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 2
Next »
DRAFT Attendees & Representation Name Company Attendee Eric Murray Vodafone (moderator)
Sachin Kumar Vodafone Kevin Smith Vodafone Alex Ferreira Phronesis Matthew Hornsey Phronesis Matthew Hand Phronesis Sébastien Synold Intersec S, Vigneshwaran Cognizant Karthik Raj Rethinakumar Cognizant Manish Jain Cognizant Huub Appelboom KPN Rafal Artych DT Axel Nennker DT Abhisek Das Infosys Brian Smith Shabodi Umair Ali Rashid Shabodi Foo Ming Hui Singtel Vilim Duganic Infobip Surajj Jaggernath Vodacom Walid Trabelsi Sofrecom (Orange) Aleksander Brankovic Ipification
Agenda Review of previous meeting minutes Review of Device Identifier API status AOB Review of Device Identifier API status Current "work in progress" version can be found here PRs Closed PRs
PR #94 : Release r1.2 (Spring'25 M3) MEETING UPDATES
07 Feb 2025 :
Reviewed by Release Management (Tanja). Some changes to be made. Request for compliance with Commonalities 0.5.0-rc.1 and ICM 0.3.0-rc.1 Issues / PRs raised following Release Management review:ICM template: #98 X-Correlator header pattern: #99 Error documentation: #101 07 Mar 2025 :
PR merged and r1.2 pre-release now published
PR #101 : Update error documentation in info.description MEETING UPDATES
07 Feb 2025 :
Leave open for comments until end of Tuesday 11 Feb 2025 , and then merge before requesting final review of PR #94 07 Mar 2025 :
PR #102 : Reset version numbers to WIP following release r1.2 Update error documentation in info.description Admin PR, to reset all version numbers to wip following publication of release candidate MEETING UPDATES
07 Mar 2025 :
Open Spring'25 PRs
PR #103 r1.3 Spring'25 Meta-Release M4 PR
M4 PR for release 0.2.0 No changes relative to 0.2.0-rc.1, other than version number updates MEETING UPDATES
07 Mar 2025 :
Other Open PRs
PR #89 : Remove multi-sim text Multi-SIM support is not well-understood and should be "solved" for all CAMARA APIs.
Multi-SIM support was discussed in several CAMARA API subprojects without solution.
For interoperability reasons API providers should handle the Multi-SIM case in the same manner.
MEETING UPDATES
03 Jan 2025 :
Eric Murray to propose more generic text describing different options for multi-SIM scenario handling07 Feb 2025 :
Alternative wording proposed in this comment 07 Mar 2025 :
PR #92 : Use scopes and introduce a pairwise pseudonymous identifier MEETING UPDATES
03 Jan 2025 :
Discussion: PPID as third device identifier is fine, but should be introduced as additional endpoint rather than controlling through scopes A better description of the properties of a PPID is required, in addition to the external linkFor example, if a new SIM (from the same MNO) is used in the physical device, should the PPID be re-generated? Eric Murray to comment in PR07 Feb 2025 :
Cannot now be merged before Spring'25 meta-release. Leave open in case Axel Nennker wants to revise. Otherwise raise new issue on PPID introduction following Spring'25 meta-release. 07 Mar 2025 :
Other New PRs
Issues Closed Issues
Issue #95 : Should the 429 error response be documented in the YAML? 429 errors are now no longer mandatory in the OAS definition We do document 429 errors. Should we keep them? MEETING UPDATES
07 Feb 2025 :
No view expressed either way during meeting. Leave open for comments until PR #94 is merged, and then close if no comments. 07 Mar 2025 :
No view expressed. Keeping 429 errors in YAML for now. Issue closed.
Issue #100 : Description of 403 PERMISSION_DENIED error is outdated Current text in info.description
for `403 PERMISSION_DENIED" is as follows:
If the end user has not consented to the API consumer getting access to the device identifier information, then a 403 PERMISSION_DENIED
error is returned.
This is only true for a 2-legged access token (i.e. client credentials), and is not the only reason for this error. More generally, for both 2- and 3-legged access tokens, this error would be returned if the access token did not have the correct scope for the endpoint being called.
Updated error description text proposed in PR #101 MEETING UPDATES
07 Feb 2025 :
No comments during meeting 07 Mar 2025 :
Spring'25 Issues Other Existing Issues
Issue #21 : API Definition Terminology MEETING UPDATES
07 Mar 2025 :
ACTIONS :
Other New Issues None
Discussions Closed Discussions None Existing Discussions
Discussion #36 : Alternative device identifiers An alternative proposal is to salt the IMEI with an API consumer specific salt and then hash it This would a less useful identifier (only useful to the API consumer) but easier to justify providing under an opt-out or no consent basis Use cases for such an alternative identifier are not clear MEETING UPDATES:
06 Sep 2024 :
Discussion updated by Axel Nennker with proposal to include PPID as a 3rd device identifier that can be requested (in addition to IMEI or TAC) 04 Oct 2024 :
Axel Nennker to review and make proposal for additional physical device identifier01 Nov 2024 :
06 Dec 2024 :
03 Jan 2025 :
Discussion has been updated. Please review. 07 Feb 2025 :
No additional comments during last month Leave open until either PR #92 is resolved or separate issue on PPID is opened 07 Mar 2025 :
New Discussions
Other Issues AOB Next meeting will be held Friday 4th April 2025 @ 09:00 UTC using Zoom