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
Version 1
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 #87 : Update Device object handling and description MEETING UPDATES
06 Dec 2024 :
Add examples for different request body scenarios Leave open for comments until next meeting 03 Jan 2025 :
Updates since last meetingRequest body scenario examples added 406 and 5XX errors removed Remaining error examples updated PR to remain open for comments until 17 Jan 2025 07 Feb 2025
PR #88 : Update LastChecked description MEETING UPDATES
06 Dec 2024 :
03 Jan 2025 :
Ramesh happy with proposed wording change DECISION: PR can be approved and merged07 Feb 2025
PR #90 : Use identifier instead of identity Use the term "identifier" if an identifier is talked about.
Operators often use the term "identity" when in fact it is an "identifier". Generally an "identity" and an "identifier" are different. There a several definitions for "identity" e.g. in OIDF, IETF and W3C e.g. "a collection of claims". But identity is never used when an identifier is meant.
I think we should avoid operator-speak and use "identifier" if it is an "identifier".
MEETING UPDATES
03 Jan 2025 :
IMEI definition reverted to International Mobile Equipment Identity PR approved and merged 07 Feb 2025
PR #91 : Update error response schema following Commonalities update MEETING UPDATES
03 Jan 2025 :
Wait for PR #87 to be merged and then fix any conflicts with this one. Goal is to approve and merged the updated PR before next meeting 07 Feb 2025
Updates test cases for retrieve-identifier
path to be more comprehensive Adds new test cases for the retrieve-type
path MEETING UPDATES
07 Feb 2025
PR was approved and merged offline
PR #98 : Update device-identifier.yaml MEETING UPDATES
07 Feb 2025 :
PR #99 : Update x-correlator definition in device-identifier.yaml MEETING UPDATES
07 Feb 2025 :
Open Spring'25 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
PR #101 : Update error documentation in info.description MEETING UPDATES
07 Feb 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 handling
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
Other New PRs
Issues Closed Issues None
Existing Issues
Issue #80 : Purpose of the lastChecked field in the response? lastChecked
response field is not clear to all potential API consumersThis is the last time that the API provider checked which IMEI was being used by a specific MSISDNCould be "now", or could be some minutes ago. Implementation dependent. How to fix?Rename field (maybe to lastConfirmed
)? Better description in YAML itself? MEETING UPDATES
04 Oct 2024 :
Leave issue open for now. Axel Nennker to review how this would be supported by DT. 01 Nov 2024 :
Eric Murray to propose updated description for this field06 Dec 2024
To be fixed by PR#88 : Update LastChecked description 03 Jan 2025
Issue #21 : API Definition Terminology MEETING UPDATES
03 Jan 2025 :
ACTIONS :
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.
New Discussions
Other Issues AOB Next meeting proposed to be held Friday 7th February 2025 @ 09:00 UTC using Zoom