DSB Maintenance Iteration 22: Meeting Notes (19 March 2025) - ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards GitHub Wiki

Meeting Notes

Release Plan

  • Current version is 1.34 incorporating decision 338 for Banking and Decision 361 LCCD for Energy
  • An 1.34.1 patch release is planned to align the NBL Candidate Standards with the current banking changes
  • Changes resulting from this MI will be published in version 1.35.0 or later.

Discussion Notes on MI Candidates

Note: To allow standards maintenance consultation to focus on the detail of unresolved issues, it is assumed that proposed solutions can be taken forward in a Decision Document for the Chair unless there are opposing views raised before the final call of the iteration. The DSB encourages participants to post their views on issues as early as possible.

Maintenance Iteration 22

#683 - Maintenance Iteration 22 Holistic Feedback

  • This comment was discussed.
  • Intent is to make the description of timeOfUse properties clear by introducing a new term time window to help differentiate between period. Change is not intended to have material impact or change the interpretation of the fields.
  • ACTION DEECA will review and suggest alternative or improvements to the suggested descriptions (e.g. use of time band instead of time window)

CX

#674 - CX Guidelines - Updates stemming from 2024 Consent Review changes

  • CX team gave overview.
  • Refer to latest comments on the issue for updates.

#684 - CX Guidelines - ADI or NBL to hold CDR data as a DH

  • CX team noted there is no update yet
  • Work is in progress for finalising draft guidelines to send to CDR agencies for review
  • Draft will be posted in comments once ready

Security

#650 - Weaken JARM Encryption Requirements for ADRs

  • DSB gave overview of proposed change
  • Biza noted they will review and provide feedback
  • ACTION Data Holders to review and raise any concerns on proposal.

Register

#682- Spec alignment - OpenID Provider Configuration and issuer value

  • ACCC noted that their team have completed analysis and a release of 30th April is targeted to fix spec alignment. They have posted a comment with the update

#679 - Update SSA specification-

  • DSB noted potential options for consideration.
  • ACCC operations gave overview of issue and reasons for suggesting to make the fields noted in the CR modifiable in the standards. They noted majority of the DHs have implemented correctly and this change will help the remaining update their implementation.
  • A participant noted that its not clear if this change is just a simple documentation change as there are implications to existing implementations, which the ACCC acknowledged.
  • DSB noted that given current feedback and discussions the issue may be carried over to next MI.

#671 - Remove deprecated Register scope detail

  • Not discussed.

Energy

#680 - Jurisdiction Code of ISO

  • DSB clarified that consumers with NMI's in the ISO jurisdiction are not part of NEM and, as a result, are not eligible for CDR data sharing. No standard change was necessary.
  • DSB noted that while the DH/retailers are expected to not request data of such NMIs as they have the relationship with the customer, AEMO should also not share data of such NMIs in case the request comes to them
  • AEMO acknowledged not responding but asked if such data can be shared voluntarily. If possible, the change may be required
  • ACCC noted their view that non-CDR consumer data can't be shared voluntarily but will seek clarification from TSY
  • The next steps will be decided pending clarification from TSY on if voluntary sharing of such data can be done.

#677 - Energy transaction fields should be conditional

  • Not discussed.
  • Support for a non-breaking change noted in previous MI call.

#662 Extend Get Generic Plan Detail to include a new field: tariffCode

  • DEECA noted they/AER cannot share the network tariff codes as the retailers do not provide the value as part of energy plan data. As the result, the change can't be adopted as they cannot share information they do not have
  • Participants re-emphasised the issue and how the tariff codes will help determine what plans are available for a given consumer, which is important to support plan switching.
  • DEECA/AEMO/Retailers noted this is an existing issue in the industry and would require a broader (outside CDR) discussion/consultation to resolve
  • Potential alternative solutions were discussed, such as DH providing an endpoint which can be called to check get the available plan information
  • DSB noted that whilst the proposed change cannot be adopted, the CR would be kept open until the end of MI for participants to suggest alternative options
  • ACTION DSB will raise issue with TSY to assess if change can be pursued via other channels

NFR

#660 - Revise the Availability Requirements NFRs

  • Not discussed.

Banking

#656 - A status of POSTED should indicate the final update for a transaction

  • DSB provided overview of proposed change
  • Biza stated the proposed solution may not address the actual problem raised. Participants suggested it would still help align posted transactions to balances.
  • DH participants (banks) discussed the variations in how pending vs posted transactions are treated by them.
  • ACTION ANZ supportive of proposed solution and will comment on the issue.
  • ACTION Biza to review and comment on proposed change

#687- Bank account balance calculation time is indeterminate

  • Issue originally discussed under 553.
  • DSB provided a summary of ACCC operational view that the rules interpretation is not of an exhaustive list of data elements. As a result "information that identifies or is about the operation of the account" could allow extra data to be specified by the standards.
  • Pending further comments and discussion, this issue may be carried over to the next MI

#681 - Retirement date for Get Transaction Detail V1

  • Not discussed.

#678 - New Error Code for Product Data Requests where the Data Holder does not hold the required Product Reference Data

  • Not discussed.

#642 - Update guidance for Banking account rate detail

  • Not discussed.

Potential new issue relating to issue #471 - Additional credit card fields

  • DSB provided a high level summary
  • ACTION SISS Data Systems to create a more specific CR to be considered as a candidate in this or a future MI.

Potential new issue relating to banking issues included, but deferred in Decision 338

  • DSB provided a high level summary
  • ACTION Frollo to summarise of key aspects from issues #283, #284, #567 and #569 in a new CR to be considered as a candidate in this or a future MI.

Other Business

  • None raised