2025-07-17 TSC Minutes

2025-07-17 TSC Minutes

Attendees & Representation

TSC Members may indicate their attendance with an X in the far column

TSC Members may indicate their attendance with an X in the far column

Representatives

Organization

Role

 

@Herbert Damker

Deutsche Telekom AG

Maintainer

x

@Shilpa Padgaonkar

Deutsche Telekom AG

Maintainer

x

@Jan Friman

Ericsson

Maintainer

 

@Toshi Wakayama

KDDI

Maintainer

x

@Ludovic Robert

Orange

Maintainer

x

@Tanja de Groot

Nokia

Maintainer, Release Manager

x

@diego.gonzalezmartinez

Telefonica

Maintainer

x

@Jose Luis Urien Pinedo

Telefónica

Maintainer

x

@Eric Murray

Vodafone

Maintainer

x

@Mahesh Chapalamadugu

Verizon

Maintainer

 

@Nick Venezia

Centillion.ai

EUC Representative

x

@massimiliano.troiani

Verizon

EUC Representative

 

@Doug Makishima

Summit Tech

EUC Representative

 

George Glass

alt: @Olta Vangjeli

TM Forum

TM Form Representative

 

@Henry Calvert

alt: @Mark Cornall

GSMA

GSMA Representative 

 

Community members may use @name tag to mark their attendance

Community: @Alberto Ramos Monaga @Kevin Smith @Thorsten Lohmar @Murat Karabulut @Rafal Artych @Ming Hui Foo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Action Item Review

LF Staff: @Casey Cain

Agenda

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

  • Review and approval of previous meeting minutes

  • Action Items Review

  • General Topics

    • Governance & project management issues

    • API Backlog

    • Commonalities

    • Identity & Consent Management

    • Release Management

  • Specific Topics

    • ...

  • Any Other Topics

Minutes

Review and approval of previous meeting minutes

Action Item Review

Governance & Project Management issues

  • Focus is currently on M3 milestone of Fall25 meta-release - thanks a lot to the team of “Release Reviewers”: @Tanja de Groot @Rafal Artych @Kevin Smith @Jose Luis Urien Pinedo @Ludovic Robert @Herbert Damker

  • Review of release PRs of updates of stable APIs regarding patch vs minor release update

    • Only one of the previous stable APIs can go with a PATCH update (one-time-password-sms in OTPValidation, going from v1.1.0 to v1.1.1)

    • All other stable APIs will have at least a minor version update, see details later in ReleaseManagement

    • Main reason is the drop of error code AUTHENTICATION_REQUIRED in most APIs

    • Going forward we should introduce changes in Commonalities if possible with a “grace period”. With that APIs can decide to apply changes in their next minor or major update, while staying compliant until then.

API Backlog (@Jorge Garcia Hospital)

  • No new APIs or proposals for this session.

Commonalities (@Rafal Artych )

Summary: No changes directly impacting API specification expected in Commonalities public release.

  • Release Plan:

    • Draft release PR Jul 21, 2025

    • Ready for review Jul 28, 2025

Identity & Consent Management (@Axel Nennker )

Release Management (@Tanja de Groot)

  • Fall25 meta-release schedule

  • Schedule layout was updated to better reflect the actual current practice: we added an M4 milestone for Commonalities and ICM to represent the public release 2 weeks before M4 of the APIs.

    image-20250716-174429.png
  • Fall25 M3 cut off date for release PRs was delayed to July 8, with a tolerance until this July 17 TSC. However, reviews are not yet completed for all API

  • Release Management reviews have been prioritized as follows:

    • stable APIs by July 17 for TSC - OK, review comments under processing by the API teams

    • updated APIs by July 24 - ongoing

    • new APIs - anytime - reviewers have been allocated

    Target for realistic M3 is July 31

    • Release Management will declare M3 when API pre-releases are available.

    • This leaves one month for testing and public release PR creation by M4 on August 30

  • Detailed status: currently 65 APIs are proposed for the meta-release.

    • 28 new APIs

    • 37 updated APIs (of which 11 stable APIs (all 9 Spring25 stable APIs updates plus 2 first-time stable APIs)

    • These APIs account for 46 Fall25 candidate repositories

    • The Fall25 plan will be updated by M3 to reflect the actual content

  • M3 readiness of (repository) release PRs

    • 43 repositories have release PRs and release review issues

      • Release Management reviews are ongoing on all issues

      • >2 are finalized and API pre-releases are available for M3 [update as of July 18th: 15 repository releases done]

      • Review automation tools greatly help to speed up the reviews - a big thanks to Herbert and the extended release management team !

    • 3 repositories with a release PR in draft mode, with previous PRs still to be merged

      • WebRTC - under alignment - a lot of work is being done by the team to meet the M3, some delay due to codeowner changes

      • SessionInsights - not ready - suggest to target Spring26, API team can try to catch up

      • NetworkAccessManagement - many open issues without PRs, recommend to split yaml and to do a first release outside of meta-release → defer to Spring26

    • 1 repository with release PRs is proposed to not proceed for M3 and skip the Fall25 meta-release:

      • ClickToDial - suggest to do a first release outside of meta-release and target the Spring26 - many updates needed including API RESTful redesign (recommendations provided)

    • Release tracker, but no work in progress:

      • HighThroughputElasticNetworks - no yaml, no PRs → defer to Spring26

      • IoTSIMFraudPrevention - no scope issue, no yaml, no PRs - defer to Spring26

 

  • Focus on Stable API updates (9 from Spring25): MAJOR, MINOR and PATCH are now all possible updates for the meta-release.

API name

Spring25

Fall25

Update

Comment

Status RM

API name

Spring25

Fall25

Update

Comment

Status RM

one-time-password-sms

1.1.0

1.1.1

PATCH

no AUTHENTICATION_REQUIRED error code in previous version, maintenance update only

Ready for approval

number-verification

2.0.0

2.1.0

MINOR

removed AUTHENTICATION_REQUIRED

PR approved

sim-swap

2.0.0

2.1.0

MINOR

removed AUTHENTICATION_REQUIRED

PR merged

quality-on-demand &

qos-profiles

1.0.0

1.0.0

1.1.0

1.1.0

MINOR

MINOR

removed AUTHENTICATION_REQUIRED (and IDENTIFIER_MISMATCH), minor version updates

PR merged

device-roaming-status &

device-reachability-status

1.0.0

1.0.0

1.1.0

1.1.0

MINOR

MINOR

removed AUTHENTICATION_REQUIRED (and IDENTIFIER_MISMATCH), minor version update

PRs approved

simple-edge-discovery

1.0.0

2.0.0

MAJOR

removed AUTHENTICATION_REQUIRED, major update due to other breaking changes

Ready for approval

location-verification

2.0.0

3.0.0

MAJOR

removed AUTHENTICATION_REQUIRED, in addition breaking functional change

PR merged

  • NEW: PATCH updates for a meta-release: APIs not doing any MAJOR or MINOR updates can check if only a PATCH updates to align with Fall25 Commonalities and ICM can be done to participate in the Fall25 meta-release.

    • As currently proposed: release PR at M3, but NO pre-release at M3, only public release for M4 (more precise: after M4 of Commonalities/ICM); However some counter arguments to this:

      • API provider who prepare their implementations for the meta-release based on release-candidates might not get aware of the change in time

      • Risk that changes which are not just a PATCH get overseen if the prepared version will not get tested by implementors

    • Do also for PATCH releases in meta-release cycle always a release candidate to make API Providers aware of the coming change and to do testing of the API

      • might be waste of resources as there is still time between early M4 and M5 to react on the PATCH changes

    • Leave it to the API team to chose one of the options

    The first option would be good for RM team as it will distribute the work better.

  • Any feedback from TSC on this point ?

  • ISSUE: the current API-Readiness-Checklist has as a mandatory requirement for stable APIs that their previous public release has been certified by GSMA (checklist item 12). This seems to be a blocker given that in many cases the API providers do not apply GSMA certification.

    • Question to the TSC: should this requirements be somehow relaxed or even removed?

    • @Herbert Damker to create an issue on Governance repository for this question.

Any Other Business

  • none

Next Meeting

  • Next TSC Meeting will be on August 21st, 15:00 UTC

    • @Herbert Damker @Ludovic Robert @diego.gonzalezmartinez @Tanja de Groot @Toshi Wakayama not there on August 7th, we will skip this instance

  • Specific agenda topics backlog:

    • OWASP security guidelines (@Rafal Artych@Kevin Smith ) - if there are more learning within CAMARA

    • ... 

Action items