Open shilpa-padgaonkar opened 7 months ago
@shilpa-padgaonkar I will probably need more to understand how to leverage the 3 attributes: authtype
, authid
and authclaims
.
Suppose here for implicit subscription that the Application XXX for a carrier billing payment on line 0601 request to get notified. My understanding will to use Auth Context as such:
"authContext": {
"authtype": "service_account"
"authid" : "XXX"
}
Reading the document I got the feeling that this more to identify the application triggering the notification than identifying the device id which is notified. WDYT ?
My two cents:
@PedroDiez @bigludo7 IMHO we can leave this issue out of meta-release scope. As @PedroDiez has mentioned, the user-id concept will need some conclusion in ICM wg probably under https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement/issues/136 . Hence, this issue was also not added to the consolidated issue for subscriptions, as this can be dealt with later.
Setting label backlog as discussed here https://github.com/camaraproject/Commonalities/issues/185
This issue will be taken up after we have some more progress here https://github.com/camaraproject/IdentityAndConsentManagement/issues/136
Problem description Does it make sense to add the authcontext cloudevents extension for certain implicit subscriptions so that device id need not be added to data?
Possible evolution Include the authcontext extension where applicable
Alternative solution
Additional context