DRAFT MINUTES

Attendees

Agenda Proposal

• Antitrust Policy
• Approval of minutes of last conf. call
• Recent Updates & Recap
• Review of Action Points
• Discussion

• OGW Drop #4 APIs:  #35 (5G New Calling), #34 (Shutdown Service Status), #41 (Telco Scoring), #50 (Device Management), #54 (Number Recycling), #63 (IMEI Fraud)

• Other APIs:  #17 (Consent and Measurement),  #23 (Carrier Wholesale Pricing),  #24 (Steering of Roaming Information), #60 (Dedicated Networks), 61 (network Info), 68 (Resource URL) #83 #85 #86 #87 (Model as a Service)

• Governance: #4 (Structures and roles, RACI, Maintainers initiative)

• Closing Issues

• #20 (Best Interconnection), #22 (Capability and Runtime Restrictions), #19 (Device Quality Indicator), #28 (Device Data Volume), #18 (Receive SMS), 70 (Quality by Design)

• AoB
• Q&A

Antitrust Policy

The project's Antitrust Policy, which you can find linked from the LF and project websites. The policy is important where multiple companies, including potential industry competitors, are participating in meetings. Please review and if you have any questions, please contact your company legal counsel. Members of the LF may contact Andrew Updegrove at the firm Gesmer Updegrove LLP, which provides legal counsel to the LinusFoundation. Antitrust Policy

New Procedures in API Backlog WG meetings

A number of improvements are under discussion with leadership team of OGW project (Henry), CAMARA Project (Markus), Product Definition WS (Helene) and TSC (Herbert). As of today, the WG adopted agreements are three:

1. To close the agenda SEVEN DAYS BEFORE the conf. call.
   • In case a WG participant wants to include a point in the agenda (e.g., present a new API proposal), this participant shall ensure the corresponding issue is opened in Github by then.
   • Exceptional situations will be treated separately.
2. New schedule of conf. calls **The meetings are to be held by Linux Foundation (Links available at GitHub and Confluence Backlog front pages)
   • 2nd Thursday of the month (10-11 CET)
   • 4th Thursday of the month (15-16 CET)
3.  Send agenda to TSC mail list, to encourage more TSC member companies to join the call and provide comments when they identify APIs which are of interest for them. 

Meeting Minutes within Wiki instead of Github

• CAMARA community agreed that meeting minutes would only be recorded in the wiki

Approval of minutes of last conf. call

• Minutes of last API backlog WG call available here

  • DECISION: Approved

Recent Updates & Recap

TSC meeting 22th August:

• New repositories still to be created (by CAMARA Admins, not yet done):
  • Device Quality Indicator (Sub Project DeviceStatus)
  • Device Data Volume (Sub Project DeviceStatus)
• New proposal approved by API Backlog Working Group 
  • Subscription Status (Sub Project KnowYourCustomer), see message https://lists.camaraproject.org/g/tsc/topic/new_api_proposal_taken_for/108016665
    • Provide information about active/inactive service subscription (voice/SMS/data for example) for a given mobile line
  •   No objection from the TSC - Approved 

TSC meeting 5th September:

• Patricia Serrano introduction - Patricia steps in for Ricardo. Welcome !
• Info: New repositories for DeviceQualityIndicator, DeviceDataVolume, SubscriptionStatus are created
• New API proposal brought to TSC: QualityByDesign
  • See message https://lists.camaraproject.org/g/tsc/message/223
  • Proposal supported by Charter, Liberty Global, Vodafone
    • This API would be part of the Connectivity Insights API Family
    • ... but separate repository
  • API Proposal: Link
  • Discussion on the name of the API - Chris Howell raised that Quality by Design is probably too marketing
    • Consider to rename it.
    • Herbert Damker Discussion an user story under this title make sense, but "QualityByDesign" will be a larger story, involving several APIs, including the QualityOnDemand family.
  • Discussion about how the QoSscore could be computed
    • Kevin Smith Research into the scoring (this is IETF, but also active in Broadband Forum via the Quality Attenuation standard): https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-olden-ippm-qoo/
    • As of now QoSscore computing is not part of the API. This is an issue for Ludovic Robert Chris Howell - We need some uniformity to compute this. Kevin Smithagreed - data send back must be consistently across implementations.
  • Next steps:
    •   Do we create a repo with current name? or another name? QualityInsights? QualityAction?
    • TSC Proposal:
      1.  Herbert Damker creates the repo QualityByDesign 
      2.  Ben Hepworth provides user story/ies, → AP
      3. (Project team) Discuss the concept & propose rename → AP
      4.  (TSC) Adjust the name

Other topics

GSMA informed CAMARA Backlog that Open Gateway is considering certain Drop2/3 APIs that have been stuck in Backlog, “at risk”, due to lack of support. What this means is that GSMA is pushing our MNOs to actively reconsider within the next 2 weeks if they can support them. By raising it in the Backlog meeting we increase the chance to find enough support to “reactivate” progress. 

• Best Interconnect

 For clarity if any API is not a priority for OGW anymore at this point in time, we still expect they can progress independently in CAMARA.

Backlog table

• Table updated in PR#79 (unmerged)

Discussion

Current Issues 

Closing Issues

Review of Action Points

Decision Points

AoB

Next Backlog conf. call: 26th September, 15-16 CET/UTC+2.

Next TSC conf. call: 19th September, 16-17:30 CET/UTC+2

Q&A

How does CAMARA API pipeline work?

The pipeline consists of FOUR stages:
A. Submission of the API proposal.
B. Evaluation of the API proposal.
C. API proposal voting & decision.
D. Sub-Project setup.

The following clauses provides details on individual stages.

Stage A: Submission of the API proposal

Participants: API owner.
Description: The process is detailed here. To proceed with the submission, the API owner shall follow these steps:

1. Fill in the template available here and save it with the following name: "APIproposal_<APIname>_<owner>. md" locally.
2. Create a new issue in the API Backlog Working Group repository, labeled with "API Backlog".
3. Upload the filled-in template to GitHub repository folder for API proposals via Pull Request. This Pull Request shall be associated to the issue created in the previous step.

Stage B: Evaluation of the API proposal

Participants: API owner, API backlog WG.
Description: The process is detailed here. Upon submission, the API owner will present the proposal in the next API backlog WG meeting, to socialize it with the rest of partners. In parallel..

1. The WG chair checks that the template is duly filled in. Otherwise, the API owner is requested to provide missing information.
2. After this sanity check, each WG participant declares their support. If a company wants to become supporter of an API, then a delegate of this company needs to add the company's name in the 'supporters' column in the API backlog table. The more support an API proposal gets, the better (it may get more traction).
3. When the API owner considers the API proposal is in good shape to go for approval, it informs the WG chair accordingly.
4. Upon receiving this information, the WG chair merges the Pull Request into the main branch, and sends the API proposal to the Technical Steering Committee (TSC) of CAMARA. This action shall be completed at least one week prior to the TSC meeting where the API proposal will be voted upon.

The whole procedure (steps 1-4) should be done within 2 regular meetings of the API Backlog WG. Nonetheless, it is up to the API owner to decide if it wants to shorten or extend this time period.

Stage C: API proposal & voting decision

Participants: TSC.
Description: The process is detailed here. Upon receiving the API proposal and notification from the API backlog WG chair, the TSC studies the proposal and votes it at the next TSC meeting.

NOTE 1: Possible decisions outcomes:

• Not Accepted: The API proposal is rejected, and thus will not be included in any API Sub-Project. The TSC will need to inform the API backlog WG of this decision, and clarify next steps: either (1) remove this API proposal from backlog, with objecting companies providing justifications why; or (2) ask for changes (e.g., clarifications, corrections, gaps to be addressed) required in order for the API to be re-submitted by the API supporters.
• Accepted: In this case, the TSC shall specify whether the API proposal is to be hosted by a new or existing Sub Project.

NOTE 2: The TSC may also propose changes to an API proposal and take the decision considering these changes. The TSC documents the decision in the CAMARA API overview list (fills in columns TSC date and TSC decision / Sub Project; in case of a No-Go "Rejected" is documented there).

Stage D: Sub-Project setup

Participants: API backlog WG, TSC, CAMARA admin team
Description: If an API proposal is accepted and there is a need to open a new Sub-Project, the following steps are needed:

1. Supporting companies propose their initial maintainers to be added for the Sub-Project. The API backlog WG chair centralizes this information, and sends it to the TSC.
2. The TSC will use this input to officially nominate the initial maintainers by next TSC meeting.
3. The CAMARA admin team creates the Sub-Project repository.

NOTE: After the initial maintainers are nominated, the criteria for further maintainers would be three months of active contribution to the sub project. Code owners are to be decided by the maintainers within the subproject.