Re: [Architecture] tenant specific MQTT receivers in DAS , not listening to topics once tenant get unloaded

2017-03-19 Thread Sinthuja Ragendran
Hi, As the receiver configurations are deployable artefacts, those will be active when the tenant is loaded. One approach is to have all tenants loaded indefinitely. I think this will have high memory. And therefore we internally discussed below approach to handling this problem. Instead of

[Architecture] tenant specific MQTT receivers in DAS , not listening to topics once tenant get unloaded

2017-03-19 Thread Jasintha Dasanayake
HI All When DAS working in tenant mode and a particular tenant has MQTT receivers, those cannot be activated once tenants get unloaded. For an example , if I restart the DAS then those tenants specific MQTT receivers are not loaded unless we explicitly load that particular tenant. IMO, expected

Re: [Architecture] [APIM] [MSF4J] Reason for creating separate micro service for each path defined swagger

2017-03-19 Thread Thusitha Thilina Dayaratne
> > In the beginning, the Application class was used for fatjar mode. I'm not > sure if we can do the same in osgi mode. As Bathiya mentioned, MicroserviceRunner is only for the standalone mode(fatjar mode). In OSGi mode, all the Microservices must implement Microservice interface in order to get

Re: [Architecture] [C5][IS 6.0.0] Password History Validation

2017-03-19 Thread Sagara Gunathunga
On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Gayan Gunawardana wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Sagara Gunathunga > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Gayan Gunawardana >> wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> We are in the process of

Re: [Architecture] How to identifying a self sign-up request

2017-03-19 Thread Sagara Gunathunga
On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Johann Nallathamby wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 4:41 AM, Omindu Rathnaweera > wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Sagara Gunathunga >> wrote: >> >>> >>> - Personally I don't like to

Re: [Architecture] [PET] SNMP Connector

2017-03-19 Thread Vivekananthan Sivanayagam
Hi , SNMP Connector is released and published in the store[1]. @Thulasika, Thank you very much for helping to initiate the connector implementation and provide the related guidelines. [1] https://store.wso2.com/store/assets/esbconnector/details/95dd3803-9abb-47c0-a0e9-c3393485b0e3 Thanks,

Re: [Architecture] [C5][IS 6.0.0] User List UI for IS 6.0.0

2017-03-19 Thread Nuwandi Wickramasinghe
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:32 AM, Omindu Rathnaweera wrote: > > >> I think the right approach would be to keep the items selected from >> previous pages. A bulk deletion with just one (or two including the >> confirmation) click(s) will be much better user experience than doing

Re: [Architecture] [C5][IS 6.0.0] User List UI for IS 6.0.0

2017-03-19 Thread Omindu Rathnaweera
> I think the right approach would be to keep the items selected from > previous pages. A bulk deletion with just one (or two including the > confirmation) click(s) will be much better user experience than doing it > page wise. Also if we are going to clear the selection of one page once > s/he

Re: [Architecture] [IS 6.0.0][admin-portal]User Onboarding with different options

2017-03-19 Thread Omindu Rathnaweera
> > This logic is in UserManager implementation in SCIM2 implementation. That > is an extension point. So one can implement passing parameters to > IdentityStore by extending UserManager implementation. I can't remember > exact APIs, but ideally it should be possible to pass parameters values >

Re: [Architecture] How to identifying a self sign-up request

2017-03-19 Thread Johann Nallathamby
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 4:41 AM, Omindu Rathnaweera wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Sagara Gunathunga > wrote: > >> >> - Personally I don't like to duplicate self sign-up or any other feature >> in two different places but I agree with the given

Re: [Architecture] [C5][IS 6.0.0] User List UI for IS 6.0.0

2017-03-19 Thread Nuwandi Wickramasinghe
On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Gayan Gunawardana wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 2:13 AM, Omindu Rathnaweera > wrote: > >> Hi Nuwandi, >> >> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Nuwandi Wickramasinghe < >> nuwan...@wso2.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> We

Re: [Architecture] [C5][IS 6.0.0] User List UI for IS 6.0.0

2017-03-19 Thread Gayan Gunawardana
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 2:13 AM, Omindu Rathnaweera wrote: > Hi Nuwandi, > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Nuwandi Wickramasinghe < > nuwan...@wso2.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> We are in the process of implementing User List view in the Admin Portal >> for the new IS 6.0.0

Re: [Architecture] [C5][IS 6.0.0] Add and Update Group UI for IS 6.0.0

2017-03-19 Thread Gayan Gunawardana
When we say Add/Edit group showing 'General' tab and 'Users' tab some what acceptable because obviously they belong to Group entity. Having 'Roles' tab under Add/Edit group may confuse end users, if they do not know C5 permission model. IMO it should reflect the idea of permission than just

Re: [Architecture] [IS 6.0.0][admin-portal]User Onboarding with different options

2017-03-19 Thread Johann Nallathamby
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Omindu Rathnaweera wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Indunil Upeksha Rathnayake < > indu...@wso2.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Omindu Rathnaweera >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 14,

Re: [Architecture] Define Username Claim in Domain Level

2017-03-19 Thread Gayan Gunawardana
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 6:50 AM, Thanuja Jayasinghe wrote: > Hi Nuwandi, > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Nuwandi Wickramasinghe > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Thanuja Jayasinghe >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Gayan, >>>