DRAFT AGENDA
Attendees & Representation
TSC Members may indicate their attendance by marking an X in the column to the right.
Community members may use @name tag to mark their attendance below the table.
Representative | Organization | Role | |
---|---|---|---|
Deutsche Telekom AG | TSC Chair, Active Maintainer | ||
Deutsche Telekom AG | Active Maintainer | ||
Ericsson | Active Maintainer | ||
KDDI | Active Maintainer | ||
Orange | TSC Deputy Chair, Active Maintainer | ||
Radisys | EUC Representative | ||
Summit Tech | EUC Representative | ||
Telefonica | Active Maintainer | ||
Telefónica | Active Maintainer | ||
Verizon | EUC Representative | ||
Vodafone | TSC Deputy Chair | ||
Vodafone | Active Maintainer | ||
Vonage | Active Maintainer | ||
George Glass | TM Forum | TM Forum Representative | |
TM Forum | TM Forum Representative | ||
GSMA | GSMA Representative | ||
GSMA | GSMA Representative |
LF Staff:
Community:
Agenda
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 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
- Minutes of previous TSC meeting: 2024-06-06 TSC Minutes
- ...
Action Item Review
- See home page Technical Steering Committee and 2024-06-06 TSC Minutes
Governance & Project Management issues
- EasyCLA Introduction (Casey Cain )
- ...
- New proposal how to manage "API Families" as Sub Projects with one lead repository and multiple API "family member" repositories (#142)
- Herbert Damker Proposal changed based on the feedback within the comments: no "lead repository" for a Sub Project, but a Sub Project / API Family will be a set of 1 to n equal repositories to describe, develop, document and test the APIs (family members). The link between the repositories is the home page of the Sub Project within the wiki
- Pull request to be reviewed: https://github.com/camaraproject/Governance/pull/146
- Issues to resolve smaller issues within the governance (for information / request to contribute):
- Ongoing project organization tasks (just in case there are questions)
API Backlog (Ricardo Serrano Gutierrez )
- ...
Commonalities (Rafal Artych )
- ...
Identity & Consent Management (Jesús Peña García-Oliva on behalf of Axel Nennker )
- Create ICM Release Plan - #146:
- The team agreed to proceed with a release candidate directly, bypassing the alpha release, given the stability and closed scope of the current state.
- Proposal to protect the /authorize endpoint for the Authorization Code Flow (Auth Code Flow) - RFC9101 - #128
- Issue 128 will be excluded from the current release, and the scope is now fully defined, allowing the team to proceed with generating the release candidate.
- Is the service API meant to validate the content of the access token and compare this against the API parameters ? - #174
- There is a recognition of the need for validation of access tokens but differing views on the feasibility and scope of standardization. Some participants suggested documenting standard claims in access tokens, while others emphasized the need to leave implementation details to individual operators.
- OIDC authorization code flow and/or CIBA - #176
- GSMA highlighted the need for clarity on which authorization flow operators should implement.
- The decision on which authorization flow to implement is more of a business decision than a technical one. Operators should support the flows defined by CAMARA and be compliant with ICM Security & Interoperability profile, but specific implementation can be decided based on business needs and regulatory requirements. For instance, an operator using only one API that requires a specific flow can choose to implement just that flow if it's allowed by the business decision of Open Gateway. For specific APIs with unique requirements, the auth flow to implement may be dictated by the API's functionality (such as Number Verification API) and be documented by the API subproject.
Release Management (Tanja de Groot Samuel Adeyemo )
- Commonalities and ICM scope issues and alpha release PRs/releases are ready for TSC approval - Combined M0/M1 to be declared after that and notified to the all mailing list.
- Question: How much time is needed for the TSC approval ?
- Question: where do we post the "Request for scope and alpha review" announcement ? TSC mailing list or the RM mailing list ? If the latter, do we have sufficient TSC members on the RM mailing list ?
- Delayed sending the message (per action previous TSC) to the all list due to an ongoing update of all the material (Update public release name - PR #35)
- Proposal: combined M0/M1 message to be sent after TSC approval of Commonalities and ICM scope and alpha releases.
- 15 APIs proposed for the Fall24 meta release sofar. All target initial (v0.x) public releases,. Possibly 1 or 2 may be proposed as stable public releases (NumberVerification and SimSwap)
- Updated CHANGELOG_TEMPLATE and example PR available for review: https://github.com/camaraproject/ReleaseManagement/pull/36
- Release management issues closed. One pending PR review 1 backlog item.
- Upcoming tasks: start looking at the APIs proposed for the meta-release.
Any Other Business
Next Meeting
- Next TSC Meeting will be on July 4th at 10:00 CEST / 08:00 UTC / 01:00 PST
- Specific agenda topics backlog:
- ...