



SCIM                                                        P. Hunt, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                             IndependentId
Intended status: Standards Track                           N. Cam-Winget
Expires: 13 March 2026                                     Cisco Systems
                                                                M. Kiser
                                                               Sailpoint
                                                            J. Schreiber
                                                                 Workday
                                                        9 September 2025


                 SCIM Profile for Security Event Tokens
                       draft-ietf-scim-events-09

Abstract

   This specification defines a set of SCIM Security Events using the
   Security Event Token Specification RFC8417 to enable the asynchronous
   exchange of messages between SCIM Service Providers and receivers.
   SCIM Security Events are typically used for: asynchronous request
   completion, resource replication, and provisioning co-ordination.

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 https://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 13 March 2026.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2025 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights



Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


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

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction and Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.2.  Notational Conventions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.3.  Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  SCIM Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.1.  Identifying the Subject of an Event . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.2.  Common Event Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     2.3.  SCIM Feed Events  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       2.3.1.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:feed:add . . . . . . . . .   8
       2.3.2.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:feed:remove  . . . . . . .   9
     2.4.  SCIM Provisioning Events  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       2.4.1.
               urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:create:{notice|full}   10
       2.4.2.
               urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:patch:{notice|full} .  12
       2.4.3.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:put:{notice|full} . .  14
       2.4.4.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:delete  . . . . . . .  16
       2.4.5.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:activate  . . . . . .  17
       2.4.6.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:deactivate  . . . . .  17
     2.5.  Miscellaneous Events  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
       2.5.1.  Asynchronous Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   3.  Events Discovery Schema for Service Provider Configuration  .  24
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
   5.  Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  26
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  27
     6.1.  SCIM Async Txn Header Registration  . . . . . . . . . . .  27
     6.2.  Registration of the SCIM Event URIs Sub-Registry  . . . .  27
     6.3.  Initial Events Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  29
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  30
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  30
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32
   Appendix A.  Use Cases  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32
     A.1.  Domain Based Replication  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32
     A.2.  Co-ordinated Provisioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  33
   Appendix B.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  35
   Appendix C.  Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  36
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  36







Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


1.  Introduction and Overview

   This specification defines Security Events for SCIM Service Providers
   and receivers as specified by the Security Event Tokens (SET)
   [RFC8417] specification.  SCIM Security Events in this specification
   include: asynchronous request completion, resource replication, and
   provisioning co-ordination.

   This specification also profiles the use of the HTTP Header "Prefer:
   Async-response" [RFC7240] to allow a SCIM Protocol Client [RFC7644]
   to request an asynchronous response (see Section 2.5.1.1).

   In a typical HTTP client-server relationship, a SCIM Protocol Client
   issues commands to a SCIM Service Provider using HTTP methods such as
   POST, PATCH, and DELETE [RFC7644] that cause a state change to a SCIM
   Resource.  When multiple independent SCIM Clients update SCIM
   Resources, individual clients become out of date as state changes
   occur.  Some clients may need to be informed of these changes for co-
   ordination or reconciliation purposes.  This could be done using
   periodic SCIM GET requests over time, but this rapidly becomes
   problematic as the number of changes and the number of resources
   increases.

   Security Event Tokens [RFC8417] and SCIM Events offer the ability to
   exchange messages that act as triggers for receivers to monitor over
   time in an asynchronous approach.  This enables greater scale and
   timeliness, where only changed information is exchanged between
   parties.

   A SET conveys information about a state change that has occurred in a
   publishing SCIM Service Provider.  That token may be of interest to
   one or more receivers and can be delivered asynchronously to the
   originating SCIM Client making the change.  Unlike SCIM Protocol
   requests which convey protocol commands, Security Events describe
   statements of fact about changes by the SCIM Service Provider.  This
   approach allows the Event Receiver to determine the best local
   follow-up action to take within its own context.  For example, the
   receiver can reconcile intentional schema and population differences
   between the domain.

1.1.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.




Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


1.2.  Notational Conventions

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

   Throughout this document 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.

1.3.  Definitions

   This specification uses definitions from the following
   specifications:

   *  JSON Web Tokens (JWT) [RFC7519],

   *  Security Event Tokens (SET) [RFC8417], and

   *  System for Cross-Domain Identity Management Protocol [RFC7644].

   In JSON Web Tokens and Security Event Tokens, the term "claim" refers
   to JSON attribute values in a JSON Web Token [RFC7519] structure.
   The term "claim" in tokens is used to indicate that an attribute
   value may not be verified and its accuracy can be questioned.  In the
   context of SCIM, claims are referred to as attributes.  For the
   purposes of this specification claims and attributes are inter-
   changeable.  For consistency, JWT and SET IANA registered attributes
   will continue to be called claims, while event attributes (i.e. those
   in an event payload) will be referred to as attributes.

   Additionally, the following terms are defined:

   Attributes and Claims
      The JWT specification [RFC7519] upon which SET is based uses the
      term "claims" to refer to attributes in a JSON token.  SCIM in
      contrast uses the term "attributes" to refer to JSON attributes.
      For the purposes of this draft, the terms "attributes" and
      "claims" are equivalent.











Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   CP
      Abbreviation for "Co-ordinated Provisioning" as defined in
      Appendix A.2.  In these relationships, an Event Publisher and
      Receiver typically exchange resource change events without
      exchanging data.  For a receiver to know the value of the data,
      the Event Receiver usually calls back to the SCIM Event Publisher
      domain to receive a new copy of data (e.g.  Uses a SCIM GET
      request).

   DBR
      Abbreviation for "Domain Based Replication" as defined in
      Appendix A.1.  In this mode because there is an administrative
      relationship spanning multiple operational domains, data shared in
      Events typically uses the full mode variation of change events
      including the data payload attribute.  This eliminates the need
      for a callback to retrieve additional data.

   Event Feed / Event Stream
      This describes the quality that a feed (aka stream) MAY be managed
      per receiving client.  A SET transfer (see [RFC8935] [RFC8936])
      Service Provider MAY offer to allow Event Receivers to "subscribe"
      to specific event types or events about specific resources (see
      Feed Management events Section 2.3).

   Event Receiver
      An entity receives events typically via [RFC8935], [RFC8936], or
      HTTP GET (see Section 2.5.1.1).  In the case of SET Push Transfer
      [RFC8935], the Event Receiver is an HTTP Service Endpoint that
      receives requests.  In the case of SET Poll-Based Transfer
      [RFC8936], the receiver is an HTTP client that initiates HTTP
      request to an Event Publisher endpoint.

   Event Publisher
      A system that issues SETs based on a resource state change that
      has occurred at a SCIM Service Provider.  For example, events MAY
      be the result of a SCIM Create, Modify, or Delete as defined in
      [RFC7644].  A SCIM Service Provider MAY be an Event Publisher or
      an independent service that aggregates events into Event Receiver
      feeds.  As described above, when using [RFC8935], the Event
      Publisher is an HTTP Client that initiates HTTP POST requests to a
      defined Event Receiver endpoint.  When using [RFC8936], the Event
      Publisher provides an HTTP endpoint which a receiver MAY use to
      "poll" for Security Events.

   SCIM Client
      An HTTP client that initiates SCIM Protocol [RFC7644] requests and
      receives responses.




Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   SCIM Service Provider
      An HTTP server that implements SCIM Protocol [RFC7644] and SCIM
      Schema [RFC7643].

   SET
      Abbreviation for "Security Event Token" as defined in [RFC8417]

2.  SCIM Events

   A SCIM event is a signal, in the form of a Security Event Token
   [RFC8417], that describe some event that has occurred.  A SET event
   consists of a set of standard JWT "top-level" claims and an "events"
   claim that contains one or more event URI subclaims (JSON attributes)
   each with a JSON object containing relevant event information.

   This specification defines a new URI prefix
   urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event which is used as the prefix for the
   following defined SCIM Events (see Section 6.2).  Events are grouped
   into one of two sub-namespaces: "feed" (feed control notices) or
   "prov" (provisioning).

2.1.  Identifying the Subject of an Event

   SCIM Events SHALL use the "sub_id" claim defined by Subject
   Identifiers for Security Event Tokens [RFC9493] specification to
   identify the subject of events.  The sub_id claim MUST be contained
   within the main JWT claims body and SHALL NOT be located within an
   Event payload within the events claim.  A SET with multiple event
   URIs indicates that the events arise from the same transaction or
   resource state change for a single resource or subject.  Finally, as
   recommended in [RFC8417] the JWT "sub" claim SHALL NOT be used to
   prevent confusion with JWT authorization tokens.

   {
        "iss": "issuer.example.com",
        "iat": 1508184845,
        "aud": "aud.example.com",
        "sub_id": {
           "format": "scim",
           "uri": "/Users/2b2f880af6674ac284bae9381673d462",
           "externalId": "alice@example.com"
        },
        "events": {
          ...
        }
   }

                     Figure 1: SCIM Subject Id Example



Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   Instead of "sub", the top-level claim "sub_id" SHALL be used.
   "sub_id" contains the subclaim "format" whose value is set to scim to
   indicate the other attributes present are SCIM attributes.  The
   following sub_id attributes are defined:

   uri
      The SCIM relative path for the resource which usually consists of
      the resource type endpoint plus the resource id.  For example
      /Users/2b2f880af6674ac284bae9381673d462.  This attribute MUST be
      provided in a SCIM Event sub_id claim.  Note the relative path is
      the path component after the SCIM Service Provider Base URI as
      defined in Section 1.3 [RFC7644].  In cases where the Event
      Receiver is unable to match a URI, the Event Receiver MAY issue a
      callback to a previously agreed SCIM Service Provider Base URI
      plus the relative uri value and perform a SCIM GET request per
      Section 3.4.1 [RFC7644].

   externalId
      If known, the externalId value of the SCIM Resource that MAY be
      used by a receiver to identify the corresponding resource in the
      Event Receiver's domain.

   id
      The SCIM Id attribute MAY be used for backwards compatibility
      reasons in addition to the uri claim.

   emails,username, ...
      A SCIM attribute that is unique to both the Event Publisher and
      Receiver.  Typically, attributes like email or usernames are used
      in situations where normal SCIM identifiers (id and externalId)
      are insufficient to identify a common resource between an Event
      Publisher and Event Receiver.

2.2.  Common Event Attributes

   The following attributes are available for all events defined.  Some
   attributes are defined as SET/JWT claims, while others are "Event
   Payload" claims as defined in Section 1.2 [RFC8417].  Only one of
   data or attributes claims SHALL be provided depending on the event
   definition.

   txn
      For the purposes of SCIM, this SET defined claim identifies a
      unique transaction originating at a SCIM Service Provider and/or
      its underlying data repository or database.  The claim is used to
      detect duplicate transactions that may have been received (e.g. in
      the case of a re-transmitted or recovered event).  The txn claim
      is REQUIRED.  The SET jti claim MAY be used in addition to the txn



Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


      claim.  Where txn identifies a unique transaction within a SCIM
      Service Provider, multiple SETs MAY be issued each with distinct
      JTI's stemming from a common originating transaction with
      identical txn values.

   version
      The Etag version of the resource as a result of the event and
      corresponds to the Etag response header described in Section 3.14
      of SCIM Protocol [RFC7644].

   data
      This event payload attribute contains information described in
      SCIM Bulk Operations data attribute, Section 3.7 [RFC7644].  The
      JSON object contains the equivalent SCIM command processed by the
      SCIM Service Provider.  For example, after processing a SCIM
      Create operation, the data contained includes the final
      representation of the created entity by the SCIM Service Provider
      including the assigned id value.

   attributes
      This payload contains an array of attributes that were added,
      revised, or removed.  Values of modified attributes SHOULD conform
      to the ABNF syntax rule for path> (Section 3.5.2 [RFC7644]).  For
      example:
      "attributes": ["username","emails","name.familyName"]

2.3.  SCIM Feed Events

   This section defines events related to changes in the content of an
   event feed.  Such as, SCIM Resources that are being added or removed
   from an event feed or events used in Co-operative Provisioning
   scenarios where only a sub-set of entities are shared across an Event
   Feed.  The URI prefix for these events is
   urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:feed

2.3.1.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:feed:add

   The specified resource has been added to the Event Feed.  A feed:add
   does not indicate a resource is new or has been recently created.
   For example, an existing user has had a new role (e.g.  CRM_User)
   added to their profile which has caused their resource to join a
   feed.









Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                 [Page 8]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   {
     "jti": "6164f3bbf6ff41a88dc94f18cb0620e8",
     "txn": "b7b953f11cc6489bbfb87834747cc4c1",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/2b2f880af6674ac284bae9381673d462",
       "externalId": "jdoe"
     },
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:feed:add": {}
     },
     "iat": 1458505044,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

                   Figure 2: Example SCIM Feed Add Event

2.3.2.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:feed:remove

   The specified resource has been removed from the feed.  Removal does
   not indicate that the resource was deleted or otherwise deactivated.
   This event has minimal disclosure.

   {
     "jti": "6164f3bbf6ff41a88dc94f18cb0620e8",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/2b2f880af6674ac284bae9381673d462",
       "externalId": "jdoe",
     },
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:feed:remove": {}
     },
     "iat": 1458505044,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

                  Figure 3: Example SCIM Feed Remove Event







Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                 [Page 9]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


2.4.  SCIM Provisioning Events

   This section defines resource changes that have occurred within a
   SCIM Service Provider.  These events are used in both Domain Based
   Replication (DBR) and Co-operative Provisioning (CP) mode.  The URI
   prefix for these events is urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov.

2.4.1.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:create:{notice|full}

   Indicates a new SCIM resource has been created by the SCIM Service
   Provider and has been added to the Event Feed.  When the data payload
   attribute is included, the event URI SHALL end with full, otherwise
   the event URI ends with notice.  In full mode, the set of values
   reflecting the final state of the resource at the Service Provider
   are provided using the data attribute.  In notice mode, attributes is
   returned disclosing the list of attributes included in the create
   request.  Note that because the event MAY be used for replication,
   the final id attribute that was assigned by the SCIM Service Provider
   is shared so that all replicas in the domain MAY use the same
   resource identifier.































Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 10]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   {
     "jti": "4d3559ec67504aaba65d40b0363faad8",
     "iat": 1458496404,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
       "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754",
       "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/5d7604516b1d08641d7676ee7"
     ],
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/44f6142df96bd6ab61e7521d9",
        "externalId":"jdoe"
     },
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:create:full":{
         "data":{
           "schemas":[ "urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:core:2.0:User"],
           "emails":[
             {"type":"work","value":"jdoe@example.com"}
           ],
           "userName":"jdoe",
           "name":{
             "givenName":"John",
             "familyName":"Doe"
           }
         }
       }
     }
   }

                    Figure 4: Example SCIM Create (Full)




















Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 11]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   {
     "jti": "4d3559ec67504aaba65d40b0363faad8",
     "iat": 1458496404,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
       "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754",
       "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/5d7604516b1d08641d7676ee7"
     ],
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/44f6142df96bd6ab61e7521d9",
       "externalId": "jdoe"
     },
     "events": {
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:create:notice": {
         "attributes": [
           "id",
           "name",
           "userName",
           "password",
           "emails"
         ]
       }
     }
   }

                Figure 5: Example SCIM Create Event (Notice)

   The event above notifies the Event Receiver which attributes have
   changed but does not convey the actual information.  The Event
   Receiver MAY retrieve that information by performing a SCIM GET to
   the sub value specified.

2.4.2.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:patch:{notice|full}

   The specified resource has been updated using SCIM PATCH.  In full
   mode, the data payload attribute is included.  When the event URI
   ends with notice, the list of modified attributes is provided.













Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 12]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   {
     "jti": "6164f3bbf6ff41a88dc94f18cb0620e8",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Groups/176f397ec4c44b94b2cfcb759780b8c2",
       "externalId": "crmUsers"
     },
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:patch:full": {
         "version": "a330bc54f0671c9",
         "data": {
           "schemas":
         ["urn:ietf:params:scim:api:messages:2.0:PatchOp"],
           "Operations":[{
             "op":"add",
             "path":"members",
             "value":[{
                "display": "Babs Jensen",
                "$ref": "/Users/2819c223...413861904646",
                "value": "2819c223-7f76-453a-919d-413861904646"
             }]
           }]
         }
       }
     },
     "iat": 1458505044,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

                 Figure 6: Example SCIM Patch Event (Full)


















Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 13]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   {
     "jti": "6164f3bbf6ff41a88dc94f18cb0620e8",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Groups/176f397ec4c44b94b2cfcb759780b8c2",
       "externalId": "crmUsers"
     },
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:patch:notice": {
         "attributes": ["members"],
         "version": "a330bc54f0671c9"
       }
     },
     "iat": 1458505044,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

                Figure 7: Example SCIM Patch Event (Notice)

2.4.3.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:put:{notice|full}

   The specified resource has been updated (e.g. one or more attributes
   has changed).  In full mode, the SCIM PUT request body is included in
   the data attribute.  In notice mode, the modified attributes are
   listed using attributes.























Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 14]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   {
     "jti": "6164f3bbf6ff41a88dc94f18cb0620e8",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/2819c223-7f76-453a-919d-413861904646"
     },
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:put:full": {
         "version": "a330bc54f0671c9",
         "data": {
           "schemas":["urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:core:2.0:User"],
           "userName":"jdoe",
           "externalId":"jdoe",
           "name":{
              "formatted":"Mr. Jon Jack Doe III",
              "familyName":"Doe",
              "givenName":"Jon",
              "middleName":"Jack"
           },
           "roles":[],
           "emails":[
             {"value":"jdoe@example.com"},
             {"value":"anon@jdoe.org"}
           ]
         }
       }
     },
     "iat": 1458505044,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

                  Figure 8: Example SCIM Put Event (Full)
















Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 15]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   {
     "jti": "6164f3bbf6ff41a88dc94f18cb0620e8",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/2819c223-7f76-453a-919d-413861904646"
     },
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:put:notice": {
         "version": "a330bc54f0671c9",
         "attributes": ["userName","externalId","name","roles","emails"]
       }
     },
     "iat": 1458505044,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

                 Figure 9: Example SCIM Put Event (Notice)

2.4.4.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:delete

   The specified resource has been deleted from the SCIM Service
   Provider.  The resource is also removed from the feed.  When a DELETE
   is sent, a corresponding feedRemove SHALL NOT be issued.  A delete
   event has no payload attributes.  Note that because the delete event
   has no attributes, the qualifiers full and notice SHALL NOT be used.

   {
     "jti": "6164f3bbf6ff41a88dc94f18cb0620e8",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/2b2f880af6674ac284bae9381673d462",
       "externalId": "jDoe"
     },
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:delete": {}
     },
     "iat": 1458505044,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

                    Figure 10: Example SCIM Delete Event




Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 16]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


2.4.5.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:activate

   The specified resource (e.g.  User) has been "activated".  This does
   not necessarily reflect any particular state change at the SCIM
   Service Provider but may simply indicate the account defined by the
   SCIM resource is ready for use as agreed upon by the Event Publisher
   and Event Receiver.  For example, an activated resource can represent
   an account that may be logged in.

   {
     "jti": "6164f3bbf6ff41a88dc94f18cb0620e8",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/2b2f880af6674ac284bae9381673d462"
     },
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:activate": {}
     },
     "iat": 1458505044,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

                   Figure 11: Example SCIM Activate Event

2.4.6.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:deactivate

   The specified resource (e.g.  User) has been deactivated and
   disabled.  The exact meaning SHOULD be agreed to by the Event
   Publisher and its corresponding Event Receiver.  Typically, this
   means the subject may no longer have an active security session.  As
   with the activate event, this event has minimal disclosure
   requirements.

2.5.  Miscellaneous Events

   This section defines related miscellaneous events such as
   Asynchronous Request completion that has occurred within a SCIM
   Service Provider.  The URI prefix for these events is
   urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:misc.

2.5.1.  Asynchronous Events







Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 17]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


2.5.1.1.  Making an Asynchronous SCIM Request

   A SCIM Client making SCIM HTTP requests defined in [RFC7644] MAY
   request "asynchronous" processing using the "Prefer" HTTP Header as
   defined in Section 4.1 [RFC7240].  The client may do this for a
   number of reasons such as: avoiding holding HTTP connections open
   during long requests, because the result of the request is not
   needed, or for co-ordination reasons where the result is delivered to
   another entity for further action.

   To initiate an async SCIM request, a normal SCIM protocol POST, PUT,
   PATCH, or DELETE request is performed with the HTTP Header Prefer
   with a value of respond-async as defined in [RFC9110].  The HTTP
   Accept header SHALL be ignored.

   In response, and as indicated in the SCIM Service Provider
   Configuration (see Section 3, the SCIM Service Provider responds with
   either a normal SCIM response or asynchronously by returning HTTP
   Status 202 Accepted.  The asynchronous response SHOULD contain no
   response body.  To enable correlation of the future event, the HTTP
   response header "Set-txn" is returned with a value corresponding to a
   future Security Event Token to be received whose "txn" claim SHALL
   match.  Per Section 3 [RFC7240], the response will also include the
   header Preference-Applied.  The Location header returned SHALL be one
   of the following:

   *  A location URI where the completion token MAY be retrieved using
      HTTP GET

   *  The normal SCIM location header response specified by [RFC7644]

   In the following non-normative example, a "Prefer" header is set to
   "respond-async":


















Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 18]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   PUT /Users/2819c223-7f76-453a-919d-413861904646
   Host: scim.example.com
   Prefer: respond-async
   Content-Type: application/scim+json
   Authorization: Bearer h480djs93hd8
   {
     "schemas":["urn:ietf:params:scim:schemas:core:2.0:User"],
     "id":"2819c223-7f76-453a-919d-413861904646",
     "userName":"bjensen",
     "externalId":"bjensen",
     "name":{
       "formatted":"Ms. Barbara J Jensen III"
     },
     "roles":[],
     "emails":[
       {
           "value":"bjensen@example.com"
       }
     ]
   }

           Figure 12: Example Asynchronous SCIM Protocol Request

   The SCIM Service Provider responds with HTTP 202 Accepted and
   includes the Set-txn header:

   HTTP/1.1 202 Accepted
   Set-txn: 734f0614e3274f288f93ac74119dcf78
   Preference-Applied: respond-async
   Location:
     "/Users/2819c223-7f76-453a-919d-413861904646"

                                 Figure 13

2.5.1.2.  Asynchronous Bulk Endpoint Requests

   SCIM Protocol Section 3.7 [RFC7644] provides the ability to submit
   multiple SCIM operations in a single request.  When an asynchronous
   response is requested, a single Async Request Completion Event SHALL
   be generated for each requested operation.  For example, if a single
   SCIM Bulk request had 10 operations, then 10 Async Event completions
   events would be generated.

   The "txn" claim MUST be set to the value originally returned to the
   requesting SCIM Client (see Section 2.5.1.1) appended with a colon
   (":") followed by the request operation number.  For example, if the
   "txn" claim value was "2d80e537a3f64622b0347b641ebc8f44", then the
   first Async Response Event Token representing the first operation



Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 19]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   SHALL have a "txn" claim value of
   "2d80e537a3f64622b0347b641ebc8f44:1", the second operation SHALL have
   a value of "2d80e537a3f64622b0347b641ebc8f44:2", and so on.

   If a SCIM Service Provider elects to optimize the sequence of
   operations (per Section 3.7 [RFC7644]), the Async Request Completion
   events generated MAY also be generated out of sequence from the order
   of operations in the original request.  In this case, the "txn"
   claims generated SHALL use operation numbers that correspond to the
   original request order.

2.5.1.3.  urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:misc:asyncResp

   The Async Response event signals the completion of a SCIM request.
   The event payload contains the attributes defined in SCIM Bulk
   Section 3.7 [RFC7644] and is the same a single SCIM Bulk Response
   Operation as per Section 3.7.3.  In the event, the "txn" claim must
   be set to the value originally returned to the requesting SCIM Client
   (see Section 2.5.1.1).

   {
     "jti": "6164f3bbf6ff41a88dc94f18cb0620e8",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/2819c223-7f76-453a-919d-413861904646"
     },
     "txn": "734f0614e3274f288f93ac74119dcf78",
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:misc:asyncResp": {
           "method": "PUT",
           "version": "W\/\"huJj29dMNgu3WXPD\"",
           "status": "200"
       }
     },
     "iat": 1458505044,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

                Figure 14: Example SCIM Async Response Event









Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 20]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   An error may occur in the SCIM Service Provider's asynchronous
   processing of the SCIM request.  In that case, the event's operation
   MUST include a "response" attribute to indicate a non-200-series HTTP
   status as defined in Section 3.7 [RFC7644].  The response attribute
   MUST contain the sub-attributes defined in Section 3.12 [RFC7644].
   Note that the "status" attribute of the event operation should match
   the "status" attribute of the response.

   {
    "jti": "6164f3bbf6ff41a88dc94f18cb0620e8",
    "sub_id": {
      "format": "scim",
      "uri": "/Users/2819c223-7f76-453a-919d-413861904646"
    },
    "txn": "734f0614e3274f288f93ac74119dcf78",
    "events":{
      "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:misc:asyncResp": {
          "method": "PUT",
          "version": "W\/\"huJj29dMNgu3WXPD\"",
          "status": "400",
          "response": {
              "schemas": [
                  "urn:ietf:params:scim:api:messages:2.0:Error"
              ],
              "scimType":"invalidSyntax",
              "detail": "Request is unparsable",
              "status":"400"
          }
      }
    },
    "iat": 1458505044,
    "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
    "aud":[
     "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
    ]
   }

             Figure 15: Example SCIM Async Error Response Event

   The following 4 figures show Async Completion events for the example
   in Section 3.7.3 of [RFC7644].










Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 21]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   {
     "jti": "dbae9d7506b34329aa7f2f0d3827848b",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/92b725cd-9465-4e7d-8c16-01f8e146b87a"
     },
     "txn": "2d80e537a3f64622b0347b641ebc8f44:1",
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:misc:asyncResp": {
            "method": "POST",
            "bulkId": "qwerty",
            "version": "W\/\"oY4m4wn58tkVjJxK\"",
            "status": "201"
       }
     },
     "iat": 1458505044,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

         Figure 16: Example SCIM Async Response Event Operation 1/4

   {
     "jti": "ca977d05ba5c43929e3a69023d5392a9",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/b7c14771-226c-4d05-8860-134711653041"
     },
     "txn": "2d80e537a3f64622b0347b641ebc8f44:2",
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:misc:asyncResp": {
             "method": "PUT",
             "version": "W\/\"huJj29dMNgu3WXPD\"",
             "status": "200"
       }
     },
     "iat": 1458505045,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

         Figure 17: Example SCIM Async Response Event Operation 2/4





Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 22]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   {
     "jti": "4bb87d70a4ab463bbdcd1f99111cbbf1",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/5d8d29d3-342c-4b5f-8683-a3cb6763ffcc"
     },
     "txn": "2d80e537a3f64622b0347b641ebc8f44:3",
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:misc:asyncResp": {
             "method": "PATCH",
             "version": "W\/\"huJj29dMNgu3WXPD\"",
             "status": "200"
       }
     },
     "iat": 1458505046,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

         Figure 18: Example SCIM Async Response Event Operation 3/4

   {
     "jti": "6a7843a7f5244d0eb62ca38b641d9139",
     "sub_id": {
       "format": "scim",
       "uri": "/Users/e9025315-6bea-44e1-899c-1e07454e468b"
     },
     "txn": "2d80e537a3f64622b0347b641ebc8f44:4",
     "events":{
       "urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:misc:asyncResp": {
             "method": "DELETE",
             "status": "204"
       }
     },
     "iat": 1458505047,
     "iss":"https://scim.example.com",
     "aud":[
      "https://scim.example.com/Feeds/98d52461fa5bbc879593b7754"
     ]
   }

         Figure 19: Example SCIM Async Response Event Operation 4/4







Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 23]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


3.  Events Discovery Schema for Service Provider Configuration

   Section 5 of [RFC7643] defines SCIM Service Provider configuration
   schemas.  This section defines additional attributes that enable a
   SCIM Client to discover the additional capabilities defined by this
   specification.

   securityEvents
      A SCIM Complex attribute that specifies the available capabilities
      related to asynchronous Security Events based on [RFC8417].  This
      attribute is OPTIONAL and when absent indicates the SCIM Service
      Provider does not support or is not currently configured for
      Security Events.  The following sub-attributes are defined:

      asyncRequest
         A string value specifying one of the following:

         *  NONE indicates async SCIM requests defined in
            Section 2.5.1.1 are not supported;

         *  LONG indicates the SCIM Service Provider MAY complete
            asynchronously at its discretion (e.g.  based on a max wait
            time);

         *  REQUEST indicates the request SHALL complete asynchronously
            when requested by the SCIM Client.

      eventUris
         A multivalued string listing the SET Event URIs (defined in
         [RFC8417]) that the server is capable of generating and
         deliverable via a SET Stream (see [RFC8935] and [RFC8936]).
         This information is informational only.  Stream registration
         and configuration are out of scope of this specification.

4.  Security Considerations

   As this specification is based upon the Security Event Tokens
   specification and the associated delivery specifications the
   following Security Considerations SHALL be applied:

   *  Section 5 of [RFC8417] (Security Event Token)

   *  Section 5 of [RFC8935] (Push-based Delivery Using HTTP)

   *  Section 4 of [RFC8936] (Poll-Based Delivery Using HTTP)






Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 24]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   SETs may contain sensitive information, including Personally
   Identifiable Information (PII).  In such cases, SET Transmitters and
   SET Recipients MUST protect the confidentiality of the SET contents.
   TLS MUST be used to secure the transmitted SETs.  Event delivery
   endpoints MUST support at least TLS version 1.3 and support the
   newest version of TLS that meets its security requirements, which as
   of the time of this publication is TLS 1.3 [RFC8446].  The client
   MUST perform a TLS/SSL server certificate check using DNS-ID
   [RFC6125] and/or DANE [RFC6698].  The implementation security
   considerations for TLS in "Recommendations for Secure Use of
   Transport Layer Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security
   (DTLS)" [RFC7525] MUST be followed.

   When co-ordinating provisioning between entities, the long-term
   series of changes may be critical to the information integrity and
   recovery requirements of both sides.  To address this, Event
   Publishers SHOULD consider storing events for receivers for longer
   periods of time than might typically be used for recovering from
   momentary delivery failures and retries per [RFC8935] or [RFC8936].
   Similarly, Event Receivers MUST ensure events are persisted directly
   or indirectly to meet local recovery needs before acknowledging the
   SET Events were received.

   An attacker might leverage transaction and/or signal information
   contained in SET Event Publisher or Receiver system.  To mitigate
   this, access to event recovery and forwarding MUST be limited to the
   parties needed to support recovery or SET forwarding.

   When SET Events are transferred in such a way as the Event Publisher
   is not communicating directly to the Event Receiver, it may become
   possible for an attacker or other system to insert an event.  To
   mitigate, the use of JWS [RFC7515] signed SET Events MUST be used to
   verify the originator of a SET Event.  Validating event signatures is
   both useful on the initial transfer of SET Events, and may also be
   useful for auditing purposes.  Signed SET Events are protected from
   tampering in the event that an intermediate system, such as a TLS-
   terminating proxy, decrypts the SET payload before sending it onward
   to its intended recipient.

   In operation, some SCIM Resources such as SCIM Groups may have a high
   rate of change.  For examples groups with more than a few thousand
   member values could lead to excessive change rates that could lead to
   a loss of SET Events between Event Publishers and Event Receivers.
   To mitigate this risk, consider the following to help mitigate
   throughput issues:






Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 25]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   *  Avoid use of SCIM PUT (Section 3.5.1 [RFC7644]) operations on
      large groups as this may require excessive locking in data store
      systems as well as large Security Event payloads.  Use SCIM PATCH
      (Section 3.5.2) to focus on updating and notifying about changed
      information.

   *  Use Patch Notice (urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:patch:notice) to
      reduce event content combined with periodic SCIM GETs (see section
      3.4 [RFC7644]) to retrieve current group state.

   *  Aggregate multiple PATCH Events into a single event.  Providing
      the exact date of each membership change is not critical but
      instead that the information content remains intact.

   When using Asynchronous SCIM Requests (see Section 2.5.1.1), a SCIM
   Service provider returns a SCIM Accepted response with a URI for
   retrieving the event result.  An unauthorized entity or attacker
   could obtain asynchronous request completion event information by
   querying the asynchronous operation result endpoint used by a SCIM
   Service Provider.  To mitigate, the returned URI endpoint MUST be
   protected requiring an HTTP Authorization header or some other form
   of client authentication.

5.  Privacy Considerations

   As this specification is based upon the Security Event Tokens and the
   associated delivery specifications the following Privacy
   Considerations SHALL be applied:

   *  Section 6 of [RFC8417] (Security Event Token)

   *  Section 6 of [RFC8935] (Push-based Delivery Using HTTP)

   *  Section 5 of [RFC8936] (Poll-Based Delivery Using HTTP)

   This specification enables the sharing of information between
   domains.  The specification assumes that implementers and deployers
   are operating under one of the following scenarios:

   *  A common administrative domain where there is one administrative
      owner of the data.  In these cases, the goal is to protect privacy
      and security of the owner and user data by keeping information
      systems co-ordinated and up-to-date.  For example, the domains
      decide to use Domain Based Replication mode to keep employee
      information synchronized.






Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 26]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   *  In a co-operative or co-ordinated relationship, parties have
      decided to share a limited amount of data and/or signals for the
      benefits of their users.  Depending on end-user consent,
      information is shared on an as-authorized and/or as-needed basis.
      For example, the domains agree to use Co-ordinated Provision mode
      that exchanges things like account status or specific minimal
      attribute information that must be fetched on request after
      receiving notice of a change.  This enables authorization to be
      verified each time data is transferred.

   In general, the sharing of SCIM Event information falls within a pre-
   existing SCIM Client and Service Provider relationship and carry no
   additional personal information.

6.  IANA Considerations

6.1.  SCIM Async Txn Header Registration

   This specification registers the HTTP Set-txn field name in the "HTTP
   Field Name Registry" defined in Section 16.3.1 [RFC9110].

   Field name:
      Set-txn

   Status:
      Permanent

   Specification Document:
      this specification, Section 2.2 and Section 2.5.1.1.

   Comments:
      See also Section 2.2 [RFC8417] Security Event Tokens.

6.2.  Registration of the SCIM Event URIs Sub-Registry

   IANA will add a new registry called “SCIM Event URIs” to the “System
   for Cross-domain Identity Management (SCIM) Schema URIs” registry
   group initiated by Section 10.1 of [RFC7643] at
   https://www.iana.org/assignments/scim.

   Unless otherwise stated, the procedures and definitions for this sub-
   registry are inherited from the parent registry.

   Namespace ID:
      The sub-namespace ID of "event" is assigned within the "scim"
      namespace.

   Syntactic Structure:



Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 27]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


      The Namespace Specific String (NSS) of all URNs that use the
      "event" Namespace ID SHALL have the following structure:

      "urn:ietf:params:scim:event:{class}:{name}:{other}

      The keywords have the following meaning:

      class
         The class of events which is one of: "feed", "prov", "sig", or
         "misc".

      name
         A US-ASCII string that conforms to URN syntax requirements (see
         [RFC8141]) and defines a descriptive event name (e.g.
         "create").

      other
         An optional US-ASCII string that conforms to URN syntax
         requirements (see [RFC8141]) and serves as an additional sub-
         category or qualifier.  For example "full" and "notice".

   Identifier Uniqueness Considerations:
      The designated contact shall be responsible for reviewing and
      enforcing uniqueness.

   Identifier Persistence Considerations:
      Once a name has been allocated it MUST NOT be re-allocated for a
      different purpose.  The rules provided for assignments of values
      within a sub-namespace MUST be constructed so that the meaning of
      values cannot change.  This registration mechanism is not
      appropriate for naming values whose meaning may change over time.

   Registration format:
      An event registration MUST include the following fields:

      *  Event Uri

      *  Descriptive Name

      *  Reference to event definition

      Initial values to be added to the SCIM Events Registry
      Section 6.3.








Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 28]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


6.3.  Initial Events Registry

   Summary of Event URI registrations:

   +============================================+==============+=======+
   | Event URI                                  | Name         |Ref.   |
   +============================================+==============+=======+
   | urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:feed:add        | Resource     |Section|
   |                                            | added to     |2.3.1  |
   |                                            | Feed Event   |       |
   +--------------------------------------------+--------------+-------+
   | urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:feed:remove     | Remove       |Section|
   |                                            | resource     |2.3.2  |
   |                                            | From Feed    |       |
   |                                            | Event        |       |
   +--------------------------------------------+--------------+-------+
   | urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:create:    | New          |Section|
   | notice                                     | Resource     |2.4.1  |
   |                                            | Event        |       |
   |                                            | (notice      |       |
   |                                            | only)        |       |
   +--------------------------------------------+--------------+-------+
   | urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:create:    | New          |Section|
   | full                                       | Resource     |2.4.1  |
   |                                            | Event (full  |       |
   |                                            | data)        |       |
   +--------------------------------------------+--------------+-------+
   | urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:patch:     | Resource     |Section|
   | notice                                     | Patch Event  |2.4.2  |
   |                                            | (notice      |       |
   |                                            | only)        |       |
   +--------------------------------------------+--------------+-------+
   | urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:patch:     | Resource     |Section|
   | full                                       | Patch Event  |2.4.2  |
   |                                            | (full data)  |       |
   +--------------------------------------------+--------------+-------+
   | urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:put:       | Resource     |Section|
   | notice                                     | Put Event    |2.4.3  |
   |                                            | (notice      |       |
   |                                            | only)        |       |
   +--------------------------------------------+--------------+-------+
   | urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:put:full   | Resource     |Section|
   |                                            | Put Event    |2.4.3  |
   |                                            | (full data)  |       |
   +--------------------------------------------+--------------+-------+
   | urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:delete     | Resource     |Section|
   |                                            | Deleted      |2.4.4  |
   |                                            | Event        |       |



Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 29]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   +--------------------------------------------+--------------+-------+
   | urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:activate   | Resource     |Section|
   |                                            | Activated    |2.4.5  |
   |                                            | Event        |       |
   +--------------------------------------------+--------------+-------+
   | urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:prov:deactivate | Resource     |Section|
   |                                            | Deactivated  |2.4.6  |
   |                                            | Event        |       |
   +--------------------------------------------+--------------+-------+
   | urn:ietf:params:SCIM:event:misc:asyncResp  | Async        |Section|
   |                                            | Request      |2.5.1  |
   |                                            | Completion   |       |
   +--------------------------------------------+--------------+-------+

                                  Table 1

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://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,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986>.

   [RFC6125]  Saint-Andre, P. and J. Hodges, "Representation and
              Verification of Domain-Based Application Service Identity
              within Internet Public Key Infrastructure Using X.509
              (PKIX) Certificates in the Context of Transport Layer
              Security (TLS)", RFC 6125, DOI 10.17487/RFC6125, March
              2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6125>.

   [RFC6698]  Hoffman, P. and J. Schlyter, "The DNS-Based Authentication
              of Named Entities (DANE) Transport Layer Security (TLS)
              Protocol: TLSA", RFC 6698, DOI 10.17487/RFC6698, August
              2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6698>.

   [RFC7240]  Snell, J., "Prefer Header for HTTP", RFC 7240,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7240, June 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7240>.






Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 30]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


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

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

   [RFC7525]  Sheffer, Y., Holz, R., and P. Saint-Andre,
              "Recommendations for Secure Use of Transport Layer
              Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security
              (DTLS)", RFC 7525, DOI 10.17487/RFC7525, May 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7525>.

   [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, <https://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, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7644>.

   [RFC8141]  Saint-Andre, P. and J. Klensin, "Uniform Resource Names
              (URNs)", RFC 8141, DOI 10.17487/RFC8141, April 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8141>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

   [RFC8417]  Hunt, P., Ed., Jones, M., Denniss, W., and M. Ansari,
              "Security Event Token (SET)", RFC 8417,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8417, July 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8417>.

   [RFC8446]  Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
              Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.

   [RFC9110]  Fielding, R., Ed., Nottingham, M., Ed., and J. Reschke,
              Ed., "HTTP Semantics", STD 97, RFC 9110,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9110, June 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9110>.






Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 31]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   [RFC9493]  Backman, A., Ed., Scurtescu, M., and P. Jain, "Subject
              Identifiers for Security Event Tokens", RFC 9493,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9493, December 2023,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9493>.

7.2.  Informative References

   [RFC8935]  Backman, A., Ed., Jones, M., Ed., Scurtescu, M., Ansari,
              M., and A. Nadalin, "Push-Based Security Event Token (SET)
              Delivery Using HTTP", RFC 8935, DOI 10.17487/RFC8935,
              November 2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8935>.

   [RFC8936]  Backman, A., Ed., Jones, M., Ed., Scurtescu, M., Ansari,
              M., and A. Nadalin, "Poll-Based Security Event Token (SET)
              Delivery Using HTTP", RFC 8936, DOI 10.17487/RFC8936,
              November 2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8936>.

   [SSF]      OpenID Foundation, "Shared Signals Framework".

Appendix A.  Use Cases

   SCIM Events may be used in a number of ways.  The following non-
   normative sections describe some of the expected uses.

A.1.  Domain Based Replication

   The objective of "Domain Based Replication" events (DBR) is to
   synchronize resource changes between SCIM Service Providers in a
   common administrative domain.  In this mode, complete information
   about modified resources are shared between replicas for immediate
   processing.




















Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 32]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


                       ┌────────────────┐
   ┌────────┐          │SCIM            │   ┌────────────────────────┐
   │Client A│          │Service Provider│   │Service Provider Replica│
   └───┬────┘          └───────┬────────┘   └───────────┬────────────┘
       │   "SCIM Operation"   ┌┴┐                       │
       │ ────────────────────>│ │                       │
       │                      │ │                       │
       │   "SCIM Response"    │ │                      ┌┴┐
       │ <────────────────────│ │                      │ │
       │                      └┬┘                      │ │
       │                       │  "Event SCIM:prov:<op>│ │
       │                       │  id:xyz"              │ │
       │                       │ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─>│ │
       │                       │                       │ │
       │                       │                       │ │
       │                       │                       │ │────┐
                                    "Update local node"│ │    │
                                                       │ │<───┘
                                                       └┬┘

                Figure 20: Domain Based Replication Sequence

   From a security perspective, it is assumed that servers sharing DBR
   events are secured by a common access policy and all servers are
   required to be up-to-date.  From a privacy perspective, because all
   servers are in the same administrative domain, the primary objective
   is to keep individual Service Provider nodes or cluster synchronized.

A.2.  Co-ordinated Provisioning

   In "Co-ordinated Provisioning" (CP), SCIM resource change events
   perform the function of change notification without the need to
   provide raw data.  In any Event Publisher and Receiver relationship,
   the set of SCIM Resources (e.g.  Users) that are linked or co-
   ordinated is managed within the context of an event feed and MAY be a
   subset of the total set of resources on either side.  For example, an
   event feed could be limited to users who have consented to the
   sharing of information between domains.  To support capability,
   "feed" specific events are defined to indicate the addition and
   removal of SCIM Resources from a feed.  For example, when a user
   consents to the sharing of information between domains, events about
   the User MAY be added to the feed between the Event Publisher and
   Receiver.








Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 33]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


                  ┌────────────────┐  ┌──────────────┐  ┌─────────────┐
   ┌───────────┐  │SCIM            │  │Client A      │  │Co-op Action │
   │SCIM Client│  │Service Provider│  │Co-op Receiver│  │Endpoint     │
   └─────┬─────┘  └───────┬────────┘  └──────┬───────┘  └───────┬─────┘
         │ "SCIM Ope"    ┌┴┐                 │                  │
         │──────────────>│ │                 │                  │
         │               │ │                 │                  │
         │ "SCIM Resp"   │ │                ┌┴┐                 │
         │<──────────────│ │                │ │                 │
         │               │ │                │ │                 │
         │               │ │                │ │                 │
         │      ╔═══════╤╪═╪════════════════╪═╪═════════════════╪════╗
         │      ║ LOOP  ││ │                │ │                 │    ║
         │      ╟───────┘└┬┘ Event:         │ │                 │    ║
         │      ║         │   SCIM:prov:<op>│ │                 │    ║
         │      ║         │  id:xyz         │ │                 │    ║
         │      ║         │  ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ ─ >│ │                 │    ║
         │      ║         │                 │ │                 │    ║
         │      ║         │    ╔════════════╧═╧══════════════╗  │    ║
         │      ║         │    ║Receiver may accumulate      ║  │    ║
         │      ║         │    ║events for periodic action.  ║  │    ║
         │      ║         │    ╚════════════╤═╤══════════════╝  │    ║
         │      ║         │ SCIM GET <id>   │ │                 │    ║
         │      ║         │ <───────────────│ │                 │    ║
         │      ║         │                 │ │                 │    ║
         │      ║         │ Filtered        │ │                 │    ║
         │      ║         │ Resource Resp   │ │                 │    ║
         │      ║         │ ───────────────>│ │                 │    ║
         │      ║         │                 │ │                 │    ║
         │      ║         │                 │ │ "Co-ord Action" │    ║
         │      ║         │                 │ │ ───────────────>│    ║
         │      ╚═════════╪═════════════════╪═╪═════════════════╪════╝

               Figure 21: Co-Ordinated Provisioning Sequence

   In CP mode, the receiver of an event must callback to the originating
   SCIM Service Provider (e.g. using a SCIM GET request) to reconcile
   the newly changed resource in order to obtain the changes.

   Co-ordinated provisioning has the following benefits:

   *  Differences in schema (e.g. attributes) between domains.  For
      example, a receiving domain may only be interested in or allowed
      to access to a few attributes (e.g. role based access data) to
      enable access to an application.






Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 34]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   *  Different Event Receivers MAY have differing needs when accessing
      information and thus be assigned varying access rights.  Minimal
      information events combined with callbacks for data allows data
      filtering to be applied.

   *  Receivers can take independent action.  Such as deciding which
      attributes or resource lifecycle changes to accept.  For example,
      in the case of a conflict, a receiver can prioritize one domain
      source over another.

   *  A receiver MAY throttle or buffer changes rather than act
      immediately on a notification.  For example, for a frequently
      changing resource, the receiver MAY choose to make a scheduled
      SCIM GET for resources that have been marked "dirty" by events
      received in the last scheduled cycle.

   A disadvantage of the CP approach is that it may be considered costly
   in the sense that each event received might trigger a callback to the
   event issuer.  This cost should be weighed against the cost producing
   filtered information in each event for each receiver.  Furthermore, a
   receiver is not required to make a callback on every provisioning
   event.

   It is assumed that an underlying relationship between domains exists
   that permits the exchange of personal information and credentials.
   For example, in a cross-domain scenario a SCIM Service Provider would
   have been previously authorized to perform SCIM provisioning
   operations and publish change events.  As such, appropriate
   confidentiality and privacy agreements should be in place between the
   domains.

   When sharing information between parties, CP Events minimize the
   information shared in each message and require the Security Event
   Receiver to receive more information from the Event Publisher as
   needed.  In this way, the Event Receiver is able to have regular
   access to information through normal SCIM protocol access
   restrictions.  The Event Receiver and Publisher may agree to
   communicate these updates through a variety of transmission methods
   such as push and pull based HTTP like in [RFC8935], [RFC8936], or
   HTTP GET (see Section 2.5.1.1), streaming technologies (e.g., Kafka
   or Kinesis), or via webhooks like in the Shared Signals Framework
   [SSF].

Appendix B.  Acknowledgments

   The authors would like to thank the following contributors:





Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 35]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   *  Morteza Ansari who contributed significantly to draft-hunt-
      idevent-scim-00, upon which this draft is based.

   *  Special thanks to Dean Saxe, Elliot Lear, Paulo Correia, and
      Pamela Dingle for reviewing the document.

   *  The participants of the SCIM working group and the id-event list
      for their support of this specification.

   *  Thanks to Elliot Lear, and Deb Cooley for their write-ups and
      reviews

Appendix C.  Change Log

   Draft 00 - PH - First WG Draft

   Draft 01 - PH - Moved non-normative sections to Appendix, Security
   and Privacy Considerations

   Draft 02 - PH - Clarifications on Async Events, IANA Considerations

   Draft 03 - PH - Fixed Header Field registration to
   RFC9110."Preference-Applied" header in async response.  Support for
   Async Bulk requests.  Added IANA SCIM Event Registry

   Draft 04 - PH - Removed Event Delivery Feeds and Appendix A(not
   normative), Removed "sig" events, change bulk txn separator to ":",
   Updated SubId Reference to RFC9493, other comments, fixed IANA
   registry paragraph, SCIM Signals Removed

   Draft 05 - PH - Removed Signals Events, Removed Delivery Section (not
   normative), Version(etag) definition added, Security Considerations
   revisions, Syntax for Attributes

   Draft 06 - PH - Editorial edits and clarifications, add SSF reference

   Draft 07 - PH - Document date update only

   Draft 08 - PH - Update to Security Considerations to frame as risk/
   correction

   Draft 09 - PH - Incorporating feedback from AD

Authors' Addresses

   Phil Hunt (editor)
   Independent Identity Inc
   Email: phil.hunt@independentid.com



Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 36]

Internet-Draft           draft-ietf-scim-events           September 2025


   Nancy Cam-Winget
   Cisco Systems
   Email: ncamwing@cisco.com


   Mike Kiser
   Sailpoint Technologies
   Email: mike.kiser@sailpoint.com


   Jen Schreiber
   Workday, Inc.
   Email: jennifer.winer@workday.com






































Hunt, et al.              Expires 13 March 2026                [Page 37]
