2024-07-11 API backlog minutes

Attendees


OrganizationName
OrangeLudovic Robert 
Charter Communications

Christopher Aubut @Justin Pace

Telefonica
Vodafone
EricssonThorsten Lohmar 
AT&TPierre Close 
DTNoel Wirzius 
T-Mobile US
KDDI
Slagen
Nokia
China Telecom
ZTE
KPN
GSMAReg Cox (Deactivated) 
Centilion
Chunghwa TelecomGuang-Han Ma 
Deutsche TelekomNoel Wirzius 


Agenda Proposal

  • Antitrust Policy
  • Approval of minutes of last conf. call
  • Recent Updates & Recap
  • Review of Action Points
  • Discussion
    • OGW Drop #4 APIs:  #35 (5G New Calling), #34 (Shutdown Service Status), #41 (Telco Scoring), #50 (Device Management), #54 (Number Recycling), #63 (IMEI Fraud)

    • Other APIs:  #17 (Consent and Measurement), #18 (Receive SMS),  #23 (Carrier Wholesale Pricing),  #24 (Steering of Roaming Information), #60 (Dedicated Networks), 61 (network Info)

    • Governance: #4 (Structures and roles, RACI, Maintainers initiative), #53 (Scope Enhancement API Template)

  • Clossing Issues
    • #20 (Best Interconnection), #22 (Capability and Runtime Restrictions), #19 (Device Quality Indicator), #28 (Device Data Volume)

  • 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:

  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 (10-11 CET)
    • 4th Thursday of the month (15-16 CET)
  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. 

Meeting Minutes within Wiki instead of Github

  • CAMARA community agreed that meeting minutes would only be recorded in the wiki

Approval of minutes of last conf. call

  • Minutes of last API backlog WG call available here
    • DECISION: Approved

Recent Updates & Recap

TSC meeting 20th June:

  • The subgroups/repos have been created:
    • Tenure: Maintainers and Codeowners need to be provided, scope is pending → KDDI can not commit to be Maintainer nor Codeowner. Codeowners vodafone (Ali to accept the invitation so the PR can be merged and the group launched), Orange and DT
    • VerifiedCaller: Maintainers and Codeowners have already been provided, scope is pending
  • In the sake of the health of the CAMARA group, so that the projects do not lose their activity as soon as they are born, it will be proposed that in order to approve new API proposals, these must be supported by at least 2 companies (MNO or suppliers indistinctly). An issue will be opened within governance encompassing this. TSC will take a decission next meeting
    • This issue seems to be under discussion, some companies have commited to make a more relaxed alternative such a sandbox
  • To launch the Repo itis needed 2 people from differen companies
    • Get formal commitment for TSC → Ricardo
  • Device Data Volume and Device Quality Indicator are to be approved by TSC, formal consent from the Device Status subgroup is required → Noel and Eric will be joinning Device status meeting

Other topics

GSMA informed CAMARA Backlog that Open Gateway is considering certain Drop2/3 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. 

The 3 APIs are

  • IMEI Fraud → The issue and PR have already been proposed, it will be discussed next meeting
  • Best Interconnect
  • Device Quality Indicator → formal agreement from the Device Status subgroup is required

 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.

Noel and eric will be joinning Desvice status meeting

Backlog table

  • Table updated in PR#51 (merged)

Review of Action Points

AP #

AP Owner

AP description

Related issue

Due date

Status

20240523-01API Backlog GovernanceRicardo to reach up TelecomXchange, Totogi and Netfocusin Technologies to see if the could connect next meetings23 24 1823/05/2024Open
20240523-07DTBest interconnection: Review wether there is overlap with EdgeCloud subproject2023/05/2024Open
20240627-01China Unicom, KDDI, Vodafone, DTCheck whether Tenure + Shutdown service + Number recycling fit in KYC (parts involved align internally)54 2 3428/06/2024Open
20240627-02API Backlog GovernanceNew use cases are usually proposed. Modify the Scope template to show this and approve5328/06/2024Open

Discussion

Current Issues 

17 CentillionNew Proposal for Authorization for Advertisements, Advertisements Consent, and Measurement
The API template is available in PR#386.

Published new standards, Next meeting (this time) Nick will bring all the documentationa present everything putted together

The issue is not eligible to be closed yet.

4

Governance

Adapt Project StructuresAndRoles.MD to changes in API backlog table (reduction of comments)
The aim is to update the governing document to reflect on the updated changes on API submission pipeline, according to the new structure of the API backlog table.

Ricardo is currently working on modeling a new table

Strugling with the new Table model.

Bring the PRs from the old repo 

Makes sense to bring the table to confluence? 

GitHub seems to be more accesible and is visited by further people (devs. etc.)

The issue is not eligible to be closed yet.

18TotogiNew Proposal: Receive SMS
The API template is available in PR#391

Seems to fit in the SMS as a new scope enhancement 

The issue is not eligible to be closed yet.

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

19

Deutsche Telekom

New Proposal: Device Quality Indicator
The API template is available in PR#380
Input from OGW Drop 3

Noel proposed Device Status subgroup to integrate their APIs within Noel's. Noel to make the proposal to the API Backlog and provide update

Two proposals Issue 19 and 28 would be integrating within the Device Status subproject The subgroup people is okay with this

The issue is not eligible to be closed yet.

Move to TSC, check wether there is support for this API (Interested parties provide comments in the Issue, Vodafone commited and a third supporter is being queried) Both issue 19  and 28 to the DeviceStatus family and separate repositories (deviceStatus) →  Device Quality Indicator

DECISION formal agreement from the Device Status subgroup is required. To be treated in next meeting (Device Status)

DECISION There is agreement Orange, DT and VDF, next backlog meeting there should be the outcome for this issue

23

TelecomsXChange

New Proposal: Carrier Wholesale Pricing
The API template is available in PR#393

First YAML avaliable here

The issue was not treated in this conference call


The issue is not eligible to be closed yet.


ACTION: Ricardo to reach up TelecomXchange to see if the could connect next meetings

24

Netfocusin Technologies

New Proposal: Steering of Roaming Management
The API template is available in PR#398


Does not seem to be in the Scope of Camara. 

NOt a 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 aproach important)


28

Deutsche Telekom

New API Proposal: Device Data Volume

New template in PR#39

Move to TSC, check wether there is support for this API (Interested parties provide comments in the Issue) Both issue 19  and 28 to the DeviceStatus family and separate repositories (deviceStatus) → Device Data Volume

DECISION formal agreement from the Device Status subgroup is required. To be treated in next meeting (Device Status)

DECISION There is agreement Orange, DT and VDF, next backlog meeting there should be the outcome for this issue

34

China Unicom

New API Proposal: Shutdown ServiceStatus

The API tempate is available in PR#32

(relations with device status to be considered)

Device Status seems to not fit withion the API proposal, anyhow Yang will be opening an issue to check this

May fit better in other API Status based group (Number verification maybe)

Wait until is discussed in device status group (Next wednesday 19th at 11h CEST → LINK)

ACTION: Open an issue within DeviceStatus subproject to check overlaps. → There should be different APIs (device Status and shutdown services)

Number verification doesn t fit either as it is more based in subscription (name change?)

Overlap with Tenure and number recycling

ACTION: Owner to check Overlap with Tenure and number recycling

DECISION  Separate Repos should be created but same familiy (KYC) in order to have coordination meeting

35

China Mobile

5G New Calling

The API template is available PR#31

Not treated

Telefonica and Vodafone willing to see the presentation to check whether there is support for this

To be treated in next session

41

Telefonica

New API Proposal: Telco Scoring

The API template is available #42

Input from OGW Drop 4

Presented slides: API-Overview-TelcoScore.pptx

The API seems to not fit within KYC and new sg should be created. Support is required, feel free

Scoring can be calculated both with any user registered in the telco. Less information means less scoring, Algorithm may be different for each of the implementators (MNO)

ACTION: Toshi validate if This APImay fit within KYC API familiy → The issue was rised but still under discussion 

→(Toshi's proposal 20240627) In API Backlog 20240613 meeting, Jorge TEF and Toshi KDDI agreed that the API does not fit within the existing KYC-SP.  Then, in KYC-SP 20240625 meeting, that was shared within KYC-SP and there was no objection.  Closed.

Pending meeting with DT to seek for support.

ACTIONNoel to come back to TEF

45

Telefonica

Scope Enhancement: KYC-Match API -Scoring logic 

The API template is available #46

This is just an enhancement of the current API. 

Looks fine as an Enhancement. SHould work without scoring due to limitation in some countries (not all responses include scoring, some cases does not make sense). 

Optional parameter in the output

ACTION: Toshi validate if This API may fit within KYC API subproject

ACTION: Scope Enhancement Template should be created → DONE can continue with the discussion

Once the Scope Enhancement is approved the README of the KYC sg need to be updated

DECISION ALready developed approved in the backlog

50

Verizon

Device Management

The API template is available #30

The issue was not treated in this conference call


The issue is not eligible to be closed yet.

53

API Backlog

Scope Enhancement Template

The API template is available #52

New use cases are usually proposed. Modify the template to show this and approve

54

KDDI

Number Recycling

The API template is available 55

Difference with shutdown service? 

Check the differences.

Shutdown service is not linked to a contract

Probable comon scopes with shutdown service + Number reciclyng + Tenure

For Tenure two APIs have been proposed and differ from this ones (tenure is more refered the client itself rather than devices or mSISDNS)

ACTION: Show the differences/similarities in the next meeting (prepare a slide or two)

Check whether Tenure + Shutdown service + Number recycling fit in KYC (parts involved align internally)

→ Issue is created but no conclusion yet (there should be no problem to fit all the APIs as separate repos will be created just some resources shared) next meeting should be the outcome.

Proposal is to include the API in the same API but separate repos

DECISION: Move to TSC

60

Ericsson

New API proposal-Dedicated Networks

The API template is available #59

Thorsten presented the proposal: Material here

There have been a similar work in a TMF API. Pierre offere himself to Thorsten to reach up

DECISION New repo/subproject to be created and a family that groups both NSB and DN

ACTION Telefonica providing comments this aafternoon and moving to TSC 

61

Vodafone

Scope Enhancement for Network info


Seems that connectivity insigth is more suitable as there is already work done in the Devce Status regarding conection status. 

As there is more alike a device centric information maybe fits better in device status. 

Connectivity insights is more focused in the network status

As it could be used in both of the contexts a new API may be the best option. 

DECISION:There is not such a big change for DS subproject so scope could be enhaced and new repo created within the same Device status family

ACTION: Create the template

63

MTN

New API proposal - IMEI Fraud

The API template is available #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

ACTION Chenosis Check the material shared by Eric/GSMA regarding DeviceCheck

Closing Issues

20

Deutsche Telekom

Best Interconnection
The API template is available in PR#381
Input from OGW Drop 3

Seek for support

ACTION: See if there is any overlap within EdgeCloud

22

T-Mobile US

Capability and Runtime Restrictions
The API template is available in PR#384

It was accepted by the TSC to treat this as a new API

intitial YAML files to be included in the API TEMPLATE

The issue was not treated in this conference call

Closed Issues

Issue

Owner

API

Repository

27 

China Telecom

 Verified Caller 


VerifiedCaller

2

Vodafone

 Tenure

Tenure
37VodafoneMove Simple Edge Discovery to own repository

New Issues









Action Points

AP #

AP Owner

AP description

Related issue

Due date

Status

20240523-01API Backlog GovernanceRicardo to reach up TelecomXchange, Totogi and Netfocusin Technologies to see if the could connect next meetings23 18 2423/05/2024Open
20240523-07DTBest interconnection: Review wether there is overlap with EdgeCloud subproject2023/05/2024Open
20240627-01China Unicom, KDDI, Vodafone, DTCheck whether Tenure + Shutdown service + Number recycling fit in KYC (parts involved align internally)54 2 3428/06/2024Open
20240627-02API Backlog GovernanceNew use cases are usually proposed. Modify the Scope template to show this and approve5328/06/2024Open
20240711-01Netfocusin TechnologiesSeek for support/commitment from the partners (technical implementation aproach important)2411/07/2024Open
20240711-02TelefonicaProvide comments for dedicated network6011/07/2024Open
20240711-03VodafoneCreate the template for network info6111/07/2024Open
20240711-04MTN/ChenosisIMEI Fraud: Check the material shared by Eric/GSMA regarding DeviceCheck6311/07/2024Open

Decision Points

DP #

DP description

Related issue

20240711-01

Formal agreement from the Device Status subgroup is required for Device Data Volume and Device Quality indicator. To be decided in next API Backlog Meeting

19 28

20240711-02

Shutdown Service: Separate Repos should be created but same familiy (KYC) in order to have coordination meeting

34

20240711-03

Number recycling has enough support, move to TSC. Proposal is to be in the same KyC family but separate repos

54
20240711-04

Dedicated Networks: Proposal is to have separate repos/subproject yet, this needs to be adressed

60

AoB

Next Backlog conf. call: 11th July, 10-11 UTC+2.

Next TSC conf. call: 4th July, 10-11,30 UTC+2

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 proccess is detailed here. To proceed with the submission, the API owner shall follow these steps:

  1. Fill in the template available here and save it with the following name: "APIproposal_<APIname>_<owner>. md" locally.
  2. Create a new issue in the API Backlog Working Group repository, labeled with "API Backlog".
  3. 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 proccess 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 paralell..

  1. The WG chair checks that the template is duly filled in. Otherwise, the API owner is requested to provide missing information.
  2. 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).
  3. When the API owner considers the API proposal is in good shape to go for approval, it informs the WG chair accordingly.
  4. 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 proccess is detailed here. Upon receiving the API proposal and notification from the API backlog WG chair, the TSC studies the proosal 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 neeed to open a new Sub-Project, the following steps are needed:

  1. 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.
  2. The TSC will use this input to oficially nominate the initial maintainers by next TSC meeting.
  3. 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.