Re: [Dev] SCIM 2.0 as default in IS 5.4.0
Hi, +1 for this as the global adoption of SCIM 2.0 is right on the track as Ishara has mentioned. Thanks *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* On 11 September 2017 at 19:10, Darshana Gunawardana <darsh...@wso2.com> wrote: > One aspect is that we don't have a SCIM 2.0 outbound provisioning > connector available. So IS to IS provisioning will not be smooth until we > get the outbound provisioning connector ready. > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Pulasthi Mahawithana <pulast...@wso2.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Shall we make $subject instead of SCIM 1.1? Any known issues on having it >> as default? Users who are migrating from older versions will still have >> SCIM 1.1 configs and won't be affected as they would keep the old configs. >> >> >> -- >> *Pulasthi Mahawithana* >> Senior Software Engineer >> WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com/ >> Mobile: +94-71-5179022 <+94%2071%20517%209022> >> Blog: https://medium.com/@pulasthi7/ >> >> <https://wso2.com/signature> >> > > > > -- > Regards, > > > *Darshana Gunawardana*Technical Lead > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com > > *E-mail: darsh...@wso2.com <darsh...@wso2.com>* > *Mobile: +94718566859 <+94%2071%20856%206859>*Lean . Enterprise . > Middleware > > ___ > Dev mailing list > Dev@wso2.org > http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev > > ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] [IS] [SCIM] Why Can't We Enable Both SCIM1 and SCIM2 at the Same Time?
Hi, IMO, should be able to enable both at the same time. What is the issue you faced when enabling both? Achieving interoperability between 1.1 consumers and 2.0 providers can have two practical approaches. One approach is to have a multi-protocol ability in the SCIM service provider’s end. This could be potentially done through unique URL structure (https://localhost:9443/wso2/scim/Users and https://localhost:9443/scim2/Users). That means the provider can accept both 1.1 and 2.0 consumers. On the other hand, SCIM consumer can be modified to support the 1.1 and 2.0 protocols. However, since SCIM specifications are focusing on keeping things simple and easy at the consumer end, I would rather suggest the first approach. That’s why we should be able to enable both the protocols at the same time. *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* On 30 August 2017 at 18:33, Sathya Bandara <sat...@wso2.com> wrote: > Hi Thilina, > > If we enable both SCIM1 and SCIM2 listeners at the same time two different > SCIM IDs will be generated for the same user when adding a new user through > SCIM. Also both SCIM1 and SCIM2 claims are mapped to the same LDAP user > attributes. Even though both listeners get triggered only the SCIM1 ID is > mapped to the user ID attribute. But the SCIM2 user creation response will > contain the SCIM ID generated by SCIM2 listener. > > Thanks, > Sathya > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Thilina Madumal <thilina...@wso2.com> > wrote: > >> >> Hi all, >> >> While I was trying to fix IDENTITY-6315 >> <https://wso2.org/jira/browse/IDENTITY-6315> I got to know that we can't >> enable both SCIM1 and SCIM2 at the same time in WSO2 Identity Server. >> Is it because of this specific issue or is there any other reasons? >> >> Thanks & Regards, >> Thilina. >> >> -- >> *Thilina Madumal* >> *Software Engineer | **WSO2* >> Email: thilina...@wso2.com >> Mobile: *+ <+94%2077%20767%201807>94 774553167* >> Web: <http://goog_716986954>http://wso2.com >> >> <http://wso2.com/signature> >> >> > > > -- > Sathya Bandara > Software Engineer > WSO2 Inc. http://wso2.com > Mobile: (+94) 715 360 421 <+94%2071%20411%205032> > > <+94%2071%20411%205032> > > ___ > Dev mailing list > Dev@wso2.org > http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev > > ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
[Dev] [GSoC] SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite
Hi All, I submitted the completed project and thanks a lot for reviewing and merging the PR [1]. Please find below the final related links for the SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite. - Github repo: scim2-compliance-test-suite [2] - Blog on the project: SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite — GSoC 2017 with WSO2 [3] - Screencast of the test suite: SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite Demo [4] - Project readme [5] [1]: https://github.com/wso2-incubator/scim2-compliance-test-suite/pull/1 [2]: https://github.com/wso2-incubator/scim2-compliance-test-suite [3]: https://medium.com/@vindulajayawardana/scim-2-0-compliance-test-suite-737fd4ace3cc [4]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJ53x_8oAWg=youtu.be [5]: https://github.com/wso2-incubator/scim2-compliance-test-suite/blob/master/README.md Please let me know if there is anything that needs to be done by my end. Thank you, *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] [GSoC 2017][IS] SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite
Hi, As I demonstrated at the demo held today, I have been able to complete a milestone of the project as per the timeline. As decided at the meeting, I sent a PR[1] to the scim2-compliance-test-suite repo. Please review and merge. As I explained at the meeting, the current implementation[1] covers approximately 75% of compliance test suite. A brief overview of the implemented tests is as follows. 1. All tests for /Users Endpoint 2. All tests for /Groups Endpoint 3. /ServiceproviderConfig Endpoint 4. /ResourceType Endpoint Following are yet to be developed. 1. /Bulk Endpoint Since the project can accommodate additional features with the time remaining, as Darshana pointed out, I will also be working on the following value adding feature as well. 1. Ability to run custom test cases Thank you [1] : https://github.com/wso2-incubator/scim2-compliance-test-suite/pull/1 *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindul...@gmail.com <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* On 10 July 2017 at 20:27, Omindu Rathnaweera <omi...@wso2.com> wrote: > Hi VIndula, > > You can use https://github.com/wso2-incubator/scim2-compliance-test-suite > for your development. Please send a PR with the current code. > > Regards, > Omindu. > > On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 11:52 PM, Omindu Rathnaweera <omi...@wso2.com> > wrote: > >> Scheduled the meeting on 28th Wednesday at 3.00 pm. Hope you've got the >> request. >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 11:17 PM, Vindula Jayawardana < >> vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Yes I can do a demo on the current implementation. How about the June >>> 28th Wednesday at 3.00 pm ? >>> >>> Please find the following details to test the /ServiceProviderConfig >>> endpoint. >>> >>> 1. Start the IS instance locally. >>> 2. Deploy the scimproxycompliance.war >>> 3. On the UI, select Compliance Test 2.0 tab >>> 4. Enter the IS SCIM base url as : https://localhost:9443 >>> >>> I have tested with mocked IS 5.3.0 instance with SCIM 2.0 support. >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> *Vindula Jayawardana* >>> Computer Science and Engineering Dept. >>> University of Moratuwa >>> mobile : +713462554 >>> Email : vindul...@gmail.com >>> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> >>> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> >>> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> >>> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> >>> >>> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. >>> "* >>> >>> >>> *-Richard Branson-* >>> >>> >>> >>> On 26 June 2017 at 10:42, Omindu Rathnaweera <omi...@wso2.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Vindula, >>>> >>>> Would it possible for you to arrange the demo within the evaluation >>>> time period (26th - 30th)? Also please share the instructions to try out >>>> the 'ServiceProviderConfig' test. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Omindu. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Vindula Jayawardana < >>>> vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I was able to implement /ServiceProviderConfig endpoint compliance >>>>> test as an end to end test [1]. >>>>> >>>>> As discussed I used feign JAX-RS client. I did not directly use >>>>> Charon core objects [1][2] in REST client due to json encoding and >>>>> decoding problem as mentioned by Gayan in the previous mail. Hence >>>>> I implemented separate object object models for this purpose. >>>>> >>>>> I am hoping to arrange a demo of the currently implemented test and >>>>> also it will be better if I can get your opinions on verifying the >>>>> architecture of the current implementation. Shall we have a quick demo >>>>> session on Thursday (22nd) ? >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://github.com/Vindulamj/SCIM-2.0-Complience-Test-Suite >>>>> [2] https://github.com/wso2/charon/blob/master/modules/ch
[Dev] SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite HTTP client
Hi, As I mentioned in the proposal, the intended http client for the project is Feign client [1]. However, it was experienced that using the feign as the http client makes the implementation process more lagging due to following reasons. 1. The documentation support for the client is not that sufficient (less documentation/blogs). 2. As the compliance test exploits most of the http features, the current feign implementation has caused addition efforts to be made to accommodate the necessary requirements(eg: extension schema based operations). Due to the above reasons and since the project is deadline sensitive, I think it would be much more flexible to use apache http client [2] as the http client for the project. This change can be accommodated without much of effort and also as the client is an established client, the mentioned difficulties will be mitigated. What do you think? [1] - https://github.com/OpenFeign/feign [2] - https://hc.apache.org/ Thank you, *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindul...@gmail.com <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] [GSoC][SCIM] SCIM 2.0 Test Dependencies
Hi Johann, > >> In SCIM 2.0 compliance test suite, there are inter dependencies between >> tests. For an example, >> >> We have identified /Schemas endpoint as a critical test which tests the >> schemas corresponding to user and group resources according to SCIM >> specification. However in a case where a SCIM service provider has >> customized the schemas according to their own requirements, this test will >> be failed. As the test suite uses the /Schemas endpoint to learn about the >> service providers schema definitions (consider the case where there is a >> user schema extension defined by the service provider), if the /Schemas >> endpoint fails, the test suite will be terminated immediately as the test >> suite cannot learn the configurations. However we can also make it not to >> terminate but to get adjusted to the service provider's configs after just >> failing the /Schemas endpoint test only. With that, the service provider >> will be able to run the remaining tests on the altered schemas without >> being blocked due to test dependency. But it should also be noted that, >> this approach can cause the test suite to not to adhere to the >> specification, but to adjust itself dynamically after a proper indication >> of the reason for the adjustment. >> >> Hence, as identified in the above example, there are two possible options >> in a test dependency situation. >> >> 1. Terminate >> 2. Adjust accordingly and continue the suite but fails only the parent >> test. >> >> What is the best way of handling this?. Any thoughts on this is highly >> appreciated. >> > > I would say just terminate. Why would you need to customize the core user > schema when there is the possibility of defining an extended user schema. > No one asked you to stick to any of the attributes coming from the core > schema right? > Yes, you have a good point on this. Assuming user schema can be done in the way you have specified, still there can be a problem when it comes to group schema since it does not have an extension defined. However due to the less number of attributes associated with the group schema and their nature of it, I would say, it is very likely that service providers will not be altering the group schema most of the cases. Hence putting an effort on the second option could be redundant. So I agree with the termination based on your reasoning. > > >> >> Thank you >> *Vindula Jayawardana* >> Computer Science and Engineering Dept. >> University of Moratuwa >> mobile : +713462554 >> Email : vindul...@gmail.com >> >> <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> >> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> >> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> >> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> >> >> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* >> >> >> *-Richard Branson-* >> >> >> > > > -- > Thanks & Regards, > > *Johann Dilantha Nallathamby* > Senior Technical Lead - WSO2 Identity Server > Governance Technologies Team > WSO2, Inc. > lean.enterprise.middleware > > Mobile - *+9476950* > Blog - *http://nallaa.wordpress.com <http://nallaa.wordpress.com>* > ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] [GSoC][SCIM] SCIM 2.0 Test Dependencies
Hi Gayan, > >> In SCIM 2.0 compliance test suite, there are inter dependencies between >> tests. For an example, >> >> We have identified /Schemas endpoint as a critical test which tests the >> schemas corresponding to user and group resources according to SCIM >> specification. However in a case where a SCIM service provider has >> customized the schemas according to their own requirements, this test will >> be failed. As the test suite uses the /Schemas endpoint to learn about the >> service providers schema definitions (consider the case where there is a >> user schema extension defined by the service provider), if the /Schemas >> endpoint fails, the test suite will be terminated immediately as the test >> suite cannot learn the configurations. However we can also make it not to >> terminate but to get adjusted to the service provider's configs after just >> failing the /Schemas endpoint test only. With that, the service provider >> will be able to run the remaining tests on the altered schemas without >> being blocked due to test dependency. But it should also be noted that, >> this approach can cause the test suite to not to adhere to the >> specification, but to adjust itself dynamically after a proper indication >> of the reason for the adjustment. >> >> Hence, as identified in the above example, there are two possible options >> in a test dependency situation. >> >> 1. Terminate >> 2. Adjust accordingly and continue the suite but fails only the parent >> test. >> >> What is the best way of handling this?. Any thoughts on this is highly >> appreciated. >> > Thanks for bringing this question. SCIM 2.0 is an open standard for > identity provisioning. Advantage of open standard is if two parties follow > a common standard/specifications integration should be seamless. Idea of > compliance test is to make sure given software product is adhere to > particular specification hence I am +1 to terminate the test. > Agree with you. What was the approach for SCIM 1.1 ? > SCIM 1.1 terminates in such a situation as well. > > >> Thank you >> *Vindula Jayawardana* >> Computer Science and Engineering Dept. >> University of Moratuwa >> mobile : +713462554 >> Email : vindul...@gmail.com >> >> <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> >> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> >> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> >> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> >> >> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* >> >> >> *-Richard Branson-* >> >> >> > > > -- > Gayan Gunawardana > Senior Software Engineer; WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com/ > Email: ga...@wso2.com > Mobile: +94 (71) 8020933 > ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
[Dev] [GSoC][SCIM] SCIM 2.0 Test Dependencies
Hi, In SCIM 2.0 compliance test suite, there are inter dependencies between tests. For an example, We have identified /Schemas endpoint as a critical test which tests the schemas corresponding to user and group resources according to SCIM specification. However in a case where a SCIM service provider has customized the schemas according to their own requirements, this test will be failed. As the test suite uses the /Schemas endpoint to learn about the service providers schema definitions (consider the case where there is a user schema extension defined by the service provider), if the /Schemas endpoint fails, the test suite will be terminated immediately as the test suite cannot learn the configurations. However we can also make it not to terminate but to get adjusted to the service provider's configs after just failing the /Schemas endpoint test only. With that, the service provider will be able to run the remaining tests on the altered schemas without being blocked due to test dependency. But it should also be noted that, this approach can cause the test suite to not to adhere to the specification, but to adjust itself dynamically after a proper indication of the reason for the adjustment. Hence, as identified in the above example, there are two possible options in a test dependency situation. 1. Terminate 2. Adjust accordingly and continue the suite but fails only the parent test. What is the best way of handling this?. Any thoughts on this is highly appreciated. Thank you *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindul...@gmail.com <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] [GSoC 2017][IS] SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite
Hi, Yes I can do a demo on the current implementation. How about the June 28th Wednesday at 3.00 pm ? Please find the following details to test the /ServiceProviderConfig endpoint. 1. Start the IS instance locally. 2. Deploy the scimproxycompliance.war 3. On the UI, select Compliance Test 2.0 tab 4. Enter the IS SCIM base url as : https://localhost:9443 I have tested with mocked IS 5.3.0 instance with SCIM 2.0 support. Thank you. *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindul...@gmail.com <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* On 26 June 2017 at 10:42, Omindu Rathnaweera <omi...@wso2.com> wrote: > Hi Vindula, > > Would it possible for you to arrange the demo within the evaluation time > period (26th - 30th)? Also please share the instructions to try out the ' > ServiceProviderConfig' test. > > Thanks, > Omindu. > > On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Vindula Jayawardana < > vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I was able to implement /ServiceProviderConfig endpoint compliance test >> as an end to end test [1]. >> >> As discussed I used feign JAX-RS client. I did not directly use Charon >> core objects [1][2] in REST client due to json encoding and decoding >> problem as mentioned by Gayan in the previous mail. Hence I implemented >> separate object object models for this purpose. >> >> I am hoping to arrange a demo of the currently implemented test and also >> it will be better if I can get your opinions on verifying the >> architecture of the current implementation. Shall we have a quick demo >> session on Thursday (22nd) ? >> >> [1] https://github.com/Vindulamj/SCIM-2.0-Complience-Test-Suite >> [2] https://github.com/wso2/charon/blob/master/modules/charo >> n-core/src/main/java/org/wso2/charon3/core/objects/User.java >> [3] https://github.com/wso2/charon/blob/master/modules/charo >> n-core/src/main/java/org/wso2/charon3/core/objects/Group.java >> >> Thank you. >> >> *Vindula Jayawardana* >> Computer Science and Engineering Dept. >> University of Moratuwa >> mobile : +713462554 >> Email : vindul...@gmail.com >> >> <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> >> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> >> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> >> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> >> >> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* >> >> >> *-Richard Branson-* >> >> >> >> On 11 June 2017 at 19:02, Gayan Gunawardana <ga...@wso2.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Vindula, >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Vindula Jayawardana < >>> vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Kindly find the weekly update below. >>>> >>>> Within the week time span, I have been working on the webapp component >>>> proposed in the system architecture. In parallel, I also looked in to >>>> implementing scimcore component as well. In implementing the scimcore >>>> component, as we discussed in the previous mails, I used the Charon code >>>> (which relates to scheme specifications only) as a base code. >>>> >>> You suppose to use feign JAX-RS client right ? Can you directly use >>> charon core objects [1][2] in REST client or did you implement your own >>> object model ? I guess you may find json encoding and decoding problem with >>> charon core standard objects. >>> >>> [1] https://github.com/wso2/charon/blob/master/modules/charon-co >>> re/src/main/java/org/wso2/charon3/core/objects/User.java >>> [2] https://github.com/wso2/charon/blob/master/modules/charon-co >>> re/src/main/java/org/wso2/charon3/core/objects/Group.java >>> >>>> >>>> In this week, I am planning on look into the scimcore component more >>>> with adhering to schema specification. Also I did not mock the SCIM 1.1 >>>> /Schemas endpoint in IS yet since it is not that urgent at the moment (it >>>> is helpful in understanding the protocol specification). Hence I will look >>>> into mock that as well since now I can work with protocol specification as >&g
Re: [Dev] [GSoC 2017][IS] SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite
Hi, Kindly find the weekly update below. Within the week time span, I have been working on the webapp component proposed in the system architecture. In parallel, I also looked in to implementing scimcore component as well. In implementing the scimcore component, as we discussed in the previous mails, I used the Charon code (which relates to scheme specifications only) as a base code. In this week, I am planning on look into the scimcore component more with adhering to schema specification. Also I did not mock the SCIM 1.1 /Schemas endpoint in IS yet since it is not that urgent at the moment (it is helpful in understanding the protocol specification). Hence I will look into mock that as well since now I can work with protocol specification as well. Thank you. *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindul...@gmail.com <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* On 29 May 2017 at 10:50, Gayan Gunawardana <ga...@wso2.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 1:21 AM, Vindula Jayawardana < > vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I have been working on understanding more on the current SCIM 1.1 test >> suite. Hence I further analyzed it and identified the following >> possibilities. >> > +1 > >> >> 1. Apart from the specification specific implementation aspects, a >> significant amount of code reuse can be done from the current code base. >> However as per the SCIM mailing list [1] some concerns were raised >> regarding the current structure of the implementation. >> 2. For the proposed scim core component, we can make use of the Charon >> [2] code base as a start. >> >> As Identity Server currently supports SCIM 2.0 in the C5 architecture >> only, I have added a PR [3] and a jira [4] to make it available for C4 >> architecture as well. Greatly appreciate if you can review it and merge. >> > We will review [3],[4] btw can you continue the work with IS 6.0.0 in C5 ? > I guess for compliance test it won't make much difference. > >> >> I am currently working in the webapp of the component architecture >> proposed and hoping to start implementing the scimcore component in the >> coming week. Apart from that, will look into mocking the /Schemas endpoint >> in the SCIM 1.1 implementation of Identity Server to get a better >> understanding on how the SCIM 1.1 test suite works with IS. >> > Great progress Vindula keep it up. > >> >> [1] - https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/scim/JYFpusDrtQ94hnghv >> EPjczU4laE >> [2] - https://github.com/wso2/charon >> [3] - https://github.com/wso2-extensions/identity-inbound-provis >> ioning-scim2/pull/16 >> [4] - https://wso2.org/jira/projects/IDENTITY/issues/IDENTITY-5942 >> >> Thank you >> >> *Vindula Jayawardana* >> Computer Science and Engineering Dept. >> University of Moratuwa >> mobile : +713462554 >> Email : vindul...@gmail.com >> >> <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> >> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> >> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> >> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> >> >> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* >> >> >> *-Richard Branson-* >> >> >> >> On 2 April 2017 at 18:29, Vindula Jayawardana <vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Omindu, >>> >>> Thank you for the prompt feedback on the draft proposal. I incorporated >>> the suggestions you made on the proposal. >>> >>> As also mentioned in the proposal, I made the configuration options >>> more flexible by giving the manual configuration feasibility to the tester >>> as an optional feature apart from what is mandatory in the project. I hope >>> that would give us the required flexibility in the SCIM 2.0 compliance test >>> suite in terms of configuration options. >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> *Vindula Jayawardana* >>> Computer Science and Engineering Dept. >>> University of Moratuwa >>> mobile : +713462554 >>> Email : vindul...@gmail.com >>> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> >>> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jay
Re: [Dev] [GSoC 2017][IS] SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite
Hi, I have been working on understanding more on the current SCIM 1.1 test suite. Hence I further analyzed it and identified the following possibilities. 1. Apart from the specification specific implementation aspects, a significant amount of code reuse can be done from the current code base. However as per the SCIM mailing list [1] some concerns were raised regarding the current structure of the implementation. 2. For the proposed scim core component, we can make use of the Charon [2] code base as a start. As Identity Server currently supports SCIM 2.0 in the C5 architecture only, I have added a PR [3] and a jira [4] to make it available for C4 architecture as well. Greatly appreciate if you can review it and merge. I am currently working in the webapp of the component architecture proposed and hoping to start implementing the scimcore component in the coming week. Apart from that, will look into mocking the /Schemas endpoint in the SCIM 1.1 implementation of Identity Server to get a better understanding on how the SCIM 1.1 test suite works with IS. [1] - https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/scim/JYFpusDrtQ94hnghvEPjczU4laE [2] - https://github.com/wso2/charon [3] - https://github.com/wso2-extensions/identity-inbound-provisioning-scim2/pull/16 [4] - https://wso2.org/jira/projects/IDENTITY/issues/IDENTITY-5942 Thank you *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindul...@gmail.com <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* On 2 April 2017 at 18:29, Vindula Jayawardana <vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote: > Hi Omindu, > > Thank you for the prompt feedback on the draft proposal. I incorporated > the suggestions you made on the proposal. > > As also mentioned in the proposal, I made the configuration options more > flexible by giving the manual configuration feasibility to the tester as an > optional feature apart from what is mandatory in the project. I hope that > would give us the required flexibility in the SCIM 2.0 compliance test > suite in terms of configuration options. > > Thank you, > > *Vindula Jayawardana* > Computer Science and Engineering Dept. > University of Moratuwa > mobile : +713462554 > Email : vindul...@gmail.com > > <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> > <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> > <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> > <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> > > *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* > > > *-Richard Branson-* > > > > On 2 April 2017 at 17:08, Omindu Rathnaweera <omi...@wso2.com> wrote: > >> Will have a look Vindula. >> >> Thanks for putting an effort on running the 1.1 test. The intention >> behind it was to get a general idea on what to include in the 2.0 test >> suite and the areas to be improved. What you have obtained should be enough >> to understand the nature of the tests and basics information to be >> captured. I agree on the fact that the configuration options should be more >> flexible. Let's capture this in the project proposal if you haven't already. >> >> Regards, >> Omindu. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Vindula Jayawardana < >> vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I shared my draft proposal in GSoC dashboard and I kindly request your >>> feedback in improving the proposal. >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> *Vindula Jayawardana* >>> Computer Science and Engineering Dept. >>> University of Moratuwa >>> mobile : +713462554 >>> Email : vindul...@gmail.com >>> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> >>> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> >>> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> >>> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> >>> >>> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. >>> "* >>> >>> >>> *-Richard Branson-* >>> >>> >>> >>> On 30 March 2017 at 23:13, Vindula Jayawardana <vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> As mentioned above, I looked at the SCIM 1.1 compliance test suite >>
Re: [Dev] [GSoC 2017][IS] SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite
Hi Omindu, Thank you for the prompt feedback on the draft proposal. I incorporated the suggestions you made on the proposal. As also mentioned in the proposal, I made the configuration options more flexible by giving the manual configuration feasibility to the tester as an optional feature apart from what is mandatory in the project. I hope that would give us the required flexibility in the SCIM 2.0 compliance test suite in terms of configuration options. Thank you, *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindul...@gmail.com <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* On 2 April 2017 at 17:08, Omindu Rathnaweera <omi...@wso2.com> wrote: > Will have a look Vindula. > > Thanks for putting an effort on running the 1.1 test. The intention behind > it was to get a general idea on what to include in the 2.0 test suite and > the areas to be improved. What you have obtained should be enough to > understand the nature of the tests and basics information to be captured. I > agree on the fact that the configuration options should be more flexible. > Let's capture this in the project proposal if you haven't already. > > Regards, > Omindu. > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Vindula Jayawardana < > vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I shared my draft proposal in GSoC dashboard and I kindly request your >> feedback in improving the proposal. >> >> Thank you, >> >> *Vindula Jayawardana* >> Computer Science and Engineering Dept. >> University of Moratuwa >> mobile : +713462554 >> Email : vindul...@gmail.com >> >> <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> >> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> >> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> >> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> >> >> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* >> >> >> *-Richard Branson-* >> >> >> >> On 30 March 2017 at 23:13, Vindula Jayawardana <vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> As mentioned above, I looked at the SCIM 1.1 compliance test suite [1]. >>> Due to the reason that the SCIM 1.1 test suite requires an internet facing >>> SCIM 1.1 server to run the tests against, I setup-ed an Identity Server >>> instance in AWS [2]. However when the test are run, it fails due to >>> /ServiceProviderConfigs and /Schemas endpoints. As WSO2 SCIM 1.1 support >>> [3] is not covering the mentioned two endpoints, tests are failing when >>> run. >>> >>> However in order to get an idea on how the result representation had >>> been done in SCIM 1.1 compliance test suit, I mocked the >>> /ServiceProviderConfigs endpoint [4] and was able to get the >>> following output. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Due to the complexity of mocking the /Schemas endpoint and also as the >>> test on one endpoint ( /ServiceProviderConfigs) could give the nature >>> of the result representation as seen above, I did not try to mock /Schemas >>> endpoint and run the test suit again. However I tried by mocking the >>> endpoint with 501 NOT IMPLEMENTED [5] as the output, but that was not >>> accepted by the test suit as a valid return object. >>> >>> However, in my opinion, the SCIM test suit should be flexible in nature >>> to skip any test which was given the input from the SCIM server as 501 NOT >>> IMPLEMENTED [5]. I encourage such kind of implementation to be adopted in >>> the proposed SCIM 2.0 compliance test suit as in that way the test suit >>> acknowledges the SP's inability to provide those endpoints while making >>> sure such kind of inability does not compromise the ability to run the test >>> suit on other endpoints. >>> >>> [1] - http://www.simplecloud.info/#complianceTest >>> [2] - https://aws.amazon.com/ >>> [3] - https://github.com/wso2/charon/tree/release-2.0.7 >>> [4] - https://github.com/Vindulamj/mocked-identity-inbound-provi >>> sioning-scim/tree/master/identity-inbound-provisioning-scim-master >>> [5] - http://www.simplecloud.info/specs/draft-scim-api-01.html#anchor6 >>> >>> *Vindula
Re: [Dev] [GSoC 2017][IS] SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite
Hi, I shared my draft proposal in GSoC dashboard and I kindly request your feedback in improving the proposal. Thank you, *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindul...@gmail.com <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* On 30 March 2017 at 23:13, Vindula Jayawardana <vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote: > Hi, > > As mentioned above, I looked at the SCIM 1.1 compliance test suite [1]. > Due to the reason that the SCIM 1.1 test suite requires an internet facing > SCIM 1.1 server to run the tests against, I setup-ed an Identity Server > instance in AWS [2]. However when the test are run, it fails due to > /ServiceProviderConfigs and /Schemas endpoints. As WSO2 SCIM 1.1 support > [3] is not covering the mentioned two endpoints, tests are failing when > run. > > However in order to get an idea on how the result representation had been > done in SCIM 1.1 compliance test suit, I mocked the /ServiceProviderConfigs > endpoint [4] and was able to get the following output. > > > > > Due to the complexity of mocking the /Schemas endpoint and also as the > test on one endpoint ( /ServiceProviderConfigs) could give the nature of > the result representation as seen above, I did not try to mock /Schemas > endpoint and run the test suit again. However I tried by mocking the > endpoint with 501 NOT IMPLEMENTED [5] as the output, but that was not > accepted by the test suit as a valid return object. > > However, in my opinion, the SCIM test suit should be flexible in nature to > skip any test which was given the input from the SCIM server as 501 NOT > IMPLEMENTED [5]. I encourage such kind of implementation to be adopted in > the proposed SCIM 2.0 compliance test suit as in that way the test suit > acknowledges the SP's inability to provide those endpoints while making > sure such kind of inability does not compromise the ability to run the test > suit on other endpoints. > > [1] - http://www.simplecloud.info/#complianceTest > [2] - https://aws.amazon.com/ > [3] - https://github.com/wso2/charon/tree/release-2.0.7 > [4] - https://github.com/Vindulamj/mocked-identity- > inbound-provisioning-scim/tree/master/identity-inbound- > provisioning-scim-master > [5] - http://www.simplecloud.info/specs/draft-scim-api-01.html#anchor6 > > *Vindula Jayawardana* > Computer Science and Engineering Dept. > University of Moratuwa > mobile : +713462554 > Email : vindul...@gmail.com > > <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> > <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> > <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> > <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> > > *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* > > > *-Richard Branson-* > > > > On 10 March 2017 at 16:42, Vindula Jayawardana <vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Thank you very much for the prompt replies. I will look into the points >> you have mentioned and will keep you updated here. >> >> Thank you. >> >> *Vindula Jayawardana* >> Computer Science and Engineering Dept. >> University of Moratuwa >> mobile : +713462554 >> Email : vindul...@gmail.com >> >> <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> >> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> >> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> >> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> >> >> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* >> >> >> *-Richard Branson-* >> >> >> >> On 9 March 2017 at 21:22, Omindu Rathnaweera <omi...@wso2.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Vindula, >>> >>> If we can run the existing 1.1 test on IS and see the generated output, >>> that will be a good point to start. However we'll need to host an IS >>> instance publicly to run the tests on it. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Omindu. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 8:52 PM, Gayan Gunawardana <ga...@wso2.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Vindula, >>>> >>>> Thanks for your interest in this project. >>>> Since you have good knowledge about SCIM 2.0 specifications, could you >>>> please look at SCI
Re: [Dev] [GSoC 2017][IS] SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite
Hi, As mentioned above, I looked at the SCIM 1.1 compliance test suite [1]. Due to the reason that the SCIM 1.1 test suite requires an internet facing SCIM 1.1 server to run the tests against, I setup-ed an Identity Server instance in AWS [2]. However when the test are run, it fails due to /ServiceProviderConfigs and /Schemas endpoints. As WSO2 SCIM 1.1 support [3] is not covering the mentioned two endpoints, tests are failing when run. However in order to get an idea on how the result representation had been done in SCIM 1.1 compliance test suit, I mocked the /ServiceProviderConfigs endpoint [4] and was able to get the following output. Due to the complexity of mocking the /Schemas endpoint and also as the test on one endpoint ( /ServiceProviderConfigs) could give the nature of the result representation as seen above, I did not try to mock /Schemas endpoint and run the test suit again. However I tried by mocking the endpoint with 501 NOT IMPLEMENTED [5] as the output, but that was not accepted by the test suit as a valid return object. However, in my opinion, the SCIM test suit should be flexible in nature to skip any test which was given the input from the SCIM server as 501 NOT IMPLEMENTED [5]. I encourage such kind of implementation to be adopted in the proposed SCIM 2.0 compliance test suit as in that way the test suit acknowledges the SP's inability to provide those endpoints while making sure such kind of inability does not compromise the ability to run the test suit on other endpoints. [1] - http://www.simplecloud.info/#complianceTest [2] - https://aws.amazon.com/ [3] - https://github.com/wso2/charon/tree/release-2.0.7 [4] - https://github.com/Vindulamj/mocked-identity-inbound-provisioning-scim/tree/master/identity-inbound-provisioning-scim-master [5] - http://www.simplecloud.info/specs/draft-scim-api-01.html#anchor6 *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindul...@gmail.com <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* On 10 March 2017 at 16:42, Vindula Jayawardana <vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote: > Hi, > > Thank you very much for the prompt replies. I will look into the points > you have mentioned and will keep you updated here. > > Thank you. > > *Vindula Jayawardana* > Computer Science and Engineering Dept. > University of Moratuwa > mobile : +713462554 > Email : vindul...@gmail.com > > <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> > <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> > <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> > <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> > > *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* > > > *-Richard Branson-* > > > > On 9 March 2017 at 21:22, Omindu Rathnaweera <omi...@wso2.com> wrote: > >> Hi Vindula, >> >> If we can run the existing 1.1 test on IS and see the generated output, >> that will be a good point to start. However we'll need to host an IS >> instance publicly to run the tests on it. >> >> Regards, >> Omindu. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 8:52 PM, Gayan Gunawardana <ga...@wso2.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Vindula, >>> >>> Thanks for your interest in this project. >>> Since you have good knowledge about SCIM 2.0 specifications, could you >>> please look at SCIM 1.1 compliance test and source code [1]. SCIM 2.0 >>> compliance test doesn't need to be same as SCIM 1.1 just get an idea from >>> SCIM 1.1 compliance test. Further you can extract test scenarios from [2] >>> as well. >>> >>> [1]https://github.com/erdtman/simplecloud.info >>> <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ferdtman%2Fsimplecloud.info=D=1=AFQjCNGycfiBxzWbdCVjpGlABAw9OXxGaQ> >>> [2]https://github.com/wso2-extensions/identity-inbound-provi >>> sioning-scim2/tree/master/tests >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Gayan >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Vindula Jayawardana < >>> vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I am Vindula Jayawardana, a final year undergraduate of Computer >>>> Science and Engineering Department of University of Moratuwa. I am >>>> interested in applying for the "Proposal 21: [IS] SCIM 2.0 compliance >>>> test suite" which you have offered for the GSoC project idea
Re: [Dev] [GSoC 2017][IS] SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite
Hi, Thank you very much for the prompt replies. I will look into the points you have mentioned and will keep you updated here. Thank you. *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindul...@gmail.com <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* On 9 March 2017 at 21:22, Omindu Rathnaweera <omi...@wso2.com> wrote: > Hi Vindula, > > If we can run the existing 1.1 test on IS and see the generated output, > that will be a good point to start. However we'll need to host an IS > instance publicly to run the tests on it. > > Regards, > Omindu. > > > > On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 8:52 PM, Gayan Gunawardana <ga...@wso2.com> wrote: > >> Hi Vindula, >> >> Thanks for your interest in this project. >> Since you have good knowledge about SCIM 2.0 specifications, could you >> please look at SCIM 1.1 compliance test and source code [1]. SCIM 2.0 >> compliance test doesn't need to be same as SCIM 1.1 just get an idea from >> SCIM 1.1 compliance test. Further you can extract test scenarios from [2] >> as well. >> >> [1]https://github.com/erdtman/simplecloud.info >> <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ferdtman%2Fsimplecloud.info=D=1=AFQjCNGycfiBxzWbdCVjpGlABAw9OXxGaQ> >> [2]https://github.com/wso2-extensions/identity-inbound-provi >> sioning-scim2/tree/master/tests >> >> Thanks, >> Gayan >> >> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Vindula Jayawardana < >> vindula...@cse.mrt.ac.lk> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am Vindula Jayawardana, a final year undergraduate of Computer Science >>> and Engineering Department of University of Moratuwa. I am interested in >>> applying for the "Proposal 21: [IS] SCIM 2.0 compliance test suite" >>> which you have offered for the GSoC project idea pool. >>> >>> I have a good understanding on SCIM core and protocol specifications for >>> both SCIM 1.1 and SCIM 2.0. Based on my knowledge I have written few blog >>> posts specifically catering on SCIM [1] and the use cases of SCIM [2]. Also >>> I have tried SCIM 1.1 and 2.0 APIs of wso2 IS. I went though the references >>> provided and would like to know more on the scope of the coverage >>> report and detailed analysis view need to be generated as a deliverable. >>> Could you kindly guide me on the said matter. >>> >>> [1] - https://medium.com/@vindulajayawardana/scim-make-it-fast-che >>> ap-and-easy-b2bd56492c15#.ec1kncbde >>> [2] - https://medium.com/@vindulajayawardana/5-things-that-will-no >>> t-be-a-nightmare-anymore-if-you-support-scim-9353d73836a7#.ihcm9aqub >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> *Vindula Jayawardana* >>> Computer Science and Engineering Dept. >>> University of Moratuwa >>> mobile : +713462554 >>> Email : vindul...@gmail.com >>> >>> <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> >>> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> >>> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> >>> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> >>> >>> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. >>> "* >>> >>> >>> *-Richard Branson-* >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Gayan Gunawardana >> Software Engineer; WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com/ >> Email: ga...@wso2.com >> Mobile: +94 (71) 8020933 >> > > > > -- > Omindu Rathnaweera > Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc. > Mobile: +94 771 197 211 <+94%2077%20119%207211> > ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
[Dev] [GSoC 2017][IS] SCIM 2.0 Compliance Test Suite
Hi, I am Vindula Jayawardana, a final year undergraduate of Computer Science and Engineering Department of University of Moratuwa. I am interested in applying for the "Proposal 21: [IS] SCIM 2.0 compliance test suite" which you have offered for the GSoC project idea pool. I have a good understanding on SCIM core and protocol specifications for both SCIM 1.1 and SCIM 2.0. Based on my knowledge I have written few blog posts specifically catering on SCIM [1] and the use cases of SCIM [2]. Also I have tried SCIM 1.1 and 2.0 APIs of wso2 IS. I went though the references provided and would like to know more on the scope of the coverage report and detailed analysis view need to be generated as a deliverable. Could you kindly guide me on the said matter. [1] - https://medium.com/@vindulajayawardana/scim-make-it-fast-cheap-and-easy-b2bd56492c15#.ec1kncbde [2] - https://medium.com/@vindulajayawardana/5-things-that-will-not-be-a-nightmare-anymore-if-you-support-scim-9353d73836a7#.ihcm9aqub Thank you, *Vindula Jayawardana* Computer Science and Engineering Dept. University of Moratuwa mobile : +713462554 Email : vindul...@gmail.com <https://www.facebook.com/vindula.jayawardana> <http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/vindula-jayawardana/a7/315/53b> <https://plus.google.com/u/0/+VindulaJayawardana/posts> <https://twitter.com/vindulajay> *“Respect is how to treat everyone, not just those you want to impress. "* *-Richard Branson-* ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] [VOTE] Release WSO2 Carbon Kernel 4.4.11 RC1
Built IS 5.3.0 SNAPSHOT and found no issues in identity provisioning. > [x] Stable - Go ahead and release > > -- *Vindula Jayawardana* Trainee Software Engineer Mobile : +94 713 462554 Email : vind...@wso2.com ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] WSO2 Committers += Malintha Fernando
t;> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Chandana Napagoda* >>>>>>>>>>>>> Associate Technical Lead >>>>>>>>>>>>> WSO2 Inc. - http://wso2.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Email : chand...@wso2.com <chand...@wso2.com>**Mobile : >>>>>>>>>>>>> +94718169299 <%2B94718169299>* >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Blog :http://cnapagoda.blogspot.com >>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://cnapagoda.blogspot.com> | http://chandana.napagoda.com >>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://chandana.napagoda.com>* >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Linkedin : http://www.linkedin.com/in/chandananapagoda >>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/chandananapagoda>* >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ___ >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Heshitha Hettihewa >>>>>>>>>>>> *Software Engineer* >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile : +94716866386 >>>>>>>>>>>> <%2B94%20%280%29%20773%20451194> >>>>>>>>>>>> heshit...@wso2.com >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ___ >>>>>>>>>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>>>>>>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Dilshani Subasinghe >>>>>>>>>>> Software Engineer - QA *|* WSO2 >>>>>>>>>>> lean *|* enterprise *|* middleware >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Mobile : +94773375185 >>>>>>>>>>> Blog: dilshani.me >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <https://wso2.com/signature> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ___ >>>>>>>>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>>>>>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Maneesha Wijesekara >>>>>>>>>> Software Engineer - EE Team >>>>>>>>>> WSO2 Inc. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Email: manee...@wso2.com >>>>>>>>>> Linkedin: http://linkedin.com/in/maneeshawijesekara >>>>>>>>>> Mobile: +94712443119 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ___ >>>>>>>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>>>>>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>>>>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Sameera Gunarathne >>>>>>>>> Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc. http://wso2.com >>>>>>>>> <http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwso2.com=gAQEswASa> >>>>>>>>> Email: samee...@wso2.com >>>>>>>>> Mobile: +94714155561 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ___ >>>>>>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>>>>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>>>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ___ >>>>>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>>>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> *Menaka Jayawardena* >>>>>>> *Software Engineer - WSO2 Inc* >>>>>>> *Tel : 071 350 5470/ 071 885 1183* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ___ >>>>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> *Charini Vimansha Nanayakkara* >>>>>> Software Engineer at WSO2 >>>>>> >>>>>> Mobile: 0714126293 >>>>>> E-mail: chari...@wso2.com >>>>>> Blog: http://www.charini.me/ >>>>>> >>>>>> <http://wso2.com/signature> >>>>>> >>>>>> ___ >>>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Lahiru J Ekanayake**Software Engineer* >>>>> Mobile : +9471 8812629 / +94778509547 >>>>> Email : lahi...@wso2.com >>>>> WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com/ >>>>> lean . enterprise . middleware. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ___ >>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Prakhash Sivakumar >>>> Software Engineer | WSO2 Inc >>>> Platform Security Team >>>> Mobile : +94771510080 >>>> Blog : https://medium.com/@PrakhashS >>>> >>>> ___ >>>> Dev mailing list >>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Madhawa Perera >>> *Software Engineer* >>> Mobile : +94 (0) 773655496 >>> <%2B94%20%280%29%20773%20451194> >>> madha...@wso2.com >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Malintha Fernando >> Software Engineer >> WSO2 Inc. | http://wso2.com >> Mobile : +94 718874922 >> Blog : http://blog.malintha.org >> >> Lean . Enterprise . Middleware >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ___ >> Dev mailing list >> Dev@wso2.org >> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >> >> > > > -- > Thank You, > Best Regards, > > Sidath Weerasinghe > > > *Intern* > > *WSO2, Inc. * > > *lean . enterprise . middleware * > > > *Mobile: +94719802550 <%2B94719802550>* > > *Email: *sid...@wso2.com > > Blog: https://medium.com/@sidath > > Linkedin: https://lk.linkedin.com/in/sidathweerasinghe > > ___ > Dev mailing list > Dev@wso2.org > http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev > > -- *Vindula Jayawardana* Trainee Software Engineer Mobile : +94 713 462554 Email : vind...@wso2.com ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
[Dev] Delete operation on /Me endpoint in SCIM 2.0
Hi All, In SCIM /Me endpoint, an authenticated user should be able to delete himself as mentioned in specification [1]. However when I try to do that using the current user core, I get a user store exception saying 'LoggedInUser Cannot delete logged in user'. One way of how I can handle this is , as mentioned in specification itself [2], can respond to HTTP DELETE on /Me endpoint with a HTTP status code 501 as we can not support it. Or else is there any other good way of handling this ? Any thoughts on this is highly appreciated. [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7644#section-3.2 [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7644#section-3.11 -- *Vindula Jayawardana* Trainee Software Engineer Mobile : +94 713 462554 Email : vind...@wso2.com ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] [IS] C5 Support for filtering
Hi Chamila, On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Chamila Wijayarathna < cdwijayarat...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Johann, Vindula, > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Johann Nallathamby <joh...@wso2.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Vindula Jayawardana <vind...@wso2.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> With the current user core implementation we support only the equal >>> filter (e.g. userName Eq "john"). However SCIM 2.0 specification [1] >>> specify total of 10 such simple filters and complex filters which are >>> combinations of simple filters using logical and grouping operators (e.g. >>> userType ne "Employee" and not (emails co "example.com" or emails.value >>> co "example.org")). As we are in the process of C5 implementation, have >>> we considered the other filter type implementations as well? >>> >> >> Yes we need to consider these features in the extended user-core >> implementation. >> >>> >>> Moreover if we are supporting the complex filters, are we supporting it >>> by simple filter by filter basis or the entire complex filter as a whole? >>> If we are looking for the simple filter by filter basis, there will be >>> performance issues as well. >>> >> >> It is better if we provide complex filters from extended user-core itself >> for performance reasons. However if time doesn't permit to implement all >> those APIs, we can have a scim UserManager implementation which will call >> multiple simple filters and combine the result and return. Obviously as you >> said performance of such implementation will be low. But it is acceptable >> as an interim solution until extended user-core implementation supports all >> the filters. >> > Can you please explain, what you refer as complex filters here? I think we > need to implement operators listed in table 3 and 4 in the specification > and implement a generic way to build complex queries reusing them. I don't > think it would be practical to more complex filters, there can be large > amount of complex filters that can be created by combining these simple > filter. Please correct me if I'm wrong. > What I meant by complex filters is exactly what you have mentioned above. Yes we can build large amount of complex filters (complex queries) by combining the simple filters using operators listed in table 3 and 4. > > Also what different would it made when we are handling these filters in > user-core level and when handling using scimUserManager level? Are you > reffering to the fact that when we need "username sw a" , we can retrieve > only the users who have username start with 'a' from database/ldap, so > that we can achieve higher performance? > > In addition to that, I believe it would be good to consider other SCIM > operations such as sorting and pagination at the same time. If we can come > up with a generic design, that would be better. Otherwise, we'll have to > put a huge effort to embed those functionalities again. > Yes agree. We need a generic design which will ease our work in the long run. > > Cheers > -Chamila > >> >>> Any thoughts on the matter is highly appreciated. >>> >>> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7644#section-3.4.2.2 >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> *Vindula Jayawardana* >>> Trainee Software Engineer >>> Mobile : +94 713 462554 >>> vind...@wso2.com >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Thanks & Regards, >> >> *Johann Dilantha Nallathamby* >> Technical Lead & Product Lead of WSO2 Identity Server >> Governance Technologies Team >> WSO2, Inc. >> lean.enterprise.middleware >> >> Mobile - *+9476950* >> Blog - *http://nallaa.wordpress.com <http://nallaa.wordpress.com>* >> >> ___ >> Dev mailing list >> Dev@wso2.org >> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >> >> > > > -- > Chamila Dilshan Wijayarathna, > PhD Research Student > The University of New South Wales (UNSW Canberra) > Australian Centre of Cyber Security > Australian Defence Force Academy > PO Box 7916, Canberra BA ACT 2610 > Australia > Mobile:(+61)416895795 > > -- *Vindula Jayawardana* Trainee Software Engineer Mobile : +94 713 462554 Email : vind...@wso2.com ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
[Dev] [IS] C5 Support for filtering
Hi All, With the current user core implementation we support only the equal filter (e.g. userName Eq "john"). However SCIM 2.0 specification [1] specify total of 10 such simple filters and complex filters which are combinations of simple filters using logical and grouping operators (e.g. userType ne "Employee" and not (emails co "example.com" or emails.value co "example.org")). As we are in the process of C5 implementation, have we considered the other filter type implementations as well? Moreover if we are supporting the complex filters, are we supporting it by simple filter by filter basis or the entire complex filter as a whole? If we are looking for the simple filter by filter basis, there will be performance issues as well. Any thoughts on the matter is highly appreciated. [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7644#section-3.4.2.2 Thank you, *Vindula Jayawardana* Trainee Software Engineer Mobile : +94 713 462554 vind...@wso2.com ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
Re: [Dev] [VOTE] Release WSO2 Identity Server 5.2.0- RC1
>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Kasun Bandara >>>>>>> *Software Engineer* >>>>>>> Mobile : +94 (0) 718 338 360 >>>>>>> <%2B94%20%280%29%20773%20451194> >>>>>>> kas...@wso2.com <thili...@wso2.com> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ___ >>>>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Hasintha Indrajee >>>>>> WSO2, Inc. >>>>>> Mobile:+94 771892453 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ___ >>>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Darshana Gunawardana*Associate Technical Lead >>>>> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com >>>>> >>>>> *E-mail: darsh...@wso2.com <darsh...@wso2.com>* >>>>> *Mobile: +94718566859 <%2B94718566859>*Lean . Enterprise . Middleware >>>>> >>>>> ___ >>>>> Dev mailing list >>>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Kathees >>>> Software Engineer, >>>> email: kath...@wso2.com >>>> mobile: +94772596173 >>>> >>>> ___ >>>> Dev mailing list >>>> Dev@wso2.org >>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> *Malithi Edirisinghe* >>> Associate Technical Lead >>> WSO2 Inc. >>> >>> Mobile : +94 (0) 718176807 >>> malit...@wso2.com >>> >>> ___ >>> Dev mailing list >>> Dev@wso2.org >>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> *Lakshan Gamage* >> Software Engineering Intern, >> WSO2 >> *Tel: +94773472649 <%2B94773472649>* >> >> ___ >> Dev mailing list >> Dev@wso2.org >> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev >> >> > > > -- > *Godwin Amila Shrimal* > Senior Software Engineer > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com > lean.enterprise.middleware > > mobile: *+94772264165* > linkedin: *http://lnkd.in/KUum6D <http://lnkd.in/KUum6D>* > twitter: https://twitter.com/godwinamila > <http://wso2.com/signature> > > ___ > Dev mailing list > Dev@wso2.org > http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev > > -- *Vindula Jayawardana* Trainee Software Engineer Mobile : +94 713 462554 vind...@wso2.com ___ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
