# WG Meeting: 2025-09-09
## Agenda
- Demo of SSF Receiver conformance tests
- Stream Updated Event and Disabled / Paused Streams

## Attendees
- Shayne Miel (Cisco)
- Thomas Darimont (OIDF)
- John Marchesini (Jamf)
- Kenn Chong (RSA)
- Wade Ellery (Radiant Logic)
- Yair Sarig (Omnissa)
- Jen Schreiber (Workday)
- Sarah Cecchetti (Beyond Identity)
- Apoorva Deshpande (Okta)
- Gail Hodges (OIDF)

## Notes
### Demo of SSF Receiver conformance tests
- Conformance Tests for SSF Receivers
- (Thomas) ---Shared the conformance tests live---
- (Apoorva) Is this only for poll?
- (Thomas) No, it supports both push and poll
- (John) Will these test plans be published?
- (Thomas) The Transmitter tests have been published and the Receiver tests will be soon
- (John) What is the process for getting certified?
- (Thomas) We don't offer certification yet, but we plan to have this soon
- (Thomas) Hoping to have Receiver tests ready 2 weeks before Authenticate
- (Apoorva) Are we going to stick with the Transmitter test suite for the interop?
- (Thomas) Goal is to have Receiver tests ready before Authenticate
- (Shayne) We will let Atul weigh in on what will be required for the interop
- (Apoorva) Is there the ability to generate a pdf report of the tests?
- (Thomas) Not at the moment
- (Thomas) [Transmitter tests are available here](https://demo.certification.openid.net/schedule-test.html)
- (Gail) Great work!
- (Gail) We would like to know which companies are interested in using these tests to self-certify. Cost will be $700 for members, $3500 for non-members
- (Apoorva) Is certification required for Authenticate's interop
- (Shayne) My understanding is that certification will not be available by then
- (Gail) Correct. The interop is a step along the way to getting the tests to a final state.

### How should we test Receivers?
- (Thomas) The SSF spec is about what a Transmitter should do. There is very little about what a Receiver should do.
- (Yair) Can there be expectations based on the profile chosen?
- (Thomas) Who will come up with this kind of profile?
- (Apoorva) We don't say much about the Receiver as an entity in the SSF spec. We may need ot address that before any profile.
- (Thomas) Such a profile should contain things like: if Rx create a stream, it should then send a Verification event to show that the stream is working
- (Thomas) Could we make capabilities configurable for a Receiver? This could be a profile or possibly more metadata for Rx
- (Yair) What is purpose of test? If to test our code, that is one thing. If certification, we may need more.
- (Apoorva) These are all optional operations that do not hinder the interoperability. Maybe we should keep it to the minimum.
- (Yair) For certification, we should keep it to the minimum. This is true for the Tx too.
- (Thomas) If we focus on delivery, we can talk about whether
- (Apoorva) Push Receiver responding with HTTP 202 is something most of the vendors miss in the first go! We should include things like these that will aid interoperability
- (Thomas) If the working group comes up with a Receiver profile they would like to test, I can update the tests
- (Thomas) Problem I ran into when writing the tests is that there is no way to force the Tx to generate an event.
- (Shayne) The only way to trigger an event is the Verification event
- (Shayne) How do you test that the Rx received the events?
- (Thomas) 202 on push or ack on poll
- (Shayne) A Rx could fake that
- (Yair) There is no requirement that a Rx parse the events
- (Shayne) Do we need something more for testing Rx or does this imply that Rx is not testable?
- (Apoorva) Should the WG propose a set of tests before Thomas spends a lot of time on this
- (Thomas) SSF Receiver tests working doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ft_-NIdWwvUiDAfyWrvxaO-WvhJDDLbMQ-gRtsKBMJw/edit?tab=t.0

### Stream Updated Event and Disable / Paused Stream
- (Thomas) Raised question in Slack about Stream Updated event - when it should be emitted
- (Shayne) Stream Updated event only gets sent if the Tx decides to change the state of the stream without the Rx's input
- (Shayne) Spec says that if switching to paused/disabled, the Tx must send the event before changing status
- (Shayne) That leaves us with a question about what to do for poll delivery streams. Does the Tx need to wait for acknowledgement of the event before it can change status?

## Action Items
- Please comment on the [SSF Receiver tests working doc](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ft_-NIdWwvUiDAfyWrvxaO-WvhJDDLbMQ-gRtsKBMJw/edit?tab=t.0)
- Co-chairs to work out checkpoints / cadence to get these tests to the finish line in Nov