Skip to main content

SET Token Delivery Using HTTP
draft-hunt-secevent-distribution-01

Document Type Replaced Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Phil Hunt , Marius Scurtescu
Last updated 2017-03-09
Replaced by draft-ietf-secevent-delivery, draft-hunt-secevent-stream-mgmt
RFC stream (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-hunt-secevent-distribution-01
Network Working Group                                       P. Hunt, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                    Oracle
Intended status: Standards Track                            M. Scurtescu
Expires: September 9, 2017                                        Google
                                                           March 8, 2017

                     SET Token Delivery Using HTTP
                  draft-hunt-secevent-distribution-01

Abstract

   This specification defines how a series of security event tokens
   (SETs) may be delivered to a previously registered receiver using
   HTTP over TLS.  The specification defines the metadata the an Event
   Transmitter uses to describe the Event Receiver's HTTP endpoint and
   the SET token delivery configuration.  The specification defines how
   the Event Receiver may check the current configuration metadata and
   delivery status using HTTP GET over TLS.  The specification also
   defines how delivery can be assured subject to the SET Token
   Receiver's need for assurance.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 9, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction and Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Notational Conventions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.2.  Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  Control Plane - Monitoring  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.1.  Event Stream Configuration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.2.  Event Stream State Model  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     2.3.  Checking Stream Configuration and Stream State  . . . . .  11
   3.  Data Plane  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     3.1.  Event Delivery Process  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     3.2.  Event Stream State  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     3.3.  HTTP POST Delivery  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     3.4.  Event Stream Verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   4.  Control Plane - Management and Provisioning . . . . . . . . .  20
     4.1.  Event Stream Resource Type Definition . . . . . . . . . .  20
     4.2.  Creating A New Event Stream . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22
     4.3.  Updating An Event Stream  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  25
     6.1.  SCIM Schema Registration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  27
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  27
   Appendix B.  Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  28

1.  Introduction and Overview

   This specification defines how a stream of SETs (see
   [I-D.ietf-secevent-token]) can be transmitted to a previously
   registered Event Receiver using HTTP POST [RFC7231] over TLS.  The
   specification defines the metadata the Event Transmitter uses to
   describe the Event Receiver's HTTP endpoint and the SET token
   delivery configuration.  The specification defines how the Event
   Receiver may check the current configuration metadata and delivery
   status using HTTP GET over TLS.  The specification also defines how
   delivery can be assured subject to the SET Token Receiver's need for
   assurance.

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017               [Page 2]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   The following diagram shows a typical SET Event Stream.  A stream
   consists of a pair of HTTP endpoints, one for the event stream
   transmitter and one for the receiver.  The receiver endpoint is used
   by the transmitter to deliver SET events via HTTPS POST and is known
   as the "Data Plane".  The transmitter's HTTP endpoint is used by the
   receiver to perform HTTPS GET requests to check the stream status and
   is known as the "Control Plane".  In the diagram, the arrow heads
   point to the service provider (the direction of an HTTP request):

             +-----------+ Data Plane            +----------+
             |Transmitter+------HTTP POST--------> Receiver |
             |           <------HTTP GET---------+          |
             +-----------+         Control Plane +----------+

                        Figure 1: SET Event Stream

   In some service provider relationships, for example between Identity
   Providers and Relying Parties, there may be a need to have bi-
   directional SET event exchange.  This involves establishing a second
   event stream that works with transmitter and receiver roles reversed.

              Identity                             Relying
              Provider                             Party

                             IDP to RP Stream

            +-----------+ Data Plane            +------------+
            |Transmitter+-----------------------> Receiver   |
            |           <-----------------------+            |
            +-----------+         Control Plane +------------+

                             RP to IDP Stream

            +-----------+ Data Plane            +------------+
            | Receiver  <-----------------------+ Transmitter|
            |           +----------------------->            |
            +-----------+         Control Plane +------------+

                        Figure 2: Duplexed Streams

   This specification contains two major sections:

   Control Plane  The service through which Event Receivers can review
      and optionally managed Event Streams.  It defines the metadata
      associated with Event Streams along with stream status reporting.

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017               [Page 3]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   Data Plane  Through which SET Events are delivered by an Event
      Transmitter to an Event Receiver using a defined Event Stream.
      The Data Plane includes a verification process which tests and
      validates Event Stream configuration.  The Data plan defines
      processing and error signaling used in the delivery of SETs.

1.1.  Notational Conventions

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] . These
   keywords are capitalized when used to unambiguously specify
   requirements of the protocol or application features and behavior
   that affect the inter-operability and security of implementations.
   When these words are not capitalized, they are meant in their
   natural-language sense.

   For purposes of readability examples are not URL encoded.
   Implementers MUST percent encode URLs as described in Section 2.1 of
   [RFC3986] .

   Throughout this documents all figures MAY contain spaces and extra
   line-wrapping for readability and space limitations.  Similarly, some
   URI's contained within examples, have been shortened for space and
   readability reasons.

1.2.  Definitions

   This specification assumes terminology defined in the Security Event
   Token specification[I-D.ietf-secevent-token] .

   The following definitions are defined for Security Event
   distribution:

   Identity Provider
      An Identity Provider is a service provider that issues
      authentication assertions that may be used by Relying Party
      service providers to establish login sessions with users.
      Examples of Identity Providers are defined in: OpenID Connect
      [openid-connect-core] and SAML2 [saml-core-2.0].  For the purpose
      of this specification an Identity Provider also includes any
      provider of services where the compromise of an account may open
      up relying parties to attack.  For example for the purposes of
      security events, an email service provider could be considered an
      "implicit" Identity Provider.

   Relying Party

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017               [Page 4]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

      A Relying Party is a service provider that accepts assertions from
      Identity Providers to establish sessions.  Examples of Relying
      Parties are defined in: OpenID Connect [openid-connect-core] and
      SAML2 [saml-core-2.0]

   Event Transmitter
      A service provider that delivers SETs to other providers known as
      Event Receivers.  Some examples of Event Transmitters are Identity
      Providers and Relying Parties.  An Event Transmitter is
      responsible for offering a service that allows the Event Receiver
      to check the Event Stream configuration and status known as the
      "Control Plane".

   Event Receiver
      A service provider that registers to receive SETs from an Event
      Transmitter and provides an endpoint to receive SETs via HTTP POST
      (known as the "Data Plane").  Some examples of Event Receivers are
      Identity Providers and Relying Parties.  Event Receivers can check
      current Event Stream configuration and status by accessing the
      Event Transmitters "Control Plane".

   Event Stream
      An Event Stream establishes Event Receiver communication
      endpoints, security configuration and feed content that is used by
      an Event Transmitter to send a series of SET Events to an Event
      Receiver.  An Event Stream defines a "Data Plane" and "Control
      Plane" service relationship between an Event Transmitter and and
      Event Receiver.

   Control Plane
      A Control Plane represents an service offered by an Event
      Transmitter that lets an Event Receiver query the current
      operational and/or error status of an Event Stream.  The Control
      Plane MAY also be used to retrieve Event Stream and SET
      configuration data.

   Data Plane
      The Data Plane represents the HTTP service offered by an Event
      Receiver that allows the Event Transmitter to deliver multiple
      SETs via HTTP POST as part of an Event Stream.

   Event Family
      An Event Family is a URI that describes the set of events types be
      issued in an Event Stream.

   Subject
      The security subject around which a security event has occurred.
      For example, a security subject might per a user, a person, an

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017               [Page 5]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

      email address, a service provider entity, an IP address, an OAuth
      Client, a mobile device, or any identifiable thing referenced in
      security and authorization systems.

2.  Control Plane - Monitoring

   The Control Plane is provided by the Event Transmitter and enables
   Event Receivers to check the Event Stream configuration and check for
   transmission errors.  This section describes mandatory to implement
   functionality to enable Event Receivers to detect SET delivery
   problems that may occur when an Event Transmitter fails to deliver
   SETs.

   Implementers MAY optionally implement and support full Event Stream
   provisioning and management as described in Section 4.  This
   functionality also allows Event Receivers to "pause", "disable", or
   re-enable Event Streams in scenario where the operational needs of
   the receiver need to be co-ordinated with Event Transmitters (see
   Section 2.2 and Section 4.3).

   SCIM defines flexible mechanisms to ease adaptability to different
   underlying data systems while maximizing inter-operabilty.  Section 2
   [RFC7643] SHALL provide the processing rule that enable Control Plane
   providers and clients negotiate specific attributes (metadata)
   including differing provider definitions of attribute types,
   mutability, cardinality, or returnability that MAY differ.  For HTTP
   method handling and error signaling, the processing rules in
   [RFC7644] SHALL apply.

2.1.  Event Stream Configuration

   An Event Stream represents an agreement to deliver SETs from a
   specified Feed URI from an Event Transmitter to an Event Receiver.
   The method of delivery and the parameters for delivery are specified
   a set of parameters called Event Stream metadata (see Section 2.1).

   An Event Stream is defined by the following metadata:

   feedUri
      An OPTIONAL JSON String value containing the URI for a feed
      supported by the feed provider.  It describes the content of the
      feed and MAY also be a resolvable URI where the feed meta data may
      be returned as a JSON object.  REQUIRED.

   methodUri
      A REQUIRED JSON String value which is a URI with a prefix of
      "urn:ietf:params:set:method".  This specification defines HTTP

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017               [Page 6]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

      POST delivery method:
      "urn:ietf:params:set:method:HTTP:webCallback"
      in which the Feed Provider delivers events using HTTP POST to a
      specified callback URI.

   deliveryUri
      A JSON String value containing a URI that describes the location
      where SETs are received (e.g. via HTTP POST).  Its format and
      usage requirements are defined by the associated "methodUri".

   aud
      An OPTIONAL JSON Array of JSON String values which are URIs
      representing the audience(s) of the Event Stream.  The value SHALL
      be the value of SET "aud" claim sent to the Event Receiver.

   feedJwk
      An OPTIONAL public JSON Web Key (see [RFC7517]) from the Event
      Transmitter that will be used by the Event Receiver to verify the
      authenticity of issued SETs.

   confidentialJwk
      An OPTIONAL public JSON Web Key (see [RFC7517]) for the Event
      Receiver that MAY be used by the Feed Provider to encrypt SET
      tokens for the specified Event Receiver.

   subStatus
      An OPTIONAL JSON String keyword that indicates the current state
      of an Event Stream.  More information on the Event Stream state
      can be found in Section 2.2.  Valid keywords are:

         "on" - indicates the Event Stream has been verified and that
         the Feed Provider MAY pass SETs to the Event Receiver.

         "verify" - indicates the Event Stream is pending verification.
         While in "verify", SETs, except for the verify SET (see
         Section 3.4) are not delivered to the Event Receiver.  Once
         verified, the status returns to "on".

         "paused" - indicates the Event Stream is temporarily suspended.
         While "paused", SETs SHOULD be retained and delivered when
         state returns to "on".  If delivery is paused for an extended
         period defined by the Event Transmitter, the Event Transmitter
         MAY change the state to "off" indicating SETs are no longer
         retained.

         "off" - indicates that the Event Stream is no longer passing
         SETs.  While in off mode, the Event Stream metadata is
         maintained, but new events are ignored, not delivered or

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017               [Page 7]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

         retained.  Before returning to "on", a verification MUST be
         performed.

         "fail" - indicates that the Event Stream was unable to deliver
         SETs to the Event Receiver due an unrecoverable error or for an
         extended period of time.  Unlike paused status, a failed Event
         Stream does not retain existing or new SETs that are issued.
         Before returning to "on", a verification MUST be performed.

   maxRetries
      An OPTIONAL JSON number indicating the maximum number of attempts
      to deliver a SET.  A value of '0' indicates there is no maximum.
      Upon reaching the maximum, the Event Stream "subStatus" attribute
      is set to "failed".

   maxDeliveryTime
      An OPTIONAL number indicating the maximum amount of time in
      seconds a SET MAY take for successful delivery per request or
      cumulatively across multiple retries.  Upon reaching the maximum,
      the Event Stream "subStatus" is set to "failed".  If undefined,
      there is no maximum time.

   minDeliveryInterval
      An OPTIONAL JSON integer that represents the minimum interval in
      seconds between deliveries.  A value of '0' indicates delivery
      should happen immediately.  When delivery is a polling method
      (e.g.  HTTP GET), it is the expected time between Event Receiver
      attempts.  When in push mode (e.g.  HTTP POST), it is the interval
      the server will wait before sending a new event or events.

   txErr
      An OPTIONAL JSON String keyword value.  When the Event Stream has
      "subState" set to "fail", one of the following error keywords is
      set:

         "connection" indicates an error occurred attempting to open a
         TCP connection with the assigned endpoint.

         "tls" indicates an error occurred establishing a TLS connection
         with the assigned endpoint.

         "dnsname" indicates an error occurred establishing a TLS
         connection where the dnsname was not validated.

         "receiver" indicates an error occurred whereby the Event
         Receiver has indicated an error for which the Event Transmitter
         is unable to correct.

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017               [Page 8]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

      [[Editors note: other conditions?]]

   txErrDesc
      An OPTIONAL String value that is usually human readable that
      provides further diagnostic detail by the indicated "txErr" error
      code.

   Additional Event Stream metadata (attributes) MAY be defined as
   extensions.  The method for adding new attributes is defined in
   Section 3.3 [RFC7643].

2.2.  Event Stream State Model

   The Event Stream configuration attribute "subStatus" tracks the state
   of any particular Event Stream with regards to whether SETs are ready
   or able to be delivered.  The impact on delivery processing is
   described in Table 1.

   The following is the state machine representation of a Event Stream
   on a Event Transmitter.  Note that a Event Stream cannot be made
   active until a verification process has been completed.  As such, a
   newly created Event Stream begins with state "verify".

                                  +
                                  |
                                Create
                                  v
       +------+              +----------+
       | fail +->Restart---->|  verify  |
       +------+              +----+-----+
           ^                      |
           |<----Confirm Fail<----+
           |                   Confirm
           |                      v
           |                 +----------+               +--------+
           |                 |          +--->Suspend--->|        |
           +------Timeout<---+    on    |               | paused |
                             |          |<--Resume<-----+        |
                             +-+--------+               +----+---+
                               |      ^                      |
                            Disable Enable                   |
                               v      |                      |
                             +--------+-+                    |
                             |   off    |<----Limited<-------+
                             +----------+

            Figure 3: Event Stream States at Event Transmitter

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017               [Page 9]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   In the above diagram, the following actions impact the state of an
   Event Stream. "subStatus" values are shown in the boxes, and change
   based on the following actions:

   Create
      A Event Receiver or an administrator creates a new Event Stream
      using SCIM as described in Section 4.2.  The initial state is
      "verify".

   Confirm
      The Event Transmitter sends a verification SET to the Event
      Receiver which confirms with the correct response as described in
      Section 3.4.  If it succeeds to deliver, the Event Transmitter
      SHALL set state to "on".

   Confirm Fail
      If the confirmation fails, the Event Transmitter sets the state to
      "fail" requiring administrative action to correct the issue and
      "Restart".

   Timeout
      A Event Transmitter who has not been able to deliver a SET over
      one or more retries which has reached a limit of attempts
      ("maxRetries") or time ("maxDeliveryTime") MAY set the Event
      Stream state to "fail".  In general, the intention is to indicate
      the maximum number of retries or time a Event Transmitter is able
      to wait until SET event loss begins to occur resulting in the
      failed state.

   Limited
      A paused Event Stream has reached a limit and the Event
      Transmitter can no longer retain SETs.  The Event Transmitter
      changes the state to "off".

   Restart
      An administrator having corrected the failed delivery condition
      modifies the Event Stream state to "verify" (e.g. see
      Section 4.3).

   Suspend and Resume
      An Event Stream MAY be suspended and resumed by updating the Event
      Stream state to "paused" or "on".  For example, see see
      Section 4.3.  While suspended, the Event Transmitter MAY retain
      undelivered SETs for a period of time.  If the Event Transmitter
      is no longer able to retain SETs, the Event Stream state SHOULD be
      set to "off" to indicate SETs are being lost.

   Enable and Disable

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 10]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

      A Event Stream MAY be disabled and enabled by updating the Event
      Stream state to "off" or "on".  For example, see see Section 4.3.
      While the Event Stream is disabled, all SETs that occur at the
      Event Transmitter are lost.

2.3.  Checking Stream Configuration and Stream State

   An Event Receiver MAY check the current status of a Stream with the
   Event Transmitter, by performing an HTTP GET using the provided URI
   from the Transmitter.

   The format of the response is defined by Section TBD [RFC7644].

   In addition to the attributes defined in Section 2.1, the response
   SHALL include an additional JSON attribute "schemas" with at least a
   single value of "urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:event:2.0:EventStream".
   This static attribute is provided to enable optional SCIM client
   compatibility and informs the client of the type of JSON object being
   returned.  Service providers may offer additional attributes by
   adding additional schema values as per [RFC7644].

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 11]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   The response below shows an example response to an HTTP GET, in this
   case to "https://example.com/v2/
   EventStreams/767aad7853d240debc8e3c962051c1c0".

   HTTP/1.1 200 OK
   Content-Type: application/json
   Location:
    https://example.com/v2/EventStreams/767aad7853d240debc8e3c962051c1c0

   {
     "schemas":["urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:event:2.0:EventStream"],
     "id":"767aad7853d240debc8e3c962051c1c0",
     "feedName":"OIDCLogoutFeed",
     "feedUri":
       "https://example.com/v2/Feeds/88bc00de776d49d5b535ede882d98f74",
     "methodUri":"urn:ietf:params:set:method:HTTP:webCallback",
     "deliveryUri":"https://notify.examplerp.com/Events",
     "aud":"https://sets.myexamplerp.com",
     "subStatus":"fail",
     "txErr":"connection",
     "txErrDesc":"TCP connect error to notify.examplerp.com.",
     "maxDeliveryTime":3600,
     "minDeliveryInterval":0,
     "description":"Logout events from oidc.example.com",
     "meta":{
        ... SCIM meta attributes ...
     }
   }

                   Figure 4: Example Stream GET Response

   In the above figure, the Event Stream is showing a failed status due
   to a TCP connection error.  The Event Receiver is able to discover
   that its endpoint was unavailable and has been marked failed by the
   Event Transmitter.  It is expected that the appropriate operations
   staff would be alerted and some corrective action would be taken.

   The frequency with which Event Receivers should poll the Event Stream
   status depends on the following factors:

   o  The level of technical fault tolerance and availability of the
      receiving endpoint.

   o  A frequency appropriate to the amount of risk that can be
      tolerated for lost events.  For example, if Security Events are
      considered informational, then infrequent (hourly or daily) may be
      sufficient.

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 12]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   In most cases Event Stream status polling can be triggered on a
   timeout basis.  Event Receivers would typically poll if they have not
   received a SET for some period during which SETs would be expected
   based on past experience.

3.  Data Plane

   The data plane represent the HTTP request channel by which the Event
   Transmitter delivers SET Events to an Event Receiver.

3.1.  Event Delivery Process

   When a Security Event occurs, the Feed Provider constructs a SET
   token [I-D.ietf-secevent-token] that describes the event.  The feed
   provider determines the feeds that the event should be distributed
   to, and determines which Event Receivers need to be notified.

   How SET Events are defined and the process by which events are
   identified for Event Receivers is out-of-scope of this specification.

   When a SET is available for a Event Receiver, the Feed Transmitter
   attempts to deliver the SET based on the Event Receiver's registered
   delivery mechanism:

   o  The Event Transmitter uses an HTTP/1.1 POST to the Event Receiver
      endpoint to deliver the SET;

   o  Or, the Feed Transmitter delivers the event through a different
      method not defined by this specification.

   Feed Transmitters SHALL NOT be required to main or record SETs.  As
   such, transmitted SETs SHOULD be self-validating (e.g. signed).

   If delivery to any particular Event Receiver has been delayed for an
   extended period of time, the Feed Transmitter MAY suspend the
   affected Event Stream and even stop maintaining outstanding SETs for
   the Event Receiver at its discretion and available resources.  See
   Event Stream "subState" in Section 2.1.

   Upon receiving a SET, the Event Receiver reads the SET and validates
   it.  Based upon the content of the token, the Event Receiver decides
   what, if any, action needs to be taken in response to the received
   SET.  For example, in response to a SCIM provisioning event
   [idevent-scim] indicating a changed resource, the Event Receiver
   might perform a SCIM GET request (see Section 3.4 [RFC7644]) to the
   affected resource URI in order to confidentially obtain the current
   state of the transmitter's affected SCIM resource in order to
   reconcile local corresponding state changes.

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 13]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   The action a Event Receiver takes in response to a SET MAY be
   substantially different than merely copying the action of the SET
   issuer.  A single SET can trigger one or more receiver actions or it
   can be ignored.  For example, upon receiving notification that a user
   resource has been added to a group, the Event Receiver may first
   determine that the user does not exist in the Event Receiver's
   domain.  The Event Receiver translates the event into two actions:

   1.  Retrieve the user (e.g. using SCIM GET) and then provisions the
       user locally.  After enabling the user,

   2.  The Event Receiver then enables the user for the application
       associated with membership in the issuer's group.

3.2.  Event Stream State

   As mentioned in Section 2.1, the attribute "subStatus" defines the
   current state of an Event Stream.  Figure 3 shows a state diagram for
   Event Streams.  The following describes that actions taken by the
   Event Transmitter based upon "subStatus".

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 14]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   +--------+----------------------------------------------------------+
   | Status | Action                                                   |
   +--------+----------------------------------------------------------+
   | on     | Delivery SHALL be attempted based on the method defined  |
   |        | in the Event Stream attribute "methodUri".  If the SET   |
   |        | fails to deliver it MAY be retained for a retry delivery |
   |        | in a minimum of "minDeliveryInterval" seconds. If new    |
   |        | SETs arrive before the interval, the SETs MUST be held   |
   |        | for delivery in order of reception.  If this is a repeat |
   |        | attempt to deliver, the Event Transmitter MAY discard    |
   |        | the SET if "maxRetries" or "maxDeliveryTime" is          |
   |        | exceeded. If a SET is discarded, the Event Transmitter   |
   |        | MAY set "subStatus" to "failed".                         |
   | verify | If the SET is not a Verify SET, the SET MAY be retained  |
   |        | for a retry at the Event Transmitter's discretion.  If a |
   |        | Verify SET fails to deliver, the Event Transmitter SHALL |
   |        | set "subStatus" to "failed". The Event Transmitter MAY   |
   |        | opt to make multiple attempts to complete a verification |
   |        | during which status remains as "verify".                 |
   | paused | The SET is held for delivery in a queue. The Event       |
   |        | Transmitter MAY at its own discretion set the Event      |
   |        | Stream state to "failed" if "subStatus" is not returned  |
   |        | to "on" in what the Event Transmitter determines to be a |
   |        | reasonable amount of time.                               |
   | off    | The SET is ignored.                                      |
   | fail   | The SET is ignored due to a previous unrecoverable       |
   |        | error.                                                   |
   +--------+----------------------------------------------------------+

                  Table 1: Delivery Processing By Status

3.3.  HTTP POST Delivery

   This method allows a feed provider to use HTTP POST (Section 4.3.3
   [RFC7231]) to deliver SETs to the registered web callback URI
   identified in the Event Stream configuration.  The Event Stream
   "methodUri" value for this method is
   "urn:ietf:params:set:method:HTTP:webCallback".

   The SET to be delivered MAY be signed and/or encrypted as defined in
   [I-D.ietf-secevent-token].

   The Event Stream's "deliveryUri" attribute indicates the location of
   a Event Receiver provided endpoint which accepts HTTP POST requests
   (e.g.  "https://notify.examplerp.com/Events").

   The content-type for the HTTP POST is "application/jwt" and SHALL
   consists of a single SET token (see [I-D.ietf-secevent-token]).

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 15]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

     eyJhbGciOiJub25lIn0
     .
     eyJwdWJsaXNoZXJVcmkiOiJodHRwczovL3NjaW0uZXhhbXBsZS5jb20iLCJmZWV
     kVXJpcyI6WyJodHRwczovL2podWIuZXhhbXBsZS5jb20vRmVlZHMvOThkNTI0Nj
     FmYTViYmM4Nzk1OTNiNzc1NCIsImh0dHBzOi8vamh1Yi5leGFtcGxlLmNvbS9GZ
     WVkcy81ZDc2MDQ1MTZiMWQwODY0MWQ3Njc2ZWU3Il0sInJlc291cmNlVXJpcyI6
     WyJodHRwczovL3NjaW0uZXhhbXBsZS5jb20vVXNlcnMvNDRmNjE0MmRmOTZiZDZ
     hYjYxZTc1MjFkOSJdLCJldmVudFR5cGVzIjpbIkNSRUFURSJdLCJhdHRyaWJ1dG
     VzIjpbImlkIiwibmFtZSIsInVzZXJOYW1lIiwicGFzc3dvcmQiLCJlbWFpbHMiX
     SwidmFsdWVzIjp7ImVtYWlscyI6W3sidHlwZSI6IndvcmsiLCJ2YWx1ZSI6Impk
     b2VAZXhhbXBsZS5jb20ifV0sInBhc3N3b3JkIjoibm90NHUybm8iLCJ1c2VyTmF
     tZSI6Impkb2UiLCJpZCI6IjQ0ZjYxNDJkZjk2YmQ2YWI2MWU3NTIxZDkiLCJuYW
     1lIjp7ImdpdmVuTmFtZSI6IkpvaG4iLCJmYW1pbHlOYW1lIjoiRG9lIn19fQ
     .

                  Figure 5: Encoded SET To Be Transmitted

   To deliver an event, the Event Transmitter generates an event
   delivery message and uses HTTP POST to the EventStream configured
   endpoint.  The content-type of the message is "application/jwt" and
   the expected response type (accept) is "application/json".

   POST /Events  HTTP/1.1

   Host: notify.examplerp.com
   Accept: application/json
   Content-Type: application/jwt
   "eyJhbGciOiJub25lIn0
   .
   eyJwdWJsaXNoZXJVcmkiOiJodHRwczovL3NjaW0uZXhhbXBsZS5jb20iLCJmZWV
   kVXJpcyI6WyJodHRwczovL2podWIuZXhhbXBsZS5jb20vRmVlZHMvOThkNTI0Nj
   FmYTViYmM4Nzk1OTNiNzc1NCIsImh0dHBzOi8vamh1Yi5leGFtcGxlLmNvbS9GZ
   WVkcy81ZDc2MDQ1MTZiMWQwODY0MWQ3Njc2ZWU3Il0sInJlc291cmNlVXJpcyI6
   WyJodHRwczovL3NjaW0uZXhhbXBsZS5jb20vVXNlcnMvNDRmNjE0MmRmOTZiZDZ
   hYjYxZTc1MjFkOSJdLCJldmVudFR5cGVzIjpbIkNSRUFURSJdLCJhdHRyaWJ1dG
   VzIjpbImlkIiwibmFtZSIsInVzZXJOYW1lIiwicGFzc3dvcmQiLCJlbWFpbHMiX
   SwidmFsdWVzIjp7ImVtYWlscyI6W3sidHlwZSI6IndvcmsiLCJ2YWx1ZSI6Impk
   b2VAZXhhbXBsZS5jb20ifV0sInBhc3N3b3JkIjoibm90NHUybm8iLCJ1c2VyTmF
   tZSI6Impkb2UiLCJpZCI6IjQ0ZjYxNDJkZjk2YmQ2YWI2MWU3NTIxZDkiLCJuYW
   1lIjp7ImdpdmVuTmFtZSI6IkpvaG4iLCJmYW1pbHlOYW1lIjoiRG9lIn19fQ
   .

                Figure 6: Example Web Callback POST Request

   Upon receipt of the request, the Event Receiver SHALL validate the
   JWT structure of the SET as defined in Section 7.2 [RFC7519].  The
   Event Receiver SHALL also validate the SET information as described
   in Section 2 [I-D.ietf-secevent-token].

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 16]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   If the SET is determined to be valid, the Event Receiver SHALL
   indicate successful submission by responding with HTTP Status 202 as
   "Accepted" (see Section 6.3.3 [RFC7231]).

   If SET or JWT is invalid, or there is an HTTP error, the Event
   Receiver SHALL respond with the appropriate HTTP error or an HTTP
   Status 400 Bad Request error as follows:

   +----------+--------------------------------------------------------+
   | Err      | Description                                            |
   | Value    |                                                        |
   +----------+--------------------------------------------------------+
   | jwtParse | Invalid or unparsable JWT or JSON structure.           |
   | jwtHdr   | In invalid JWT header was detected.                    |
   | jwtCypto | Unable to parse due to unsupported algorithm.          |
   | jws      | Signature was not validated.                           |
   | jwe      | Unable to decrypt JWE encoded data.                    |
   | jwtAud   | Invalid audience value.                                |
   | jwtIss   | Issuer not recognized.                                 |
   | setType  | An unexpected event type was received.                 |
   | setParse | Invalid structure was encountered such as inability to |
   |          | parse SET event payload.                               |
   | setData  | SET event claims incomplete or invalid.                |
   | dup      | A duplicate SET was received and has been ignored.     |
   +----------+--------------------------------------------------------+

                      Table 2: HTTP Status 400 Errors

   The following is a non-normative example of a successful receipt of a
   SET.

   HTTP/1.1 202 Accepted

              Figure 7: Example Successful Delivery Response

   An HTTP Status 400 Bad Request response includes a JSON object which
   provides details about the error.  The JSON object includes the JSON
   attributes:

   err
      A value which is a keyword that describes the error (see Table 2).

   description
      A human-readable text that provides additional diagnostic
      information.

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 17]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   The following is an example non-normative Bad Request error.

   HTTP/1.1 400 Bad Request
   Content-Type: application/json

   {
     "err":"dup",
     "description":"SET already received. Ignored."

   }

                  Figure 8: Example Bad Request Response

3.4.  Event Stream Verification

   To confirm an Event Stream configuration, the Event Transmitter SHALL
   send a verification SET to the Event Receiver using the registered
   "methodUri" mechanism which in this case is
   "urn:ietf:params:set:method:HTTP:webCallback".

   The Verify SET contains the following attributes:

   events  Set with a value of "[[this RFC URL]]#verify".

   iss  Set to the URI defined in the Event Stream metadata (see
      Section 2.1).

   aud  MUST be set to a value that matches the EventStream "aud" value
      (see Section 2.1).

   exp  A value that indicates the time the verification request will
      expire.  Once expired, the server will set the Event Stream state
      to "fail".

   If the Event Stream "confidentialJWK" value was supplied, then the
   SET SHOULD be encrypted with the provided key.  Successful parsing of
   the message confirms that provides confirmation of correct
   configuration and possession of keys.

   A payload attribute "confirmChallenge" is provided with a JSON String
   value that the Event Receiver SHALL echo back in its response.  The
   intent is to confirm that the Event Receiver has successfully parsed
   the SET and is not just echoing back HTTP success.

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 18]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   A non-normative JSON representation of an event to be sent to a Event
   Receiver as a Event Stream confirmation.  Note the event is not yet
   encoded as a JWT token:

   {
     "jti": "4d3559ec67504aaba65d40b0363faad8",
     "events":["[[this RFC URL]]#verify"],
     "iat": 1458496404,
     "iss": "https://scim.example.com",
     "exp": 1458497000,
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754",
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/5d7604516b1d08641d7676ee7"
     ],
     "[[this RFC URL]]#verify":{
       "confirmChallenge":"ca2179f4-8936-479a-a76d-5486e2baacd7"
     }
   }

             Figure 9: Example Verification SET with Challenge

   The above SET is encoded as a JWT and transmitted to the Event
   Receiver as shown in Figure 6.

   Upon receiving a verify SET, the Event Receiver SHALL respond with a
   JSON object that includes a "challengeResponse" attribute and the
   value that was provided in "confirmChallenge".  The content type
   header is set to "application/json".

   The following is a non-normative example response to a Verify SET
   received via HTTP/1.1 POST and includes a JSON object containing the
   confirmation attribute and value.

   HTTP/1.1 200 OK
   Content-Type: application/json

   {
     "challengeResponse":"ca2179f4-8936-479a-a76d-5486e2baacd7"
   }

         Figure 10: Example Response to Verify SET with Challenge

   If the Event Receiver returns a non-matching value or an HTTP status
   other than a 200 series response, the Event Stream "state" SHALL be
   set to "fail".  A declining Event Receiver MAY simply respond with
   any 400 series HTTP error (e.g. 404).

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 19]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

4.  Control Plane - Management and Provisioning

   This section describes how SCIM [RFC7644] and [RFC7643] MAY be used
   to add create, read, update, delete capability to the Control Plane
   to enable provisioning and operational management of Event Streams.
   In addition to provisioning of Event Streams, it can also be used by
   Event Receivers to change or reset the operational state of Event
   Streams such as pausing, stopping, or re-enabling after a failure.

   SCIM is a protocol used by many security systems for provisioning and
   co-ordinating identities and other security subjects in cross-domain
   scenarios.  SCIM is a RESTful profile of HTTP that is intended to be
   implemented by applications that need provisioning and management of
   security subjects and is ideal to the task of provisioning related
   security event signal systems.  Examples of provisioning endpoints
   (SCIM service providers) include both Identity Providers and Relying
   Party applications (e.g. business and consumer web applications) as
   well as security and authorization infrastructure components.

   [[Editors Note: At the time of writing, some groups feel a CRUD API
   is not required and participants would prefer to manage streams using
   an out-of-band workflow approach.]]

4.1.  Event Stream Resource Type Definition

   To extend SCIM to support Event Streams, requires defining an
   "EventStream" SCIM resource type, and implementing the corresponding
   RESTful HTTP operations to create, update, retrieve EventStream
   Resources.  For SCIM service provider capability and schema discovery
   (see Sections 3 and 4 [RFC7644]).

   The "EventStream" resource type definition is defined as follows:

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 20]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

{
  "schemas": ["urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:core:2.0:ResourceType"],
  "id": "EventStream",
  "name": "EventStream",
  "endpoint": "/EventStreams",
  "description": "Endpoint and event configuration and status for SEC EVENT streams.",
  "schema": "urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:event:2.0:EventStream",
  "schemaExtensions": []
}

   The resource type above is discoverable in the "/ResourceTypes" and
   informs SCIM clients about the endpoint location of EventStream
   resources and the SCIM schema used to define the resource.  The
   corresponding schema for the EventStream resource MAY be retrieved
   from the SCIM "/Schemas" endpoint (see Section 3.2 [RFC7644]).

           Figure 11: SCIM EventStream Resource Type Definition

   To retrieve information about one or more Event Streams, authorized
   clients MAY query the "/EventStreams" endpoint as defined in
   Section 3.4 [RFC7644].

   The example below retrieves a specific "EventStream" resource whose
   "id" is "548b7c3f77c8bab33a4fef40".

   GET /EventStreams/767aad7853d240debc8e3c962051c1c0
   Host: example.com
   Accept: application/json
   Authorization: Bearer h480djs93hd8

           Figure 12: Example SCIM EventStream HTTP GET Request

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 21]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   The response below shows an example Feed resource that describes an
   available feed.

   HTTP/1.1 200 OK
   Content-Type: application/json
   Location:
    https://example.com/v2/EventStreams/767aad7853d240debc8e3c962051c1c0

   {
     "schemas":["urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:event:2.0:EventStream"],
     "id":"767aad7853d240debc8e3c962051c1c0",
     "feedName":"OIDCLogoutFeed",
     "feedUri":
       "https://example.com/v2/Feeds/88bc00de776d49d5b535ede882d98f74",
     "methodUri":"urn:ietf:params:set:method:HTTP:webCallback",
     "deliveryUri":"https://notify.examplerp.com/Events",
     "aud":"https://sets.myexamplerp.com",
     "subStatus":"verify",
     "maxDeliveryTime":3600,
     "minDeliveryInterval":0,
     "description":"Logout events from oidc.example.com",
     "meta":{
        ... SCIM meta attributes ...
     }
   }

             Figure 13: Example EventStream HTTP GET Response

   In the above example (Figure 13) the EventStream is for the the Feed
   "https://example.com/v2/Feeds/88bc00de776d49d5b535ede882d98f74".  The
   current Event Stream state is "verify" which suggest the Event Stream
   Verification (see Section 3.4) process has not yet completed.  Since
   there is no value for "feedJwk", ) or "confidentialJwk", SETs will be
   sent without signing or encryption (plain text).

4.2.  Creating A New Event Stream

   To subscribe to a feed, the Event Receiver first obtains an
   authorization credential authorizing to to make the request (this
   process is out of scope of the specification but is often completed
   through OAuth).  Upon obtaining authorization, the Event Receiver
   organization uses the SCIM Create operation (HTTP POST) as defined in
   Section 3.3 [RFC7644].  Event Transmitter's Control Plane service MAY
   have additional schema requirements for Event Stream creation which
   MAY be discovered using SCIM service configuration and schema
   discovery, see Section 4 [RFC7644].

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 22]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   In the following non-normative example, a new EventStream is created.
   Note that the Event Transmitter's control-plane automatically assigns
   the "id" attribute.

   POST /EventStreams
   Host: example.com
   Accept: application/scim+json
   Content-Type: application/scim+json
   Authorization: Bearer h480djs93hd8

   {
     "schemas":["urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:event:2.0:EventStream"],
     "feedName":"OIDCLogoutFeed",
     "feedUri":
       "https://example.com/v2/Feeds/88bc00de776d49d5b535ede882d98f74",
     "methodUri":"urn:ietf:params:set:method:HTTP:webCallback",
     "deliveryUri":"https://notify.examplerp.com/Events",
     "aud":"https://sets.myexamplerp.com",
     "maxDeliveryTime":3600,
     "minDeliveryInterval":0,
     "description":"Logout events from oidc.example.com"
   }

              Figure 14: Example Create Event Stream Request

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 23]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   In following non-normative response, the Event service provider has
   automatically assigned a resource location as well as an "id".
   Usually upon creation, the initial value of "subStatus" is "pending"
   indicating that the Stream Verification process (see Section 3.4) has
   not been completed.

   HTTP/1.1 201 Created
   Content-Type: application/scim+json
   Location:
    https://example.com/v2/EventStreams/767aad7853d240debc8e3c962051c1c0

   {
     "schemas":["urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:event:2.0:EventStream"],
     "id":"767aad7853d240debc8e3c962051c1c0",
     "feedName":"OIDCLogoutFeed",
     "feedUri":
       "https://example.com/v2/Feeds/88bc00de776d49d5b535ede882d98f74",
     "methodUri":"urn:ietf:params:set:method:HTTP:webCallback",
     "deliveryUri":"https://notify.examplerp.com/Events",
     "aud":"https://sets.myexamplerp.com",
     "subStatus":"verify",
     "maxDeliveryTime":3600,
     "minDeliveryInterval":0,
     "description":"Logout events from oidc.example.com",
     "meta":{
        ... SCIM meta attributes ...
     }
   }

         Figure 15: Example Response to Create EventStream Request

4.3.  Updating An Event Stream

   Periodically, Event Receivers MAY have need to update an Event Stream
   configuration for the purpose of:

   o  Rotating access credentials or keys

   o  Updating endpoint configuration

   o  Making operational changes such as pausing, resetting, or
      disabling an Event Stream.

   o  Other operations (e.g. such as adding or removing subjects) as
      defined by profiling Event specifications.

   To modify an EventStream, an Event Receiver or authorized management
   client MAY use the HTTP PUT operation (see Section 3.5.1 [RFC7644])

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 24]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

   or MAY use the HTTP PATCH operation (see Section 3.5.2 [RFC7644]) if
   supported by the Event Transmitter's control plane service.  Note
   that HTTP PATCH enables more specific changes.  This is particularly
   useful when updating multi-valued attributes that may contain large
   numbers of values.  An example of this would be an EventStream that
   uses a "members" attribute to define the subjects of the Event
   Stream.

   In the following non-normative example, the client is requesting that
   "subStatus" be changed to "paused" for the EventStream whose path is
   identified by the request URI path.

   PATCH /EventStreams/767aad7853d240debc8e3c962051c1c0
   Host: example.com
   Accept: application/scim+json
   Content-Type: application/scim+json
   Authorization: Bearer h480djs93hd8

   {
     "schemas":
       ["urn:ietf:params:scim:api:messages:2.0:PatchOp"],
     "Operations": [{
       "op":"replace",
       "path":"subStatus",
       "value":"paused"
     }]
   }

   Upon receiving the request, the Event Transmitter would stop sending
   Events to the Receiver.  Note that while the request MAY seem complex
   it avoids the need for the requestor to have all of the current
   EventStream values in order to make a PUT request.  In other words,
   an HTTP PATCH can be typically done in a single request response
   whereas an HTTP POST usually is preceded by an HTTP GET.

               Figure 16: Example EventStream PATCH Request

5.  Security Considerations

   [TO BE COMPLETED]

6.  IANA Considerations

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 25]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

6.1.  SCIM Schema Registration

   As per the "SCIM Schema URIs for Data Resources" registry established
   by Section 10.3 [RFC7643], the following defines and registers the
   following SCIM URIs and Resource Types for Feeds and Event Streams.

   +---------------------------+----------+--------------+-------------+
   | Schema URI                | Name     | ResourceType | Reference   |
   +---------------------------+----------+--------------+-------------+
   | urn:ietf:params:scim:     | SET      | EventStream  | Section 2.1 |
   | schemas:event:2.0:        | Event    |              |             |
   | EventStream               | Stream   |              |             |
   +---------------------------+----------+--------------+-------------+

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-secevent-token]
              Hunt, P., Denniss, W., Ansari, M., and M. Jones, "Security
              Event Token (SET)", draft-ietf-secevent-token-00 (work in
              progress), January 2017.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC3986]  Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
              Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
              RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986>.

   [RFC5988]  Nottingham, M., "Web Linking", RFC 5988,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5988, October 2010,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5988>.

   [RFC7231]  Fielding, R., Ed. and J. Reschke, Ed., "Hypertext Transfer
              Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content", RFC 7231,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7231, June 2014,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7231>.

   [RFC7519]  Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web Token
              (JWT)", RFC 7519, DOI 10.17487/RFC7519, May 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7519>.

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 26]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

7.2.  Informative References

   [idevent-scim]
              Oracle Corporation, "SCIM Event Extensions (work in
              progress)".

   [openid-connect-core]
              NRI, "OpenID Connect Core 1.0", Nov 2014.

   [RFC7515]  Jones, M., Bradley, J., and N. Sakimura, "JSON Web
              Signature (JWS)", RFC 7515, DOI 10.17487/RFC7515, May
              2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7515>.

   [RFC7516]  Jones, M. and J. Hildebrand, "JSON Web Encryption (JWE)",
              RFC 7516, DOI 10.17487/RFC7516, May 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7516>.

   [RFC7517]  Jones, M., "JSON Web Key (JWK)", RFC 7517,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7517, May 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7517>.

   [RFC7643]  Hunt, P., Ed., Grizzle, K., Wahlstroem, E., and C.
              Mortimore, "System for Cross-domain Identity Management:
              Core Schema", RFC 7643, DOI 10.17487/RFC7643, September
              2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7643>.

   [RFC7644]  Hunt, P., Ed., Grizzle, K., Ansari, M., Wahlstroem, E.,
              and C. Mortimore, "System for Cross-domain Identity
              Management: Protocol", RFC 7644, DOI 10.17487/RFC7644,
              September 2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7644>.

   [saml-core-2.0]
              Internet2, "Assertions and Protocols for the OASIS
              Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML) V2.0", March
              2005.

Appendix A.  Acknowledgments

   The editors would like to thanks the members of the SCIM WG which
   began discussions of provisioning events starting with: draft-hunt-
   scim-notify-00 in 2015.

   The editor would like to thank the participants in the the SECEVENTS
   working group for their support of this specification.

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 27]
Internet-Draft      draft-hunt-secevent-distribution          March 2017

Appendix B.  Change Log

   Draft 00 - PH - First Draft based on reduced version of draft-hunt-
   idevent-distribution

   Draft 01 - PH -

   o  Reworked terminology to match new WG Transmitter/Receiver terms

   o  Reworked sections into Data Plane vs. Control Plane

   o  Removed method transmission registry in order to simplify the
      specification

   o  Made Create, Update operations optional for Control Plane (Read is
      MTI)

Authors' Addresses

   Phil Hunt (editor)
   Oracle Corporation

   Email: phil.hunt@yahoo.com

   Marius Scurtescu
   Google

   Email: mscurtescu@google.com

Hunt & Scurtescu        Expires September 9, 2017              [Page 28]