API Enhancement due to Consent Management · Issue #16 · camaraproject/BlockchainPublicAddress

@Pedro Díez García

ON-HOLD

No feeback received yet from Business side.

• Consent Management topic is set undefinitely on-hold until input from TEF Business

10/OCT: TEF indicates this topic is still on-hold. Will ping Business durign this quarter

24/OCT: So far Keep this ON-HOLD.

Avoiding the use of "plain" phoneNumber as filter criteria of blockchain retrieval · Issue #51 · camaraproject/BlockchainPublicAddress

@Pedro Díez García
@Georgios Papadopoulos

ONGOING

Not providing “plain” phoneNumber as input criteria for blockchain retrieval

10/OCT: DT indicates we have to think in a confident solution. TEF indicates not think in detail so far but it will do.

24/OCT: Proposal presented by TEF to be reviewed. Explained during the meeting. Will be checked offline and if alll fine, it would be a way forward to fix the issue.

06/NOV: PR Avoid phoneNumber as query param - Blockchains Retrieval by PedroDiez · Pull Request #60 · camaraproject/BlockchainPublicAddress raised to cover this Issue

Enhancement of blockchainPublicAddress belongs to the user whose phoneNumber is indicated to set-up the binding relationship · Issue #52 · camaraproject/BlockchainPublicAddress

@Georgios Papadopoulos

PENDING

Enforcement about blockchainPublicAddress really belongs to the phoneNumber indicated (i.e, the user that owns the phoneNumber)

10/OCT: DT indicates we have to design a solution that provides security and reliability. In the past was commented about sending of OTP but not also sure that could be a good way.

24/OCT: TEF commented this need deep thinking, as the constrain is how to guarentee the blockcahin is associated to the user whose phoneNumber is used to the bound. DT acknowledges this and indicates the topic would be to ensure how the user has control over the blockchain in a usable manner (An option would be to create a new wallet for each binding but that was not very usable from User’s point of view). DT and TEF will talk offline about this topic.
07/NOV: Pedro will contact Georgios in advance in ordr to talk in a possible solution for this before the next meeting.

API Aligment with Commonalities and Further enhancements · Issue #57 · camaraproject/BlockchainPublicAddress

@Pedro Díez García

CLOSED

Issue raised from former meeting in order to adapt API Specification to Commonalities

Related PR raised:
API aligment with Commonalities by PedroDiez · Pull Request #58 · camaraproject/BlockchainPublicAddress

Approved by DT (@Georgios Papadopoulos (Unlicensed)). Will be given one more week to provide comments if any and, if no other topics, will be merged on 31/10.

Intention is to have baseline API Spec to work on for the next release.

31/OCT: PR is MERGED, Therefore issue is closed

Add Aleph Zero to the default Protocol List · Issue #59 · camaraproject/BlockchainPublicAddress

Aleph Zero

ONGOING

Proposal by Aleph Zero to consider their blockchain as part of BlockChain Networks
07/NOV: Documented in the Issue the BlockChain Network to be considered. Take advantage of ongoing PR#60 to consider within it.

AoB

WG

Next Steps

Official Release is targeted around March/25.
We can move forward in advance to be ready in time for it.
Next steps are:
- Try to find a solution for Issue 52
- Align Repository documentation
- Generate an initital Test Plan