Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

grouper-users - Re: [grouper-users] SCIM support for Grouper?

Subject: Grouper Users - Open Discussion List

List archive

Re: [grouper-users] SCIM support for Grouper?

Chronological Thread 
  • From: Bas Zoetekouw <>
  • To: Emily Eisbruch <>
  • Cc: Tom Barton <>, Niels van Dijk <>, "" <>, Geert van der Ploeg <>, "" <>
  • Subject: Re: [grouper-users] SCIM support for Grouper?
  • Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 10:32:12 +0100
  • Authentication-results:; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
  • Openpgp: id=BFA98DE6

Hi Emily,

I think the first week of April will be fine for all SURFnet-perople
involved (even though april 1st is a national holiday).
A doodle poll would be great!

Best regards,

On 19-03-2013 19:53 , Emily Eisbruch wrote:
> Hi Niels,
> Tom asked me to help set up a call for interested parties to discuss
> Grouper and SCIM.
> Please me know if the first week of April works for you. If yes, I'll
> set up a Doodle poll.
> Thank you
> Emily
> On 3/19/13 9:30 AM, "Tom Barton"
> <>
> wrote:
>> Niels,
>> Sounds good. Can we shoot for sometime the week of April 1 to have a
>> discussion? I'll ask for
>> help in setting that up.
>> Tom
>> On 3/19/2013 6:35 AM, Niels van Dijk wrote:
>>> Hello Tom,
>>> Thanks for your suggestion, it all sound very workable. We would like to
>>> have the overall service available by the end of Q3. However, adding
>>> SCIM to Grouper is only part of that equation, so its probably going to
>>> be several months earlier that we would like to pick this up.
>>> We have until now been very happy grouper users where we could mostly
>>> consider Grouper as a well working black box. We have used the APIs and
>>> hardly ever had to deal with 'inner workings' of Grouper.
>>> For us the biggest issue is therefor that we do not have a very clear
>>> picture of the amount work involved to add such an API to Grouper. Also
>>> the best route the take is not clear. We have a rough idea of the work
>>> needed to do a Java based SCIM interface as we partially implemented
>>> that already for the pilots we did earlier. Another post to my question
>>> by David Langenberg indicated that they are currently investigating
>>> exacly this, so perhaps we could set up a session between David, e.g.
>>> your and/or Chris and some of our team to get a better understanding of
>>> what we would need to do?
>>> Regards,
>>> Niels
>>> On 03/18/2013 11:06 PM, Tom Barton wrote:
>>>> Hi Niels,
>>>> As I think you know we try to prioritize our work in alignment with
>>>> community needs. In particular, we've tried to add new capabilities in
>>>> concert with a partner that shows up with a real use case and
>>>> resources to commit to help us be sure that we build something that
>>>> actually works for their use case. We are currently partnering with
>>>> CMU to iron out some performance issues with PSP, also providing the
>>>> newest member of our development team with a great opportunity to get
>>>> familiar with its internals. One approach is to engage with you on
>>>> SCIM as the CMU engagement winds down. Do you have an idea of the time
>>>> frame within which you might be able to partner with us on this?
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Tom
>>>> On 3/18/2013 11:36 AM, Niels van Dijk wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> I was wondering if Grouper roadmap has SCIM on it.
>>>>> We have a use case where we are using SCIM to provision group info to
>>>>> a
>>>>> cloud provisioning broker who then provisions various other clouds
>>>>> services via none-standard APIs. Until now this was mostly test cases
>>>>> (SCIM functionality outside of Grouper), now we would like to look at
>>>>> doing this for 'real'.
>>>>> As our groups already live in Grouper, and Grouper already has
>>>>> capabilities e.g. to determine the difference between group
>>>>> memberships
>>>>> between date A and date B, this seems like a good fit, I think.
>>>>> I note that last years I2 Spring Meeting had some discussions [1] and
>>>>> in
>>>>> 2011 a MACE-Dir discussion [2] addressed a lot of issues that by now
>>>>> have been solved I think. Neither however have a clear direction for
>>>>> SCIM in regards to Grouper.
>>>>> If it is on the roadmap, are there any timeliness? If not, what ways
>>>>> would there be to accelerate this? We have coding capabilities, but
>>>>> coding an entire new API out of the blue is probably not a good idea
>>>>> ;)
>>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Niels
>>>>> [1]
>>>>> ng+23-Apr-2012
>>>>> [2]
>>>>> l

Bas Zoetekouw
SURFnet Advanced Services
Tel: +31 30 2305362 Fax: +31 30 2305329
SURFnet - POBox 19035 - NL-3501 DA Utrecht - The Netherlands

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page