...
- Review if this work has been done.
Discussion
| Item | Who | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Status description in flow [Issue#32](Include detailed status description · Issue #32 · camaraproject/WebRTC (github.com) | Santiago | the lack of detail on the status field blocks the CallHandling flow definition. Some events could be clear, but they require explicit definition. I included some examples on issue #32, but I will really apprecaite some feedback on that point. Without it, map the flow with IMS netowrk becomes really complex. Reviewed the call flow and correct the status messages with the new information. |
| Problems on the current API description and it's translation to the flow | Santiago | JSON ACKs from webclient, probably directly extracted from the WebSocket notification option... but How a PSN will send n ACK?Do we lack of PUT messages there (example: message 14 of the call handling). Some discussion tomorrow about the content of these ACKs and if we need them or not, will be great. |
| Is it mandotaroy to have a notification channel? | Santiago | |
| Rewarding the linting rules against current API specification gives some warnings. | Rafał | It is necessary to review the API deifnition and correct the warnig/error lines. |
Actions points.
| Description | Who |
|---|---|
| Review de details on the status field from CallHandling flow deifnition. [Issue#32](Include detailed status description · Issue #32 · camaraproject/WebRTC (github.com) | Santiago |
AOB
- Next meeting will be the 23rd of April
- From then to now the minutes will be uploaded to Confluence