Hi Vindula, On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Vindula Jayawardana < [email protected]> 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-core/src/main/java/org/wso2/charon3/core/objects/User.java [2] https://github.com/wso2/charon/blob/master/modules/charon-core/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 well. > Could you able to run SCIM 1.1 compliance test if you mock /Schemas endpoint ? This task also important to get an understanding about compliance test. > > 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 29 May 2017 at 10:50, Gayan Gunawardana <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> 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/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 : [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#a >>>>>>> nchor6 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *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/@vindulajay >>>>>>>>>>> awardana/scim-make-it-fast-cheap-and-easy-b2bd56492c15#.ec1k >>>>>>>>>>> ncbde >>>>>>>>>>> [2] - https://medium.com/@vindulajay >>>>>>>>>>> awardana/5-things-that-will-not-be-a-nightmare-anymore-if-yo >>>>>>>>>>> u-support-scim-9353d73836a7#.ihcm9aqub >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 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 >> > > -- 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
