2024-06-18 Device Location - Meeting Minutes

DRAFT AGENDA

Date

18 Jun 2024

Attendees & Representation

Type @ and your name to indicate your attendance

Community:  Ludovic Robert Fernando Prado Cabrillo Ákos Hunyadi 

Agenda

• Approve previous meeting minutes 
  • Approved?
• Open issues and PRs

Minutes

New

• Scopes for meta-release Fall24, to be linked in DeviceLocation API Release Tracking
  • Scope of Location Verification API for Fall24 CAMARA Meta Release
  • Scope of Location-Retrieval for Fall24 CAMARA Release
  • Scope of Geofencing Subscriptions API for Fall24 CAMARA Meta Release

• Geofencing - Align with new model
  • PR: Update the geofencing subscription models to align on CAMARA commonalities
    • Decision in Commonalities to include all options for protocol and credentialType, even if in this version only HTTP and ACCESSTOKEN are supported
    • Limits for array types (number of events per subscription) will be set to minItems = 1 (permanently), and maxItems = 1 (for this version)
      • Updated as well in Commonalities: camaraproject/Commonalities#235
    • Fixes as well past issues:
      • Geofencing API - Add "format: uri" to notificationUrl 
      • Geofencing API - Defining a standard behavior for first event
    • Ready for final review

• Simplification of Device object - short term solution
  • Should device be made optional?
  • Should networkAccessIdentifier be deprected?

Ongoing

• Issue: [Geofencing] Support for polygon area type
  • PR: Polygon area type added
  • Decision about adding support or not, making this support mandatory or not ?
    • Does the following statement could be acceptable for first meta release: "We add the polygon. Circle management is mandatory while polygon is nice to have. " ?
      • We have still some time to discuss this.
  • How to managed not supported polygon: 

• • • New issue: Geofencing - Manage when telco is not able to manage geofencing on the requested area
      • Proposal 
        • Sync response: Add a 422 error when the area is not 'manage-able'
        • Async: Add a terminationReason to indicate that the the area is not 'manage-able'
    • Can we propose PR?

• Issue: [Location-Retrieval]: add POINT as possible Location response
  • Some comments on the issue. Minimum right now is a CIRCLE with radius=1m, Is it not enough?
  • Discard point and rely on Circle?
    • Agreement (previous meeting) from Jose Luis Urien Joachim Dahlgren and Ludovic Robert to consider that 1m radius will be good enough (and no need for Point)
    • No further comments, can we close issue?
  • Related topic raised in last meeting, no new issue:
    • Should we lower minimum radius for location-verification?
      • Javier Carro has still some discussion with legal team about privacy issue
    • Any update?

• Geofencing - Adding a value in Termination Reason value enum

  • New dedicated issue in Commonalities: Adding SUBSCRIPTION_DELETED as a terminationReason [event-subscription-template.yaml] 

• Define guidelines for geofencing implementation 

  • No new comments
  • Last meetinng:
    • Akos & José proposed some suggestion - in particular to improve the subscription to allow consumer to indicate the 'reliability' expected.
    • Ludovic also raised the point above UC where we are not able to send any notification.... and we need to inform the consumer.
    • Discussion/Action: DT team can move forward with a PR with the proposal about adding triggerSensibility
  • New thoughts, can we create PR?

• Location Verification Implementation Guidelines
  • No new comments but should be addressed for next meta-release

Test plans

• Commonalities guidelines approved and merged.
  • All test plans should be updated to follow them.

• PR: Testing plan for location verification
  
  • Example updated, ready for review

• PR: Add Test Definition for location Retrieval #119 
  • Aligned with initial version of location-verification. It may be needed to be aligned with the latest version

• PR: Geofencing feature file
  
  • Discuss licensing header: (Meeting Action) Akos will check internally → Feedback?

AOB

Action items