Subject: [scim] Draft charter - v5

From: "Morteza Ansari (moransar)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 03:00:24 -0500

The differences between this and v4 are:

-removal of the third bullet from the out of scope section

-update of initial drafts based on Trey's submission

-added use case draft to the list of docs

Please send any additional comments/feedback.

Cheers,

Morteza

*** charter4.txt               2012-03-14 20:03:09.000000000 -0700

--- charter5.txt  2012-03-22 00:53:41.000000000 -0700

***************

*** 47,54 ****

  identities as part of the work adopted by the working group.  The
group

  will use, as starting points, the following drafts in the following
ways:

!      draft-XXX-scim-schema-00 as the schema specification,

!      draft-XXX-scim-protocol-definition-00 as the protocol
specification,

       draft-XXX-scim-saml-binding-00 for binding the SCIM schema to
SAML, and

       draft-XXX-scim-ldap-binding-00 for binding the SCIM schema to
LDAP.

--- 47,55 ----

  identities as part of the work adopted by the working group.  The
group

  will use, as starting points, the following drafts in the following
ways:

!      draft-scim-use-cases-00 as the initial use cases for SCIM,

!      draft-scim-core-schema-00 as the schema specification,

!      draft-scim-api-00 as the protocol specification,

       draft-XXX-scim-saml-binding-00 for binding the SCIM schema to
SAML, and

       draft-XXX-scim-ldap-binding-00 for binding the SCIM schema to
LDAP.

***************

*** 69,78 ****

  The group considers the following out of scope for this group:

       Defining new authentication schemes

       Defining new policy/authorization schemes

-      Defining how SCIM implementations define and implement
authorization

  Milestones

  5/2012    Initial adoption of SCIM core schema

  5/2012    Initial adoption of SCIM restful interface draft

  5/2012    Initial adoption of SCIM SAML bindings draft

--- 70,79 ----

  The group considers the following out of scope for this group:

       Defining new authentication schemes

       Defining new policy/authorization schemes

  Milestones

+ 5/2012    Initial adoption of SCIM use cases

  5/2012    Initial adoption of SCIM core schema

  5/2012    Initial adoption of SCIM restful interface draft

  5/2012    Initial adoption of SCIM SAML bindings draft

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 09:54:01 -0600

> draft-XXX-scim-ldap-binding-00 for binding the SCIM schema to 

Do we have a strong feeling that these need to be in scope for now? It
seems to me that it would be productive for the working group (if
formed) to finish the core work first, then recharter to work on the
mappings/bindings to LDAP and SAML. It's easy enough for a working
group to recharter, so I'd recommend keeping these deliverables off
the charter for now.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

---

From: "Morteza Ansari (moransar)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 14:38:26 -0500

I did put text in the body of the charter pointing out core specs have higher priority and will be the initial focus of the group, but I am personally OK with removing these and adding them to the charter at a later date.

Thoughts from others in the group?

Cheers,
Morteza

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Saint-Andre [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 8:54 AM
To: Morteza Ansari (moransar)
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [scim] Draft charter - v5

On 3/22/12 2:00 AM, Morteza Ansari (moransar) wrote:

> draft-XXX-scim-saml-binding-00 for binding the SCIM schema to SAML, 
> and
> 
> draft-XXX-scim-ldap-binding-00 for binding the SCIM schema to LDAP.

Do we have a strong feeling that these need to be in scope for now? It seems to me that it would be productive for the working group (if
formed) to finish the core work first, then recharter to work on the mappings/bindings to LDAP and SAML. It's easy enough for a working group to recharter, so I'd recommend keeping these deliverables off the charter for now.

Peter

--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

---

From: Trey Drake <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:10:44 -0500

Agreed.  The mapping/binding specifications are not yet in good shape.

On Mar 22, 2012, at 2:38 PM, Morteza Ansari (moransar) wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> scim mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim