On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 1:21 AM, Vindula Jayawardana < [email protected]> 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/ > 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 : [email protected] > > <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 <[email protected]> > 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 : [email protected] >> >> <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 <[email protected]> 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 < >>> [email protected]> 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 : [email protected] >>>> >>>> <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 < >>>> [email protected]> 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 Jayawardana* >>>>> Computer Science and Engineering Dept. >>>>> University of Moratuwa >>>>> mobile : +713462554 >>>>> Email : [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> <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 < >>>>> [email protected]> 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 : [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> <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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>>>>>> 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&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=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 < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> 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#.i >>>>>>>>> hcm9aqub >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> *Vindula Jayawardana* >>>>>>>>> Computer Science and Engineering Dept. >>>>>>>>> University of Moratuwa >>>>>>>>> mobile : +713462554 >>>>>>>>> Email : [email protected] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> <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: [email protected] >>>>>>>> Mobile: +94 (71) 8020933 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Omindu Rathnaweera >>>>>>> Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc. >>>>>>> Mobile: +94 771 197 211 <+94%2077%20119%207211> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Omindu Rathnaweera >>> Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc. >>> Mobile: +94 771 197 211 <+94%2077%20119%207211> >>> >> >> > -- Gayan Gunawardana Senior Software Engineer; WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com/ Email: [email protected] Mobile: +94 (71) 8020933
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
