Use Rule Tester to investigate a Sync Expression

Objective

Test a rule expression with a specific user from the the HyperVerse Graph - namely one where the account name is test_user.

Note: This builds on the use of the generic "Object Record" as a good starting point for any search.

From here adjustments can be made such as

• Changing Data Type
• Changing the Value Rule to an expression - see below.

Expression to test

If(DEMO.targetAddress, Contains(special.Environment.MyDomains, Split(LowerCase(DEMO.targetAddress), "@").-1), false)

Problem

Unexpected final value when syncing user "test_user" for attribute targetAddress.

Eventual Outcome

A Full data sync had happened over the weekend in UAT and the HyperVerse was now stale.  I was not expecting targetAddress to be null in the HyperVerse, nor for unexpected flag values.

Investigation

1. Located the object in the time traveller and made the DEMO silo the context silo:
2. Ran a sync preview and inspected the Process Actions
3. Not expecting to see any change with the Import Settings, inspected the corresponding Rule Results:

Rule Result Details

Revised Approach

Suspecting a possible issue with the use of "Contains" for the intersection of 2 sets (which was misguided because I was thinking of multivalue proxyAddresses not single value targetAddress), I wanted to be able to test the hasMail IAF rule in isolation.

1. Started with the Rule Tester using a generic approach in Use Rule Tester to investigate a Silo object
2. Changed the Data Type to HyperSync Graph
3. Changed the Value Rule to the expression above, namely:
   If(DEMO.targetAddress, Contains(special.Environment.CommercialDomains, Split(LowerCase(DEMO.targetAddress), "@").-1), false)
4. Clicked Render - returned 1 object with Rule Value == false
   

   This was consistent with the rule results above - i.e. no change, when I was expecting there to be a value based on what I was seeing in MIM, namely:

   targetAddress,SMTP:test_user@sidmdemo.mail.onmicrosoft.com,DEMO,string,11/30/2022 7:20:27 PM

5. There had been no change since 11/30/2022 … so I wasn't expecting one now …
6. Progressively broke down the expression:
   Contains(special.Environment.Domains, Split(LowerCase(DEMO.targetAddress), "@").-1): False
   1. 1. • special.Environment.Domains

      sidmdemo.onmicrosoft.com

      sidmdemo.mail.onmicrosoft.com

      1. • Contains(special.Environment.Domains,"sidmdemo.mail.onmicrosoft.com"): TRUE
         • Contains(special.Environment.Domains,"a" "b" "c" "sidmdemo.mail.onmicrosoft.com"): TRUE
           Note: at this point it appears that contains works as an intersection test - useful for proxyAddresses but unnecessary for targetAddress !!!
   • • • Split(LowerCase(DEMO.targetAddress), "@"): Null
       • DEMO.targetAddress: Null
       • HV.targetAddress: Null
         … at this point I was confused, and at this point returned to the MIM Sync console to investigate current state.
7. Here I deduced I should run delta imports for DEMO AD management agents, and this detected unexpected changes.
8. Checked to see if any pending changes were present on the MIM MV object, and sure enough there were!
9. Deduced that the sync rule was actually OK, and that instead the underlying directory data had indeed been changed and needed to be re-scanned.