On 03/07/2014 04:39 PM, Marco Di Sabatino Di Diodoro wrote:
Hi all,

Il giorno 03/feb/2014, alle ore 11:41, Francesco Chicchiriccò
<ilgro...@apache.org <mailto:ilgro...@apache.org>> ha scritto:

On 31/01/2014 18:57, Dmitri Pal wrote:
On 01/31/2014 08:17 AM, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote:
Are you saying that we should split our development in two:

(1) smart proxy, exposing the RESTful interface, developed on the
basis of [8]

(2) actual ConnId connector, dealing with the proxy above for
implementing its own logic

If so, could you please point to the source code of [8]?
Will then this eventually become part of FreeIPA?
Quite soon. I would leave it to the team to suggest whether user and
host provisioning smart proxies should be a same smart proxy or
different so that they can be installed independently from each other
but use the same approach. IMO haveing them separately but share the
same code and approach will be more valuable to the project. But I am
open to other ideas here.

I am actually not sure if it is "lightweight" connector could actually
be better than a "loaded" connector (e.g. without proxy), from a
deployment point of view, unless you are saying either that (a) a
smart proxy is already available that can be reused
The idea can be reused as a starting point. IMO the easiest would be to
look at the patches and use same machinery but implement different

or that (b) incorporating the smart proxy that we are going to develop
into FreeIPA will easily happen.
If done right: i.e. following process and style then yes.

Please become familiar with the coding style [9] page on the wiki and
other contributer guidelines [10].
Also having a design page created as a result of the preliminary
investigation would go a long way towards acceptance and quality of the

We will gladly guide you on the way if you have specific questions


Ok then, we'll do it as follows.

We are currently experimenting with FreeIPA, to get familiar with
technology and options; once we will be confident enough to start the
actual work on the connector, we will check the status of the smart
proxy patches from [11].

If the implementation status will be close to be ready and about to be
included in the official distribution, we will follow the suggestions
above and develop a REST-based connector.

We start to implementing a FreeIPA ConnId connector for Apache Syncope.
We have to implement all identity operations defined by the ConnId
I would like to know the implementation status of the Smart/Proxy and if
we can use it to all the identity operations.

I'm reviewing the Foreman Smart proxy patches now. They're not in the FreeIPA repository yet. However the remaining issues were with packaging, code organization, naming.

The Smart Proxy is now specific to Foreman provisioning; it is not a full REST interface so it will probably not support all operations you need.

For a full REST interface, patches are welcome but the core FreeIPA team has other priorities at the moment. The RFE ticket is here: https://fedorahosted.org/freeipa/ticket/4168.

Otherwise, we will instead specialize the CMD connector [12] to
feature the FreeIPA command-line interface (as suggested at the
beginning of this thread). There will be potentially need, in this
case, to include the ConnId connector server into the Syncope
deployment architecture, but this is a supported pattern.

Have you looked at JSON-RPC interface mentioned earlier in this thread, and [6]? It might be cleaner to use that than the command-line interface.

[1] http://syncope.apache.org/
[2] http://tirasa.github.io/ConnId/
[3] http://java.net/projects/identityconnectors/
[4] https://github.com/Tirasa/ConnIdFreeIPABundle
[6] https://www.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-users/2013-January/msg00109.html
[7] http://www.freeipa.org/page/Documentation
[8] http://www.freeipa.org/page/V3/Smart_Proxy


Freeipa-devel mailing list

Reply via email to