search

5G-MAG / Standards

Specifications related to 5G-MAG's areas of work. Tracking comments, bug-fixing, request for new features, etc.
https://www.5g-mag.com/standards
12 stars 4 forks source link

M5 Service Access Information - Inconsistency with ConsumptionReportingConfiguration.accessReporting #93

Closed dsilhavy closed 7 months ago

dsilhavy commented 1 year ago

Context and problem description

TS 26.512-h60 defines the accessReporting property as part of the clientConsumptionReportingConfiguration. The following inconsistency was identified:

  1. Table 7.7.3.1-1 defines the data model for the ConsumptionReportingConfiguration. In this case, accessReporting has a cardinality of 0..1
  2. Table 11.2.3.1-1 defines the ServiceAccessInformation resource. In this case, accessReporting has a cardinality of 1..1
  3. TS26512_M5_ServiceAccessInformation.yaml defines the corresponding YAML file. In this case, accessReporting is not a required field.

Suggested solution

At this point, it is unclear if accessReporting is a mandatory field and shall be included in the ServiceAccessInformation. If it shall be included then the M1 data model also needs to be adjusted.

rjb1000 commented 12 months ago

I agree that the inconsistency between table 11.2.3.1-1 and the OpenAPI definition needs to be corrected.

  1. I think it would be alright to have the accessReporting property optional at M1 and mandatory at M5 provided that there was a clear specification that it needs to be set to false at M5 if omitted at M1.
  2. Equally, it would be alright to have the accessReporting property optional at M5 (matching the cardinality at M1), but only if the semantics clearly state that it should be considered false by the Media Session Handler if not present in the Service Access Information.

I'm not sure which of these options is better at this point. Option 2 seems more economical, but option 1 seems more explicit.

dsilhavy commented 12 months ago

My personal preference would be option 1 since it is more explicit as you described.

rjb1000 commented 12 months ago

Option 1 also seems consistent with the approach for its siblings samplePercentage and locationReporting.

It is also consistent with what is already specified in table 7.7.3.1-1.

rjb1000 commented 11 months ago

Change Request addressing this issue endorsed during yesterday's 3GPP SA4 ad hoc call:

Revisions to be contributed to SA4#126 (Chicago).

rjb1000 commented 10 months ago

Change Requests agreed at SA4#126 (Chicago):

Client consumption reporting configuration parameter accessReporting is now required in Service Access Information. Also clarified its population (as well as that of samplePercentage and locationReporting for consistency) in clause 11.2.3.1.

rjb1000 commented 7 months ago

CR Packs approved at SA#102 (Edinburgh):

rjb1000 commented 7 months ago