2025-10-14 PredictiveConnectivityData Minutes
Community Attendees:
@Alberto Ramos Monaga @Sachin Kumar @Eric Murray
Community Attendees:
LF Staff:
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.
Approval of previous meeting minutes and meeting agenda.
Open issues and PRs
Discussion Summary
Agenda 1: Clarifications for asynchronous response in callback #533
Agenda 2: Spring26 meta-release scope
AoB
Approval of previous meeting minutes
2025-09-16 PredictiveConnectivityData Minutes: OK
Closed Issues
# | Summary | Action |
|---|---|---|
Release r1.2 (Fall'25 M4) - Publication of Fall'25 M4 public release of predictive-connectivity-data v0.1.0 | Under review by the Release Management WG
|
Open Issues & PRs
# | Summary | Action |
|---|---|---|
Add “Best Effort” Service Level - Introduce a BEST_EFFORT service level providing qualitative coverage predictions without guaranteeing specific service levels. |
| |
Add User Stories for Predictive Connectivity Data API - The Predictive Connectivity Data API currently does not have documented User Stories, which are mandatory for stable public releases. The current status of the API is initial and not a priority, but it is a task that would be good to move forward with. |
| |
Issue from Release Management: | Context: proceed with Fall’25 RC as is, create issues, document the exception in the API Readiness Checklist, and fix in v0.2.0 (post-Fall’25, dual-phase). Status: An issue (#533) has been created in the commonalities group to address this issue. Once a decision has been made, it will be applied to this issue.
|
Discussion Summary
Agenda 1: Clarifications for asynchronous response in callback #533
Problem description
Some APIs such as Population Density and Predictive Connectivity Data support asynchronous responses for large or time-consuming requests by allowing a sink (callback URL).
Current CAMARA guidelines define two subscription types — instance-based (implicit) and resource-based (explicit) — and specify that event notifications use CloudEvents.
The open question is whether asynchronous responses (triggered once per request) should also adopt the CloudEvents structure, or remain simple JSON payloads.
Discussion summary
Patrice Conil and Pedro Diez both argued that an asynchronous response is not an event but rather a deferred response, which happens once and whose value lies in the payload, not in the occurrence of the event itself. Therefore, using CloudEvents adds unnecessary overhead and does not conceptually fit this case.
The group agreed that the key question is whether CAMARA should mandate CloudEvents as the default envelope for asynchronous responses, or allow plain JSON responses for simplicity.
Next step
→ The group will discuss and reach a consensus on this topic in an upcoming meeting before applying any decision or documentation update.
Agenda 2: Spring26 meta-release scope
AoB
N/A
Action Points