Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this content. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Version History

« Previous Version 9 Next »

Community Attendees:

Thorsten Lohmar , Rajat Kandoi , Barath K , @Peter Kovacs, Surajj Jaggernath , @Stefano Brivio, Masaharu Hattori , steve.vickers , @Hubert Przybysz, @Fadime Demirer

Community Attendees:

LF Staff:

Agenda

Antitrust Policy

  • Action Items Review

  • Agreement of last minutes (Link)

  • Action Items Review

    • Issue at CAMARA Governance (Issue #172): Verbal answer during the meeting: Approval by one CodeOwner (who is not the contributor of the PR) unblocks the merging. Still, agreement according to the CAMARA process description is needed before merging.

    • Issue #16 is closed. Issue #17 (Correlating a Dedicated Network resource within a subsequent IoT Data Transfer Activation API call) is open

  • Issues and Pull Requests

  • Issue #11: Usage Scenarios for Dedicated Networks

    • Pull Request #12: Description of Usage Scenarios for the Dedicated Networks API

  • Issue #10: API Design Requirements

    • Pull Request #15: API Design considerations

    • New Pull Request #18: Initial API Proposal for Dedicated Networks

      • MegaLinter failure (Link):

Minutes

Review of Action Points:

  • Thorsten: Created PR in Governance (#172) and discussed in TSC / API Backlog. One CODEOWNER needs to approve before it can be merged (other than the Contributor). CODEOWNERS automatically added to review. Maintainers need to be added manually.

  • Rajat: No update on images. Request to leave open.

PR #12 and PR #15

  • Merged in the meeting. Agreed that since they are living documents - changes in future versions are to be expected. Members agree that having some info public is good to make progress.

New PR #18 - Initial API Proposal

  • Megalinter issue - seems like it is more restrictive.

  • Thorsten walked through the slide deck (no notes made other than Q&A)

    • Peter - question on “networks” - how do you identify the CSP?

      • Thorsten: API is exposed by a specific CSP. If there is an aggregator, then there might be a need to have a CSP ID.

      • Rajat: Seems like a common concern across all CAMARA APIs. May be could check how other subprojects approach it.

      • Hubert: Could / should be handled at a higher level.

      • Barath: Enterprise (ASP) has to subscribe / signup for specific APIs from CSPs perhaps?

Action items

  • No labels