2025-12-11 API Backlog Minutes

2025-12-11 API Backlog Minutes

 

Attendees

Organization

Name

Orange

 

Charter Communications

CableLabs

 

Telefonica

@Alberto Ramos Monaga

Vodafone

@Eric Murray

Ericsson

@Jan Friman @kamran keykhosravi

AT&T

 

T-Mobile US

 

KDDI

 

Slagen

 

Nokia

@Tanja de Groot

China Telecom

 

ZTE

 

KPN

 

GSMA

@Reg Cox

Centilion

 

Deutsche Telekom

 

MTN

 

China Mobile

 

Verizon

PlektonLabs

 

TIM

 

NTT

 

China Unicom

 

Infosys Ltd

 

Spectrum

 

Chunghwa Telecom

 

Telecom Argentina

 

Huawei

 

xFlow Research

@ALI IQBAL

Agenda Proposal


Approval of minutes of last conf. call

  • Minutes of last API backlog WG call available here

    • DECISION: OK


Antitrust Policy

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

 

 

New Procedures in API Backlog WG meetings

A number of improvements are under discussion with leadership team of OGW project (Henry), CAMARA Project (Markus), Product Definition WS (Helene) and TSC (Herbert). As of today, the WG adopted agreements are three:

  1. To close the agenda SEVEN DAYS BEFORE the conf. call.

    • In case a WG participant wants to include a point in the agenda (e.g., present a new API proposal), this participant shall ensure the corresponding issue is opened in Github by then.

    • Exceptional situations will be treated separately.

  2. New schedule of conf. calls **The meetings are to be held by Linux Foundation (Links available at GitHub and Confluence Backlog front pages)

    • 2nd Thursday of the month (9-10:30 UTC)

    • 4th Thursday of the month (15-16:30 UTC)

  3.  Send agenda to TSC mail list, to encourage more TSC member companies to join the call and provide comments when they identify APIs which are of interest for them. 

  4. New API proposals are included in backlog table when template PR is created, linking to the pending PR

  5. PR will be merged as soon as ready for TSC, and should be merged before TSC review

  6. API enhancements requires existing group’s validation. TSC is informed accordingly to validate

  7. Link and status in backlog table will be updated accordingly

  8. Issue to track API onboarding will be opened once new API is confirmed in TSC.

  9. New proposal Lifecycle for frozen APIs.


Recent Updates & Recap

Last TSC meeting 2025-12-04:

  • Governance & Project Management

    • TSC Election: See message https://lists.camaraproject.org/g/tsc/message/355

    • Migration to Zulip: creation of channels for working groups possible (ICM and ReleaseManagement done, Commonalities not yet). No objections, @Casey Cain should go forward with the migration.

    • Unified Clean-up Process for Inactive Onboarding Trackers and Repositories: Ready to merge - https://github.com/camaraproject/Governance/pull/201. For already evaluated once @Alberto Ramos Monaga will create issues in APIBacklog:

      • #283 - [Repository Transition → Archived]: HomeDevicesQoD,

      • #284 - [Repository Transition → Archived]: SiteToCloudVPN,

      • #285 - [Repository Transition → Archived]: ShortMessageService,

      • #286 - [Repository Transition → Archived]: VoiceVerificationCode: China Unicom has expressed its intention to proceed with both proposals.

      • #287 - [Repository Transition → Archived]: VoiceNotification.

      Please confirm whether the assessment is correct or if there are other repositories that need to be taken into account. The review was based on the Lifecycle Clean-up Process defined in Governance and executed after the Fall 25 meta-release.

      1. We screened onboarding trackers and Sandbox repositories against the Phase A/C/D criteria (presence of artifacts, releases/meta-releases, validation, WG activity, maintainer engagement).

      2. Each candidate was classified (Failed Onboarding, Partial Progress, or Stalled Reviewed Release) based on prolonged inactivity and lack of a clear roadmap.

      3. Code owners were notified and given a 4-week window to react (progress, ownership transfer, or evolution plan).

      4. After this window, if no viable plan was provided, we proposed transition to “Archived” to the TSC, together with the corresponding actions (archive repo, close tracker, update APIbacklog and wiki).

  • Commonalities: https://github.com/camaraproject/Commonalities/issues/543 - the scope is frozen - up to now 30% completed.

  • Identity & Consent Management

    • Spring26 meta-release status: The scope for ICM within Spring26 is now closed (M1 reached). The overall scope is currently 45% complete. The working group has issued a Call to Action for members to take ownership of remaining issues to meet the M2 (Release Candidate) deadline of January 31st.

    • Consent Info API evolution / Controlled Consent Capture Delegation: The next version of the ConsentInfo API (target v0.2.0) is not bound to Spring26. The PR adding an optional callbackUrl parameter feature in Consent Info API has been merged. Meanwhile, Telefónica has provided a proposal that suggests managing Consent Capture Delegation via two distinct APIs rather than overloading the existing API. That proposal is under review and waiting for feedback.

  • Release Management

    • M1 APIs (Dec 15) - Spring26 is not recommended for APIs: A reminder has been sent to codeowners list that requests for Spring26 participation are to be done through a GitHub issue in Release Management. However it is preferred that APIs target Fall26 or do a release earlier outside the meta-release.

    • M2 (Jan 31, 2026) Release-candidate of Commonalities & ICM.

    • M3 (Jan 31, 2026) Release-candidate for Spring26 APIs.


Other topics

(Discussion) We need to agree on the API Category for Device Authenticity (link) at working-group level, using the current taxonomy (Authentication and Fraud Prevention, Location Services, Communication Services, Communication Quality, Device Information, Computing Services, Payments and Charging, Service Management). By analogy with Device Identifier, it could fit under Device Information, but given its role as a risk/auth signal it could also fall under Authentication and Fraud Prevention.

  • Decision: Use the category of Device Information

(Reminder) CAMARA APIs - Functional Differences (Use-Case & Data Semantics Edition): A white paper has been produced for publication on the CAMARA website to explain in detail what problem each API solves, what data it delivers, how to interpret it, and how to combine them in risk and error-prevention policies (Audience: Non-telco experts) APIs covered: SIM Swap · Device Swap · Tenure · Number Recycling - (link)


Discussion

Current Issues 

Issue #

Company

Summary

Status Update

#250

Infosys

In Home Device Management API

The API template is available in #281

LAST UPDATES:

The API enables full management of devices connected to a home network, providing connection details and control functions for both customer and operator devices.

  • @Eric Murray - What use cases could this API support that TR-369 cannot? And if TR-369 has gaps, why is it preferable to create a new API in CAMARA instead of evolving TR-369 within the Broadband Forum?

    • @ravim95-eng: The BBF TR-369 standard focuses on low-level broadband network operations intended for service providers. In contrast, CAMARA offers a higher-level abstraction through simplified APIs, making them accessible to non-telecom consumers without requiring knowledge of underlying protocols like TR-369, TR-069, or TR-181. The proposed CAMARA Device API is designed to be standards-agnostic and easily consumable across domains.

  • @Alberto Ramos Monaga: Bit concerned about a possible overlap with the already approved Home Devices QoD API, since both build on the same household device inventory.

    • @ravim95-eng: I see the proposed InHomeDeviceAPI to be foundational/pre-requisite API for usecases like Home Devices QOD API rather than functional overlap

Aug 28, 2025: The presentation will be on the next Backlog meeting with all needed supporting documentation and the API proposal.

AP: The presentation will be on the next Backlog meeting with all needed supporting documentation and the API proposal.

Sep 11, 2025: AP: The presentation will be on the next Backlog meeting with all needed supporting documentation and the update API proposal.

Key Architects are out of office; hence team would be presenting ‘AP 20250828-01’ on the next call of 25th September.

Sep 25, 2025: The presentation has been carried out during the meeting. Discussion:

  • @Mahesh Chapalamadugu (verizon):

    • Noted that the IoT Device Management repo is still very early, with the goal of basic lifecycle management, later extending to diagnostics.

    • Raised the possibility of overlap/synergy between IoT Device Management and the new In-home Device API.

    • Emphasized CAMARA’s principle of keeping APIs small, intent-based and simple, rather than large YAMLs covering multiple functions.

    • Asked whether In-home Device API is really distinct or if it should be consolidated with IoT device management.

  • @Ravi:

    • Explained that In-home Device API is intended to manage household connected devices (desktops, laptops, mobiles) behind a modem, exposing standard APIs for ISPs and third-party apps (voice assistants, apps, etc.).

    • Suggested that IoT and connected devices should be unified under one specification rather than kept separate.

    • Argued that at an abstraction level the data attributes for IoT and connected devices are nearly identical, so one generalized API could cover both.

    • Clarified that the proposal is not about putting everything in one YAML but keeping separate operations with a shared model for all devices.

    • Conceded that while the current focus is “in-home”, the model could extend beyond (e.g., connected cars).

AP1: Create a PR with the API proposal following the template - OK

  • Join to the call of IoT Device Management to clarify scope and positioning (if the API remain separate, clearly document the distinct use cases, if not proposed a unified device object model that works across IoT, home, and possible other domains like automotive).

  • https://github.com/camaraproject/APIBacklog/issues/50 - This is the issue in API backlog for device management. You will also find a pdf file which has high level scope defined in the same issue.

    • @Ravi Shekhar attended IoT device management backlog meeting earlier to understand the scope of it and overlap with proposal here. Based on those discussions, #50 is about IoT devices management and the one proposed here is related to devices connected to modem, so the scope are different. I am refining the usecase for this proposal & mostly have it for upcoming call - OK

AP2: Upload the presentation to the supporting document within the current PR - OK

Oct 9, 2025, Oct 23, 2025: Not treated

Nov 13, 2025: Create the PR with the related presentation. The last point of IoT Device management has been solved (see previous minutes).

Nov 27, 2025: Not treated - Review posible overlap with https://github.com/camaraproject/NetworkAccessManagement (Discussed): NetworkAccessManagement API scope to enable developers to manage network operator-supplied devices(ie. Modem). Scope of proposed API here is to enable developers to manage network access of home devices(ie. Laptop, Smartphone) that are connected to Modem.


MEETING UPDATE:

Dec 11, 2025: There are no further topics pending on this issue. The idea would be to present this API to the TSC for approval.

#259

Heksagon

Voice One Time Password Call

The API template is available at #263

INITIAL CONTEXT:

The “Voice One Time Password Call” API is used to send short-lived one time passwords (OTP) to a phone number via voice call and validate it afterwards, in order to provide a proof of possession of the phone number.

AP1: Update the PR by creating a new entry under documentation/API-proposals instead of modifying documentation/API-proposal-template.md.

AP2: Create an issue with the API proposal label and link it to this PR.

AP3: Resolve the easyCLA error by clicking the provided link and signing the authorization

Sep 25, 2025: Not treated

Relation with Voice Verification Code (#233) - Herbert suggest if we can merge this with this issue.

Heksagon: Regarding your suggestion to merge our issue proposal with #233, we have checked and it looks like that their use case works only for "IMS based audio codes" as explained in their API description which is not the case for our API. So we don't think that merging the two issues would be a good idea. If there is any further discussion needed on that, we can have a call to evaluate it.

Oct 10, 2025, Oct 23, 2025, Nov 13, 2025,Nov 27, 2025: Not treated


MEETING UPDATE:

Dec 11, 2025: Resolve the PR comments and upload the PowerPoint presentation - Not treated

#267

Ericsson

Radio signal Strength API

The API template is available at #268

INITIAL CONTEXT:

The API exposes microwave link endpoints, carrier frequencies and the current attenuation level for a given geographical area. API Consumer can convert a link’s attenuation in dB into mm/h of rain intensity. The API can be used by weather companies or by climate researchers to improve accuracy, delay, geographical coverage and spatial resolution.

Oct 23, 2025:

AP1: The person responsible for sending the ppt will present it at the next Backlog session - OK

AP2: Solve the EasyCLA - OK

Nov 13, 2025: Ericsson made a presentation for the proposal.

  • Question from @Kevin Smith: For a service API this looks like too much low-level network detail. Instead, we should expose something the average application provider can actually use – e.g. in a rainfall use case, give “predicted rainfall” as a simple outcome, not raw network-state parameters. He’s asking whether you or the others agree with that direction.

  • Response from @kamran: Our original intention with this API was precisely the opposite: to expose raw data, because weather companies and researchers can combine it with their own sensors and that’s where the added value is for them. I agree that some of this can reveal network details, but we could mitigate that with compromises such as adding noise or similar techniques.

  • Point from Vodafone:

    • Common concern: the proposed API is far too technical for a CAMARA service API; several participants suggest shifting toward a use-case–driven service (e.g., rainfall prediction) instead of exposing raw network metadata.

    • Vodafone’s position: their teams are already building an algorithmic, processed-data solution, not a raw-network interface; they see more market value in outcome-level insights aligned with concrete use cases.

    • Open question: while meteorological agencies could use raw data, it’s unclear whether the market truly wants that, or whether CAMARA should instead standardize a higher-level “results” API rather than a low-level RF-data feed.

  • Point from @Eric Murray:

    • This proposal is too technical, with a very narrow audience, because most customers don’t care about attenuation itself, they care about rainfall at a given place and time.

    • Therefore he suggests shifting to an API where rainfall is the response, and the telco (or provider) handles the internal problem of converting network data into rainfall prediction, which he considers a solvable problem.

AP: Ericsson will have a internal discussion to see if they want to change anything related with the collected feedback and if not, notified backlog to review the PR and sent to TSC for approval.

Nov 27, 2025: New update will come in the next session.


MEETING UPDATE:

Dec 11, 2025: Suggestion naming, avoid attenuation and the technical output parameters (tx, rx, and polarization). The group want to use Radio Signal Strength. No objections to sent to next TSC.

Out Of Agenda

  • N/A

Closing Issues

Issue #

Company

Summary

Status Update

18

Totogi

New Proposal: Receive SMS

 

The API template is available in PR#75

Seems to fit in the SMS as a new scope enhancement 

The issue is not eligible to be closed yet.

ACTION: Ricardo to formally proceed with the scope enhancement os the SMS group.

MEETING UPDATE:

  • Reminder sent


→ Follow-up on API onboarding tracker: Pending.

20

Deutsche Telekom

Best Interconnection

 

The API template is available in PR#88

 

Input from OGW Drop 3

Seek for support

ACTION: See if there is any overlap within EdgeCloud

ACTION: Nick (centillion) to review with Noel (DT) about the match of use cases and consider support.