2024-06-18 Device Location - Meeting Minutes

DRAFT MINUTES

Date

Jun 18, 2024

Attendees & Representation

Type @ and your name to indicate your attendance

Community:  @Ludovic Robert @Fernando Prado Cabrillo @Akos Hunyadi @Jose Luis Urien Pinedo @Surajj Jaggernath @Javier Carro @Joachim Dahlgren @Rafal Artych 

Agenda

• Approve previous meeting minutes 

  • Approved?  Yes - no objection.

• Open issues and PRs

Minutes

New

• Scopes for meta-release Fall24, to be linked in DeviceLocation API Release Tracking

  • Scope of Location Verification API for Fall24 CAMARA Meta Release

  • Scope of Location-Retrieval for Fall24 CAMARA Release

  • Scope of Geofencing Subscriptions API for Fall24 CAMARA Meta Release

  • Discussion during meeting:

    • About initial vs stable maturity level. Our understanding (José/Ludovic) is that for the first meta-release we use the initial maturity level. But this could be confirmed as the release process management set in. 

    • Regarding milestone we can target M3 around mi-July & M4 for end of August.

    • About Test Definition we should provide at least scenario for basic UCs (for M4).

• Geofencing - Align with new model

  • PR: Update the geofencing subscription models to align on CAMARA commonalities

    • Decision in Commonalities to include all options for protocol and credentialType, even if in this version only HTTP and ACCESSTOKEN are supported

    • Limits for array types (number of events per subscription) will be set to minItems = 1 (permanently), and maxItems = 1 (for this version)

      • Updated as well in Commonalities: camaraproject/Commonalities#235

    • Fixes as well past issues:

      • Geofencing API - Add "format: uri" to notificationUrl 

      • Geofencing API - Defining a standard behavior for first event

    • Ready for final review

• Simplification of Device object - short term solution

  • Should device be made optional?

    • Team decision:  It's quite safe - OK for the team.

      • Akos raised the point about requirement to enhance documentation in the API - should be global for all CAMARA API

      • Rafal indicated that it would be handled & finalized in Commonalities

  • Should networkAccessIdentifier be deprecated?

    •  

      • @Joachim Dahlgren asked to keep it.

      • For Telefonica & Orange it could be removed.

      • Rafal explained that in commonalities we propose to keep it but not use it

      • Team Decision: We keep it but not use it. We will add a test scenario for that.

  • Discussion during meeting

    • Discussion about the CIBA flow.

Ongoing

• Issue: [Geofencing] Support for polygon area type

  • PR: Polygon area type added

  • Decision about adding support or not, making this support mandatory or not ? 

  •  

    • Does the following statement could be acceptable for first meta release: "We add the polygon. Circle management is mandatory while polygon is nice to have. " ?

      • We have still some time to discuss this.

  • How to managed not supported polygon: 

  • Team Decision: This one could be backlog-ed. Not for first meta release.

•  

  •  

    • New issue: Geofencing - Manage when telco is not able to manage geofencing on the requested area

      • Proposal 

        • Sync response: Add a 422 error when the area is not 'manage-able'

        • Async: Add a terminationReason to indicate that the the area is not 'manage-able'

    • Can we propose PR?

      • Team Decision: Sounds good to create the PR

        • /!\This one need to be managed for the first meta release

• Issue: [Location-Retrieval]: add POINT as possible Location response

  • Some comments on the issue. Minimum right now is a CIRCLE with radius=1m, Is it not enough?

  • Discard point and rely on Circle?

    • Agreement (previous meeting) from @Jose Luis Urien Pinedo @Joachim Dahlgren and @Ludovic Robert to consider that 1m radius will be good enough (and no need for Point)

    • No further comments, can we close issue?

      • Action: Akos will check with Max if we can close it.

  • Related topic raised in last meeting, no new issue:

    • Should we lower minimum radius for location-verification?

      • @Javier Carro has still some discussion with legal team about privacy issue

    • Any update?

• Geofencing - Adding a value in Termination Reason value enum

  • New dedicated issue in Commonalities: Adding SUBSCRIPTION_DELETED as a terminationReason [event-subscription-template.yaml] 

  • Action: Approved by usual suspects in Commonalities so we wan apply it

• Define guidelines for geofencing implementation 

  • No new comments

  • Last meeting:

    • Akos & José proposed some suggestion - in particular to improve the subscription to allow consumer to indicate the 'reliability' expected.

    • Ludovic also raised the point above UC where we are not able to send any notification.... and we need to inform the consumer.

    • Discussion/Action: DT team can move forward with a PR with the proposal about adding triggerSensibility

  • New thoughts, can we create PR?

  • Not discussed with the team - Probably to be shift to the backlog.

• Location Verification Implementation Guidelines

  • No new comments but should be addressed for next meta-release

Test plans

• Commonalities guidelines approved and merged.

  • All test plans should be updated to follow them.

• PR: Testing plan for location verification
  
  

  • Example updated, ready for review

• PR: Add Test Definition for location Retrieval #119 

  • Aligned with initial version of location-verification. It may be needed to be aligned with the latest version

    • Action: Ludovic will do

• PR: Geofencing feature file
  
  

  • Discuss licensing header: (Meeting Action) Akos will check internally → Feedback?

    • Check if Max is willing to do it.

AOB

Action items