Hi Jo,

On 20 April 2017 at 09:01, Joseph Fonseka <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Lakmali
>
> Small thing, will the portal app subscription be automatic in the store ?
> if so can we make it explicit with a button on top of the swagger console
> with the title  "Try API with swagger console" and bellow that we can
> explain what actually happens.
>

We are creating an app for the admin user here and therefore the
subscription happens for the admin user. Therefore IMO, that information is
not required for the store user.

>
> Also how will the test app affects stats ? If we are not planing to hide
> it better to document that behavior.
>

The admin user will have this test app. I believe its okay for admin to
have this test app shown may be with a special flag.

In overall, we can explain the underlying process here when we document the
options users will have around this.

Thanks,
Lakmali


> Thanks
> Jo
>
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Lakmali Baminiwatta <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We had a discussion regarding this yesterday and please find the
>> summarized points.
>>
>>
>>    - "Testing APIs" is a required feature for Store and Editor portals.
>>    Since we are not restricting API designing only to the editor, but allowed
>>    in publisher too, it is good to have "Testing APIs" feature in Publisher
>>    for a complete story.
>>    - For editor, since the API is published to a local GW, it will not
>>    have any security and therefore testing API will not require any
>>    tokens/subscriptions etc.
>>    - When the API is published from Publisher portal to the GW in
>>    CREATED state for testing, we have to apply standard security/throttling 
>> to
>>    avoid security risks.
>>    - As discussed in this thread as well, we will be using the OAuth app
>>    created for the portals as the test app. However, for supporting prod and
>>    sandbox tokens, we have to register 2 apps.
>>    - We can create the test apps when doing the DCR call.
>>    - When retrieving the swagger definition of the API, we can check the
>>    availability of subscriptions against the test apps and add if not
>>    available.
>>    - Since swagger itself support OAuth, we can rely on it to obtain a
>>    token. For that, we need to inject the test app's credentials to swagger 
>> UI
>>    and KM details needs to be injected to swagger definition.
>>    - We can have a special throttling tier for API testing purpose.
>>    - As the first step, we can implement this for Store and then decide
>>    on adding it to Publisher.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lakmali
>>
>> On 24 March 2017 at 19:08, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Jo,
>>>
>>> The publisher and store are anyway OAuth apps registered in the IDP.
>>> There are registered under the system/admin user. That is done irrespective
>>> of the testing usecase so that those apps can use the OAuth protected Rest
>>> APIs.
>>>
>>> Regarding stats, the stats against the API will show that there are
>>> requests being being from the publisher/store webapps. Which is what
>>> happens in reality. The stats against the application will only be visible
>>> to the system/admin user since the publisher/store webapps belong to him.
>>> So it doesn't confuse the end user (actual App Developer on the Store) like
>>> it does today.
>>>
>>> My thinking is that this testing of the API is mainly for the API
>>> Developers (not publishers) to test the API Implementation code (ballerina
>>> code) they write. Testing OAuth and throttling are just by-products of the
>>> main usecase.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> NuwanD.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Joseph Fonseka <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> @Jo, what's the downside of using the Publisher/Store webapp that
>>>>> you're trying to get rid of by explicitly creating a test app? What's the
>>>>> difference basically?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The main issue I see is that automatic subscription of store and
>>>> publisher app. Once subscribed it will come up in IdP , Stats ( If we
>>>> capture ) which will confuse the end user. The second issue is that
>>>> majority of APIs will be just proxy-ed though GW and you wont be testing
>>>> the BE functionality at this stage so what you would do is more of an
>>>> integration test with OAuth and throttling hence the user should be able to
>>>> utilize all grant types and scopes.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Jo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I see a few negatives in allowing to create test apps from the
>>>>> Publisher.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. The UX is definitely not as good since the user now has to go
>>>>> through additional steps just to test his API.
>>>>> 2. There will be lots of test apps created in the system as opposed to
>>>>> the two webapps.
>>>>> 3. If by any chance the same user visits the Store, we have to find
>>>>> mechanisms to differentiate his test Apps from the Standard Apps so that
>>>>> the test Apps don't appear in Store.
>>>>> 4. If we open up an App creation functionality on the Publisher,
>>>>> chances are that users will misuse this for other purposes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Lakmali Baminiwatta <
>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The objective of providing this feature is making the API
>>>>>> developers/publisher to test and verify before make it available for the
>>>>>> consumers. So how about we provide the ability to deploy it to the 
>>>>>> gateway
>>>>>> without security so that it can be invoked without a token?
>>>>>> Once the test is completed, they can set the security and publish
>>>>>> that to the store/gateway.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Lakmali
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 24 March 2017 at 09:34, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Sanjeewa Malalgoda <
>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 7:12 PM, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Sanjeewa Malalgoda <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Joseph Fonseka <[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess there is a possibility of that  API developer not being
>>>>>>>>>>>> the one who publish / create the API ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, the API Developer may not be the same one who's publishing
>>>>>>>>>>> the it. But what's wrong with him testing the API under development 
>>>>>>>>>>> using a
>>>>>>>>>>> valid token?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If this is valid argument then person who create APIs can consume
>>>>>>>>>> it. If we consider scenario where we develop API and later it 
>>>>>>>>>> published and
>>>>>>>>>> appear in gateways, just because I'm developer will i get chance to 
>>>>>>>>>> use
>>>>>>>>>> this API? I don't think we should allow it. Even if we say we are 
>>>>>>>>>> testing
>>>>>>>>>> what actually happen is someone invoke API and get results.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In API Manager 3.0.0, the API deployment to the Gateway happens
>>>>>>>>> before the Publishing phase actually. It gets deployed on the Gateway 
>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>> soon as its created.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why do we deploy API to gateway by the time we created it? Ideally
>>>>>>>> it should go to topic and notified only after publishing it. I haven't
>>>>>>>> noticed it any of our previous discussions.
>>>>>>>> Did i missed something here?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The cause is the same as before. We want to enable API testing on
>>>>>>> the publisher itself so that API developers can test their API before
>>>>>>> publishing it to the Store. In order to test an API, it should be 
>>>>>>> deployed
>>>>>>> on the Gateway.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> sanjeewa.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If the API developer accessing a published API with a valid token
>>>>>>>>> is a concern, we can automatically remove the publisher webapp's
>>>>>>>>> subscription to the API once the API gets published. This will 
>>>>>>>>> prevent the
>>>>>>>>> API developers and publishers from accessing a published API since 
>>>>>>>>> they no
>>>>>>>>> longer have a valid subscription.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> sanjeewa.
>>>>>>>>>> This can be an edge case, but if you consider an  API designed to
>>>>>>>>>> work with client credentials ie. B2B API, subscription is the 
>>>>>>>>>> authorization
>>>>>>>>>> point for that API if so you don't want the creator or publisher on
>>>>>>>>>> accessing it ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I guess it is fare to ask a user to go though subscription
>>>>>>>>>> process to test the published API without magic. WDYT ?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Well, the point here is that we're trying to provide the
>>>>>>>>>>> facility for the Developer to test the API he's developing before
>>>>>>>>>>> publishing it. Because that's a very valid use case. Asking the 
>>>>>>>>>>> developer
>>>>>>>>>>> to publish the API and subscribe to it in order to be able to 
>>>>>>>>>>> safely test
>>>>>>>>>>> it is not right IMO. The sole reason he wants to test the API first 
>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>> because he's not ready to publish it yet.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks & Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jo
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why is it a concern? Its only the App developers who have the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> subscriber role. Almost all consumers of the API are general 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> users and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hence do not have the subscriber role. So why is it a concern to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> allow the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> person who's developing the API to access it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 23 March 2017 at 13:46, Joseph Fonseka <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Lakmali Baminiwatta <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In publisher shouldn't we invoke the API back-end instead
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of Gateway ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess publisher may need to test the API execution flow
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through gateway. For instance the resource paths, mediation 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logics, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes that make sense, but if we automatically subscribe to a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> published API it will allow a user ( ie user with creator role 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in publisher
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ) who may not have subscription permission to invoke an API. 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That might be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a security concern based on a company policy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, this can be a valid concern.  In that case we can allow
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this only for users with publish permissions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lakmali
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or are we only allowing the test feature in publisher for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specific roles.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lakmali
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMO it would be difficult to explain the mention approach
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to a user than what we have.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks & Regards
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jo
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The proposed solution is to generate an access token with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the UUF app's credentials + special scope. The subscription 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> validation will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be skipped for the tokens in this special scope. For 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementing the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> solution, we have to consider below points.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    - Grant Type - If the client_credentials grant type
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    is used, all the concurrent users accessing the UI app 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will get the same
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    token. In order to do any user level restrictions for 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this token in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    gateway level, we have to use password grant type. One 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> case is visibility
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    restricted API invocations. Also I guess we shouldn't 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allow to invoke API
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    resources protected with scopes if the logged in user is 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not allowed for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    - Scope white listing - This scope has to be white
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    listed, since the API resource is not actually protected 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    - Throttling - Since there is no API subscription,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    special throttle limit has to be applied with some 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minimum quota. One
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    option is to apply the unauthenticated tier limits which 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does a throttling
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    based on the client IP.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    - Token validity and refresh token - If the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    client_credential grant type is used, we can't invalidate 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this test token
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    when a user is logged out since other users might be 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using it already.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    Therefore IMO, we can use password grant type and use the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> similar token
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    refreshing mechanism done for UUF app authentication.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    - Obtaining the access token - In order to get an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    access token, we need the consumer key and secret of the 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UUF app. Currently
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    we do a UUF backend app call only when the user is 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> authenticating or when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    refreshing the token. So here also, I think we can 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generate the test token
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    when the user is authenticated(log in to the UUF app) and 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> store it in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    local storage. I believe its okay to display this access 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> token for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    user.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lakmali
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lakmali Baminiwatta
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Associate Technical Lead
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mobile:  +94 71 2335936
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blog : lakmali.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Joseph Fonseka*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mobile: +94 772 512 430
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skype: jpfonseka
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * <http://lk.linkedin.com/in/rumeshbandara>*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lakmali Baminiwatta
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Associate Technical Lead
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mobile:  +94 71 2335936
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blog : lakmali.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Joseph Fonseka*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mobile: +94 772 512 430
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skype: jpfonseka
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * <http://lk.linkedin.com/in/rumeshbandara>*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lakmali Baminiwatta
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Associate Technical Lead
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mobile:  +94 71 2335936
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blog : lakmali.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>> email : [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> *Joseph Fonseka*
>>>>>>>>>>>> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>>>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> mobile: +94 772 512 430
>>>>>>>>>>>> skype: jpfonseka
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> * <http://lk.linkedin.com/in/rumeshbandara>*
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>>>>> email : [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <077%20777%205729>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *Sanjeewa Malalgoda*
>>>>>>>>>> WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>>>>>> Mobile : +94713068779 <+94%2071%20306%208779>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>blog
>>>>>>>>>> :http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>>>>> <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>>>>>>>> email : [email protected]
>>>>>>>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <077%20777%205729>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Sanjeewa Malalgoda*
>>>>>>>> WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>>>> Mobile : +94713068779 <+94%2071%20306%208779>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>blog
>>>>>>>> :http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>>> <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>>>>>> email : [email protected]
>>>>>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Lakmali Baminiwatta
>>>>>> Associate Technical Lead
>>>>>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>>>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>>>> mobile:  +94 71 2335936
>>>>>> blog : lakmali.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>>>
>>>>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>>>> email : [email protected]
>>>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *Joseph Fonseka*
>>>> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com
>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>>
>>>> mobile: +94 772 512 430
>>>> skype: jpfonseka
>>>>
>>>> * <http://lk.linkedin.com/in/rumeshbandara>*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>
>>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>> email : [email protected]
>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Architecture mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lakmali Baminiwatta
>> Associate Technical Lead
>> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>> mobile:  +94 71 2335936
>> blog : lakmali.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Architecture mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> --
> *Joseph Fonseka*
> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com
> lean.enterprise.middleware
>
> mobile: +94 772 512 430
> skype: jpfonseka
>
> * <http://lk.linkedin.com/in/rumeshbandara>*
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


-- 
Lakmali Baminiwatta
Associate Technical Lead
WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com
lean.enterprise.middleware
mobile:  +94 71 2335936
blog : lakmali.com
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture

Reply via email to