ewV8w8ndkkXmBR4Ua+Fu6qgcGMRRFbdeh0VbcEOAwmgJmwH6fhC2yr8O3k+ rAE1u4nUkIcnxTi2OWqFVLzQRumnB1JUDNcca0IaIuiDrrQoINK1xe9jZwyNBZWJccSK EipQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=17hT/Et4+P8b2E1IDiBoKlSiiuYydoLjr34GPTXKitc=; b=Eahb6F8/GyeNmlTm87p/lpweluI4HoIrstMGupLp9T6gP8BN9jatYzadFrBHW4mgTw mVZtMxSWMWB8tnaf2NeWsfR0EjQ7tZewvohb44jROvHtC7xQIRxSLkCBYf1k1aKlQGWe gz872pgE0N8bjggF57EtelvPEYXJbvHqIKGijfoaPGcqDZNKtSh9GFBPlcImWHvk5i8g Cye9CD5HZwPMTelTyRjZM5mCjKJH6E9x9duunww0q895W2uVwVb6UJsTdKK+1P2j4twi vdYVqCT3j9ceUJZs/CLAstdimUjrgCJa45+TvQ2V3lHx0fpNstmwN5dT4E5roilXLicd DRiQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWe5RCV1h/++R/u/O+Wcm9mD+mG9bK48BTJoXAZMgRKemWALBIh gAcl/uUY0w5TYC67iaT58KuLKonXdK0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwIBh1PU7Vi9MTalqjmBMIHfyrFvmwnTyj2BFz4oQdM+3J4YLrygLuMAyahziNMzRvniaR57Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:a386:: with SMTP id x6mr133103pjp.108.1582754707345; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:05:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2605:8d80:441:4e54:3dda:693a:9c22:e79? ([2605:8d80:441:4e54:3dda:693a:9c22:e79]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m16sm4043424pfh.60.2020.02.26.14.05.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:05:06 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-7EE7D9D8-C89B-47EB-A092-E7BEBEED5D84"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Phillip Hunt <phil.hunt@independentid.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 15:05:05 -0700
Message-Id: <24BBC17A-4013-4DF7-987F-C73C4AB52A46@independentid.com>
References: <CAGUsYPzdDh3Lhmtz-bN+=GYoesX8+NO2jcs72vZNE_5T3AjGzg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: scim@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <CAGUsYPzdDh3Lhmtz-bN+=GYoesX8+NO2jcs72vZNE_5T3AjGzg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shelley <randomshelley@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17C54)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/scim/h7jRG8LzM4xVubJLyWVzXQRYR3k>
Subject: Re: [scim] /ServiceProviderConfig vs. /ServiceProviderConfigs
X-BeenThere: scim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 22:05:17 -0000
I would have to check. But it is singular because it is not a container but a resource. Phil > On Feb 26, 2020, at 10:31 AM, Shelley <randomshelley@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I just wanted to get some confirmation regarding the service provider configuration endpoint in SCIM 2.0. > > My understanding from the RFCs [1] and some past discussions (e.g. [3]) is that the endpoint is intended to be /ServiceProviderConfig (singular) in SCIM 2.0, despite that it was /ServiceProviderConfigs (plural) in SCIM 1.1. > > However, there are some errata that state the SCIM 2.0 RFC documents are incorrect and actually should use the plural form [3,4]. I'm assuming these are just erroneous errata? > > [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7644#section-4 > [2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/scim/8DlmxC-2Ju-VqYCHZwXK2Z6O_90/ > [3] https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid4979 > [4] https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid4978 > _______________________________________________ > scim mailing list > scim@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim