eSIM Mgmt - Should EIDs be supplied with ICCIDs in eSIM operations

[rkandoi]

The current APIs accept the ICCID (enable, disable, etc.). The EID can be provided as an optional parameter although the given eSIM profile is already bound to a specific EID / EUICC at this point.

What are the use cases and corner scenarios to consider? How should mismatches be handled?

[david-bohaty-thalesgroup]

There are few reasons:

• Each operation (enable, disable...) requires EID as it is the eUICC that is performing the operation. ICCID is just the parameter of the operation sent to eUICC identified with EID.
• Mismatch between EID and ICCID is standard error case (i.e. the target ICCID for the operation is not installed in the eUICC).
• eIM will only know in which EID is the ICCID is installed only after the eUICC contacted the eIM and after the list all profiles operation is run. For IoT devices in order to minimize data and energy consumption such operation might not be run routinely. This could lead to chicken<->problem - API requires to list profile information for the specific ICCID, but eIM does not know the ICCID, because the list profile operation has not been requested. If EID is provided, the eIM runs the operation to list ICCID information on the EID.
• ICCID can be installed to multiple EIDs, there is nothing that technically preventing installation to multiple eUICC. It is up to MNO<->customer agreement and SM-DP+ configuration to set the rules that a profile with an ICCID is downloaded only once or multiple times (to same or different eUICC). There are valid cases where profile can be downloaded to multiple eUICCs (although typically they require deletion from the old eUICC first). For example, if only ICCID is provided then it would be not possible to delete the profile from eUICC1 to which it was installed errorneously while it is also installed into eUICC2.

[chenfr2-ChinaTelecom]

Hi team,

Thank you for raising this important design consideration.

From China Telecom's perspective, we recommend the EID should be an OPTIONAL parameter in the initial API version. This allows us to gather real-world usage data before making a final decision on whether it should be mandatory.

[david-bohaty-thalesgroup]

In general for initial release if EID is at least optional then it should be acceptable, although there might be some implementations that will require EID.

[rkandoi]

@david-bohaty-thalesgroup - this issue is at least partly address in the latest release candidate. EIDs can be supplied in any request along with ICCID. And, when both are supplied and there is an inconsistency, then a new 422 code has been defined. Please advise if this addresses this issue and can be closed. Thanks.