2024-06-14 Quality on Demand - Meeting Minutes

Owned by Herbert Damker
Last updated: Oct 01, 2024
3 min read

Attendees & Representation

Type @ and your name to indicate your attendance

 

LF Staff: na

Community: @Eric Murray @Thorsten Lohmar @Randy Levensalor@Ben Hepworth  @Akos Hunyadi @Rafal Artych @Mahesh Chapalamadugu @Joachim Dahlgren @Ramesh Shanmugasundaram @Toshi Wakayama @Syed Rehman Ria Das @Konstantinos Fragkos @Ben Hepworth @Jose Luis Urien Pinedo 

Agenda

  • Antitrust Policy

  • Review of previous meeting minutes

  • Overall Topics

    • Device object definition discussion

  • Regular Topics

    • Open Pull Requests

    • New Issues

    • Issues relevant for v0.11.0

  • Any Other Topics

Minutes

Review of previous meeting minutes

Overall topics

  • GitHub Teams @camaraproject/quality-on-demand_codeowners and @camaraproject/quality-on-demand_maintainers available

    • Please use them to notify especially the Maintainers about PRs which should be reviewed

    • Note: you can add the Maintainer team also as a reviewer ... but GitHub will drop it from the list as soon one Maintainer has done a review "on behalf" of the team. On the positive side all Maintainers have then got a notification of the PR and that they can/should have a look on it

  • Discussion Commonalities/issues/171: Revise the device object definition to simplify it 

    • See also the issue opened within QoD: https://github.com/camaraproject/QualityOnDemand/issues/300

    • Commonalities is waiting for feedback

    • Discussion:

      • Device object will be made optional, but we need to document the cases in which it can be omitted by the API consumer, and it which cases the additional information from device object is needed

      • NAI might be needed for IoT device cases (which have no MSISDN assigned) - but that is a general decision for the project, not specific to QoD

    • Action: Provide the above as feedback into the Commonalities' discussion @Herbert Damker Jun 17, 2024 

Open Pull Requests

  • PR #295 Add required security scheme and scopes by @Eric Murray

    • @Herbert Damker Should we add an explicit "manage" scope which includes all session operations? (can be done also in separate PR)

      • (have we made a decision on that?)

    • Eric will update the PR with documentation for the following points:

      • Endpoints which have different behaviour with 2-legged vs 3-legged

      • Endpoints which don't require 3-legged token (no user resource involved)

    • The dependency of the Device object on the used authentication will be documented in a separate PR (after decision in Commonalities #171)

  • PR #296 Consolidation of changes related to session duration by @Jose Luis Urien Pinedo

    • Ready to be merged (done)

    • New issue to discuss format alignment between session and profiles to created (done)

  • PR #299 New API QOD Provision

    • Jose introduced the proposed API

    • Eric: Does the API still allow to have multiple provisions per device? Or should it be restricted to one, and enhance the complete traffic of the device (would simplify the API a lot)

      • Jose: all traffic is only one possible use case (hence 'applicationServer' is proposed to be optional)

      • Open: Are there use cases to provision QoD for specific flows (defined by applicationServer)? - Jose will ask on product side

  • PR #301 Make + prefix mandatory for phoneNumber

    • Merged

  • PR #302 fix for enhancement proposal #302

    • Background material for issue #302, see below

    • @Herbert Damker proposal to change to draft until the issue is discussed (done)

Closed issues

New Issues

Issues relevant for v0.11.0

Further Issues

Any other topics

  • Next QoD meeting will be on June 28th, at 14:00 CEST / 12:00 UTC

Action items

Provide the discussion result for https://github.com/camaraproject/QualityOnDemand/issues/300 as feedback into the Commonalities' discussion @Herbert Damker Jun 17, 2024