2024-11-28 API backlog minutes
- Jorge Garcia Hospital
- Wahid Mohammad
- G. Murat Karabulut
Attendees
Organization | Name |
Orange |
|
Charter Communications |
|
CableLabs |
|
Telefonica | @Jorge Garcia Hospital |
Vodafone | @Eric Murray @Kevin Smith |
Ericsson | @Jan Friman |
AT&T |
|
T-Mobile US | @G. Murat Karabulut |
KDDI |
|
Slagen |
|
Nokia |
|
China Telecom | @FurongChen @Moyuan Sun |
ZTE |
|
KPN | @Huub Appelboom |
GSMA | Reg Cox @Mark Cornall |
Centilion | @Nick Venezia |
Chunghwa Telecom |
|
Deutsche Telekom | @Noel Wirzius |
MTN |
|
China Mobile | @yinming Fu |
Verizon |
|
PlektonLabs | @Wahid Mohammad |
TIM | @fabrizio moggio Antonio Varvara |
Agenda Proposal
Approval of minutes of last conf. call
Recent Updates & Recap
Review of Action Points
Discussion
New APIs Proposals: #35 (5G New Calling), #50 (Device Management), #63 (IMEI Fraud), #17 (Consent and Measurement), #23 (Carrier Wholesale Pricing), #24 (Steering of Roaming Information), #95 (IoT SIM Status Mgmt API), #96 (IoT SIM Fraud Prevention API), #97 (IoT SMS send API), #115 (SIM Historical Information), #121 (User Account Spend Count), #122 (Number Of Cards Under User's ID), #126 (Facial Recognition), #127 (Network Health Assessment), #128 (Network Traffic Analysis)
Out of Agenda: #136 (eSIM Remote Management), #141 (Energy Footprint Notification), #143 (IoT Data Transfer Activation)
API Enhancements Proposals: #109 (Support application resource requirements in application profiles)
Governance: N/A
Closing Issues
AoB
Q&A
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:
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.
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)
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.
New API proposals are included in backlog table when template PR is created, linking to the pending PR
PR will be merged as soon as ready for TSC, and should be merged before TSC review
API enhancements requires existing group’s validation. TSC is informed accordingly to validate
Link and status in backlog table will be updated accordingly
Issue to track API onboarding will be opened once new API is confirmed in TSC.
Approval of minutes of last conf. call
Minutes of last API backlog WG call available here
DECISION: Approved
Recent Updates & Recap
TSC meeting 21st November:
One new API proposals brought to TSC (1):
High-throughput Elastic Network:
Input Parameters | Output Parameters |
|---|---|
|
|
Capability and Runtime Restrictions:
Decision (previous TSC): Ask to @G. Murat Karabulut to provide some examples where this API will be useful. To be revisited during the after-next TSC meetingNov 21, 2024
Status:
Presentation slides from @G. Murat Karabulut
Next Steps: no objection - Decision to launch API work in a sandbox repository
Consent URL API:
Decision (previous TSC): under discussion in ICM group.
Status: IdentityAndConsentManagement/issues/224 created in ICM & discussion ongoing.
@diego.gonzalezmartinez : Need a deadline to launch (or not) the API work → To be addressed in next ICM meeting with the objective to close this for next TSC.
Next Steps: see above
Other topics
GSMA informed CAMARA Backlog that Open Gateway is considering certain Drop2/3/4 APIs that have been stuck in Backlog, “at risk”, due to lack of support. What this means is that GSMA is pushing our MNOs to actively reconsider within the next 2 weeks if they can support them. By raising it in the Backlog meeting we increase the chance to find enough support to “reactivate” progress.
Best Interconnect
For clarity if any API is not a priority for OGW anymore at this point in time, we still expect they can progress independently in CAMARA.
Sandbox proposal from TSC to speed-up the inclusion of new APIs into CAMARA, fostering the development of new APIs and the finalization of API scope definition.
(new) Backlog table information review Supporters in Backlog table · Issue #123 · camaraproject/APIBacklog
Problem description
Current supporters field in backlog table is intended to report original participants who pushed the API proposal template in its inclusion to backlog.
As per #118 , @StefanoFalsetto-CKHIOD proposed to include current supporters in the table.
To discuss in the modification of the Supporters field:
- Or to maintain current info, it is, original supporters of the API proposal
- Or to include current supporters of the API under specification (similar to maintainers list in subgroups)
Decision:
Meeting management
Participants are encouraged to get registered in LF page for Zoom meeting identification, both individuals and their affiliation.
Github account can be used to facilitate registration and tracking
Also required for CAMARA easyCLA process GitHub - camaraproject/EasyCLA: Repository for Contributors to test/initiate the EasyCLA signing process
Participants are encouraged to get registered in CAMARA confluence to facilitate meeting management and comments/Action Points considerations.
Discussion
Current Issues
Issue # | Company | Summary | Status Update |
Centillion | New Proposal for Authorization for Advertisements, Advertisements Consent, and Measurement
The API template is available in PR#73. | Published new standards, Next meeting (this time) Nick will bring all the documentation and present everything putted together The issue is not eligible to be closed yet. Pending to provide a concrete API description into the API proposal template Action: Clarifying with interested parties whether this may be a possible API or a Framework etc. AP: provide required information and examples MEETING UPDATE: No update | |
TelecomsXChange | New Proposal: Carrier Wholesale Pricing
The API template is available in PR#77 First YAML available here | The issue was not treated in this conference call The issue is not eligible to be closed yet. ACTION: Backlog Governance to reach up TelecomXchange to see if the could connect next meetings MEETING UPDATE: No update | |
Netfocusin Technologies | New Proposal: Steering of Roaming Management
The API template is available in PR#78
| Does not seem to be in the Scope of Camara. Not an east-west (not between telcos) Already included in 3GPP as technical viable (provided in comment) The issue is not eligible to be closed yet. ACTION: Check for support/commitment from the partners (technical implementation approach important) Meeting Update: No update | |
China Mobile | 5G New Calling The API template is available PR#31 | Telefonica and Vodafone willing to see the presentation to check whether there is support for this To be treated in next session (still pending for providing extra info) Presentation of current proposal was shared in the meeting. Slides to be included in PR#31. @G. Murat Karabulut asked about the proposal been part of WebRTC enhancement or new API → new API. @Eric Murray asked about examples of 3rd parties in this API flow → app invoquing API to request or activate features, which can be enabled or not by the telco. @Mark Cornall raised the existance of a 5G New Calling project in GSMA: 5G New Calling & 5GNCTF Meeting#1 ACTION: Operators open to comment/ask for clarification and support the API. @Eric Murray asks for user stories that can explain the behaviour of the proposed API, as not clear how this interacts with the proper 5G New Calling standard and how it solves the features that are proposed. AP for @Haojie Li Branded Calls impact in WebRTC API · Issue #52 · camaraproject/WebRTC to discuss in WebRTC about relationship new information to be uploaded and treated in next session Recommendation is that China Mobile join regular WebRTC call to discuss 5G New Calling proposal there. MEETING UPDATE: No updates | |
Verizon | Device Management The API template is available PR#30 | The issue was not treated in this conference call The issue is not eligible to be closed yet. Action to contact Verizon to ensure participation in next backlog meeting API proposal presented by @Mahesh Chapalamadugu , clarified this proposal is targeted for IoT device management to activate/deactivate/manage the connection of those devices. ACTION:@Mahesh Chapalamadugu to upload current yaml for clarification in PR#30, and present again in next meeting. @Mahesh Chapalamadugu AP to upload documentation Slides presented by @Mahesh Chapalamadugu & @joshua Slide will be uploaded and reviewed offline before approval MEETING UPDATE: Review match with other Device management APIs (home devices or similar) and IoT/Device status (AP Backlog: contact Mahesh) Also ensure this is a proper telco capacity to be consumed by developers, in comparison with Operate API (TM Forum) that are related to Aggregators. | |
MTN | New API proposal - IMEI Fraud The API template is available PR#64 | This API was presented already and included in an existing group but no work was done so discontinued. Now Rebecca is presenting the proposal seeking for support DeviceCheck GSMA proposal overlaps this IMEI Fraud will offer more information to developers than GSMA Device Check service. MTN and other supporters should meet with GSMA to discuss if proceeding with this API within CAMARA still makes sense. Request for meeting already sent by GSMA to MTN Outcome of meeting awaited before deciding if this API proposal should proceed in CAMARA
@Eric Murray : (IMEI status) service related, but GSMA is ok for this proposal. ACTION: Pending from MTN for moving on with this API. Maybe to be included in the Device Identifier family. @reg no further information from MTN, consider to de-prioritize, pending to further update Any other operator open to take the lead of this API is welcomed MEETING UPDATE: No update (pending) | |
China Telecom | IoT SIM Status Mgmt API The API template is available in PR#105 | Relationship with device management proposal, to confirm relationship. AP: China Telecom Meeting considered that this proposal has some overlap with the Device Management proposal from Verizon APs: China Telecom
@Moyuan Sun proposal to be modified to “communication capabilities” to avoid overlap with Device Management API proposal 50 Slides presented in the meeting (to be updated into the API proposal documentation) @Eric Murray @G. Murat Karabulut New proposal focused on the management of services of devices (activate/deactivate) but still in relation with Device Management concept @Mahesh Chapalamadugu (Verizon) to confirm if both proposals may still be merged AP: Email thread to be opened to provide a common position | |
China Telecom | IoT SIM Fraud Prevention API The API template is available in PR#103 | @Jorge Garcia Hospital is it required to create a new set of APIs only for IoT devices or can they live in the existing groups? @Eric Murray agrees, device status can take in charge of this new parameters, check first with this subgroup GitHub - camaraproject/DeviceStatus: Repository to describe, develop, document and test the Device Status API family MEETING UPDATE: Meeting agreed with China Telecom that this proposal does not fit within Device Status sub-project APs: China Telecom
MEETING UPDATE: New proposal shared by@Moyuan Sun about SIM-Device binding change (possibly related to Device Swap) and area alerting (possibly related to Geofencing). Actions over lines are part of Device Management. AP: China Telecom to update proposal in PR#103 | |
China Telecom | IoT SMS send API The API template is available in PR#104 | @Jorge Garcia Hospital @Mahesh Chapalamadugu requires to validate this proposal with existing SMS Send API GitHub - camaraproject/ShortMessageService: Repository to describe, develop, document and test the Short Message Service API family AP: China Telecom MEETING UPDATE: Proposal to be withdrawn → AP to take it out | |
Verizon | Support application resource requirements in application profiles The API template is available in PR#110 | METING UPDATE: No update | |
China Unicom | SIM Historical Information The API template is available in PR#114 | @Eric Murray comment: Sounds like a “historical SIM Swap” API. Discuss with SIM Swap sub-project. APs: China Unicom
METING UPDATE: no updates | |
China Unicom | User Account Spend Count The API template is available in PR#120 | METING UPDATE: Use case appears to be a KYC use case APs: China Unicom
METING UPDATE: no updates | |
China Unicom | Number Of Cards Under User's ID The API template is available in PR#119 | Use case appears to be a KYC use case APs: China Unicom
METING UPDATE: no updates | |
China Mobile | Facial Recognition The API template is available in PR#130 | EasyCLA to be solved METING UPDATE: material presented by YinMing Fu. @Eric Murray proposes in 126 to consider this APi as part of already existing ModelAsA Service APi group (also from China Mobile) YinMing Fu considers APi separated as MaaS focused on LLM models @Eric Murray raises issues on match with CAMARA authentication, privacy and identity existing mechanisms to be applied in this API @Jorge Garcia Hospital raised question on the telco capabilities been leveraged AP to China Mobile to clarify open points | |
China Unicom | Network Health Assessment The API template is available in PR#129 | EasyCLA to be solved METING UPDATE: No updates | |
China Unicom | Network Traffic Analysis The API template is available in PR#129 | EasyCLA to be solved METING UPDATE: No updates | |
China Unicom | eSIM Remote Management The API template is available in PR#140 | METING UPDATE: No updates | |
TIM | Energy Footprint Notification The API template is available in PR#142 | METING UPDATE: API to report energy consumption of a service including computing and communication. @Kevin Smith asks about the “energy scopes” managed by this API (carbon footprint, electricity consumption…) https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/green/documents/ @fabrizio moggio proposes to create an API that can report reports from the operator depending on the calculation that each telco can create (depending on the information sources of each one). | |
TIM | IoT Data Transfer Activation The API template is available in PR#144 | METING UPDATE: Focused on booking resources for a non-warranted connection for IoT, group of many devices at once, during a certain period. Not directly related to QoD or HighThroughput API. @Kevin Smith posible overlap with Dedicated Network API (proposal), related to configure a network for a set of devices. To be reviewed. AP: Open issue in Dedicated Network API to discuss. |
Closing Issues
Issue # | Company | Summary | Status Update |
T-Mobile US | Capability and Runtime Restrictions
The API template is available in PR#74 | Approved for Sandbox repository Follow-up on API onboarding: | |
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:
| |
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. DECISION API to be de-prioritised following de-prioritisation by OGW, but to remain in backlog. Issue to remain open. MEETING UPDATE: Not treated | |
Telefonica | New API proposal - Consent URL The API template is available PR#67 | The API proposal was presented, including additional slide info Discussion to follow offline in the issue/PR.
@Huub Appelboom supports API proposal @G. Murat Karabulut previously raised some concerns but seem clarified with last documentation. (uploaded in API PR#67 and also direct link) Pending: Proposal to be brought to TSC if no other concern is raised before end of week. MEETING UPDATE: under discussion in I&CM | |
Telefonica | Fixed Lines in Location The API template is available in PR#92 | METING UPDATE: Issue open in Carrier Billing https://github.com/camaraproject/CarrierBillingCheckOut/issues/190 | |
Telefonica | Line Eligibility for Carrier Billing API The API template is available in PR#94 | MEETING UPDATE: Issue open in location https://github.com/camaraproject/DeviceLocation/issues/271
| |
China Mobile | IP High-throughput Elastic Network The API template is available in PR#90 | Approved for Sandbox repository Follow-up on API onboarding:
|
Review of Action Points
AP # | AP Owner | AP description | Related issue | Status |
20240523-01 | API Backlog Governance | Backlog Governance to reach up TelecomXchange & Netfocusin to see if the could connect next meetings | Open | |
20240711-04 | MTN/Chenosis | IMEI Fraud: Check the material shared by Eric/GSMA regarding DeviceCheck, and validate the inclusion of the API in the Device Identifier group
Meeting Update: Waiting for more updates, any other operator open to join | Open | |
20240912-01 | Cablelabs | QualityByDesign:
| Closed | |
20240926-01 | Telefonica | Telco Scoring
| Closed | |
20240926-03 | China Mobile | 5G New Calling
| Open | |
20241010-01 | China Mobile | IP High-throughput Elastic Network
Pending review from Kevin about responses in the PR. @Jorge Garcia Hospital raised concerns about technology dependancy in this API proposal | Closed | |
20241010-02 | ALL | IMEI Fraud
| Open | |
20241024-01 | China Telecom | Clarifications required in IoT API Proposals | Closed | |
20241024-02 | Verizon | Device Management
| Open | |
20241024-03 | T-Mobile US | Capability and Runtime Restrictions Ask to @G. Murat Karabulut to provide some examples where this API will be useful. To be revisited during the after-next TSC meetingNov 14, 2024 . | Closed | |
20241114-01 | Cablelabs | QualityByDesign:
| Closed | |
20241128-01 | China Telecom | IoT SIM Status Mgmt API: Slides presented in the meeting (to be updated into the API proposal documentation) @Eric Murray @G. Murat Karabulut New proposal focused on the management of services of devices (activate/deactivate) but still in relation with Device Management concept @Mahesh Chapalamadugu (Verizon) to confirm if both proposals may still be merged AP: Email thread to be opened to provide a common position | Open | |
20241128-02 | China Telecom | IoT SIM Fraud Prevention API New proposal shared by@Moyuan Sun about SIM-Device binding change (possibly related to Device Swap) and area alerting (possibly related to Geofencing). Actions over lines are part of Device Management. AP: China Telecom to update proposal in PR#103
| Open | |
20241128-03 | Backlog Admins | IoT SMS send API Proposal to be withdrawn → AP to take it out | Open | |
20241128-04 | China Mobile | Facial Recognition @Eric Murray proposes in 126 to consider this APi as part of already existing ModelAsA Service APi group (also from China Mobile) YinMing Fu considers APi separated as MaaS focused on LLM models @Eric Murray raises issues on match with CAMARA authentication, privacy and identity existing mechanisms to be applied in this API @Jorge Garcia Hospital raised question on the telco capabilities been leveraged, to be clarified AP to China Mobile to clarify open points | Open | |
20241128-05 | TIM | IoT Data Transfer Activation @Kevin Smith posible overlap with Dedicated Network API (proposal), related to configure a network for a set of devices. To be reviewed. AP: Open issue in Dedicated Network API to discuss. | Open |
Decision Points
DP # | DP description | Status |
1 | Increase backlog meeting duration from 1 to 1:30:
| Agreed |
2 | Move meeting schedule to UTC:
Or align with TSC:
| Agreed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AoB
N/A
Q&A
How does CAMARA API pipeline work?
The pipeline consists of FOUR stages:
A. Submission of the API proposal.
B. Evaluation of the API proposal.
C. API proposal voting & decision.
D. Sub-Project setup.
The following clauses provides details on individual stages.
Stage A: Submission of the API proposal
Participants: API owner.
Description: The process is detailed here. To proceed with the submission, the API owner shall follow these steps:
Fill in the template available here and save it with the following name: "APIproposal_<APIname>_<owner>. md" locally.
Create a new issue in the API Backlog Working Group repository, labeled with "API Backlog".
Upload the filled-in template to GitHub repository folder for API proposals via Pull Request. This Pull Request shall be associated to the issue created in the previous step.
Stage B: Evaluation of the API proposal
Participants: API owner, API backlog WG.
Description: The process is detailed here. Upon submission, the API owner will present the proposal in the next API backlog WG meeting, to socialize it with the rest of partners. In parallel..
The WG chair checks that the template is duly filled in. Otherwise, the API owner is requested to provide missing information.
After this sanity check, each WG participant declares their support. If a company wants to become supporter of an API, then a delegate of this company needs to add the company's name in the 'supporters' column in the API backlog table. The more support an API proposal gets, the better (it may get more traction).
When the API owner considers the API proposal is in good shape to go for approval, it informs the WG chair accordingly.
Upon receiving this information, the WG chair merges the Pull Request into the main branch, and sends the API proposal to the Technical Steering Committee (TSC) of CAMARA. This action shall be completed at least one week prior to the TSC meeting where the API proposal will be voted upon.
The whole procedure (steps 1-4) should be done within 2 regular meetings of the API Backlog WG. Nonetheless, it is up to the API owner to decide if it wants to shorten or extend this time period.
Stage C: API proposal & voting decision
Participants: TSC.
Description: The process is detailed here. Upon receiving the API proposal and notification from the API backlog WG chair, the TSC studies the proposal and votes it at the next TSC meeting.
NOTE 1: Possible decisions outcomes:
Not Accepted: The API proposal is rejected, and thus will not be included in any API Sub-Project. The TSC will need to inform the API backlog WG of this decision, and clarify next steps: either (1) remove this API proposal from backlog, with objecting companies providing justifications why; or (2) ask for changes (e.g., clarifications, corrections, gaps to be addressed) required in order for the API to be re-submitted by the API supporters.
Accepted: In this case, the TSC shall specify whether the API proposal is to be hosted by a new or existing Sub Project.
NOTE 2: The TSC may also propose changes to an API proposal and take the decision considering these changes. The TSC documents the decision in the CAMARA API overview list (fills in columns TSC date and TSC decision / Sub Project; in case of a No-Go "Rejected" is documented there).
Stage D: Sub-Project setup
Participants: API backlog WG, TSC, CAMARA admin team
Description: If an API proposal is accepted and there is a need to open a new Sub-Project, the following steps are needed:
Supporting companies propose their initial maintainers to be added for the Sub-Project. The API backlog WG chair centralizes this information, and sends it to the TSC.
The TSC will use this input to officially nominate the initial maintainers by next TSC meeting.
The CAMARA admin team creates the Sub-Project repository.
NOTE: After the initial maintainers are nominated, the criteria for further maintainers would be three months of active contribution to the sub project. Code owners are to be decided by the maintainers within the subproject.