Need support

[psidana1983]

Hi Team ,
Can you please help me to understand what is the significance of the request fields

• ipv6Addr
• ipv4
• external Id

I understand that these are the mandatory request parameter but we don't understand why it is required.
I checked with my team and as per the feedback we can fetch the details based on mobile number itself . So want to understand if it is mandatory to implement it and how does the response change based on these fields.

[eric-murray]

@psidana1983
The UeId schema is currently defined as:

    UeId:
      description: User equipment identifier
      type: object
      properties:
        externalId:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/ExternalId'
        msisdn:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/MSISDN'
        ipv4Addr:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/Ipv4Addr'
        ipv6Addr:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/Ipv6Addr'
      minProperties: 1

So only one of these parameters is required. If you have msisdn (i.e. the mobile phone number), then that is all that is required.

Note that the current API definition is pre-release, and this schema will be updated in the not too distant future following changes likely to be approved within other CAMARA sub-projects.

[eric-murray]

I am converting this issue to a discussion in case any further discussion is required

[sahidkhangithub]

@eric-murray , thanks for the reply.

As a service provider if we provide DeviceStatus service with input as just 1 field (msisdn) and output as fields mentioned in CAMARA swagger, then do it will be CAMARA approved api.

[eric-murray]

@sahidkhangithub
Yes, that would compliant with the current API specification.

[Carmezim]

Are there plans to adopt OpenAPI v3.1 (added support for oneOf in parameters)?
Could be a clearer option to document the endpoint parameters requirement on such use case.

[eric-murray]

@Carmezim
Use of discriminators is allowed and is discussed here in the CAMARA API design guidelines. I don't know what additional benefit OAS v3.1 brings over v3.0.3 in this case - maybe you could elaborate.

But for the particular issue of identifying the device, the current specification states that "one or more" identifiers must be provided (minProperties: 1). Using a oneOf would require that exactly one device identifier must be provided. What is the benefit of that in this case? If the API consumer knows multiple identifiers for a given device, then allowing them to provide all of these identifiers increases the probability that the request can be fulfilled.