[Openbts-discuss] Any plan to fork OpenBTS and/or merge with Osmocom code?

James Jordan james.jordan.fun at gmail.com
Mon Apr 11 01:39:54 UTC 2011

I don't think openbts and Osmocom should be integrated together.
If you want to integrated them the source is there.
I don't think there is any wrong in Commercial version. Openbts is the
inteligient property
to their owner. there is nothing wrong even the source is totally not open.
Can anyone get the approve by the government to build truely free gsm

On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) <
lists at infosecurity.ch> wrote:

> Hi all,
> this email don't want to be a provocative email but just an opinion
> related to the creation of value for GSM TLC stack into the opensource
> environment.
> As we know currently there are several different projects growing into
> the GSM (then tetra and in future 3G?) opensource ecosystem.
> The first "pratical" base has been OpenBTS as a simplified GSM um
> interface for VoIP.
> The second major implementations was around the osmocom project that
> build-up a complete and well designed GSM stack with all the modular
> interfaces and protocols for communications between BTS and BSC, with
> MSC, HLR, GGSN, SGSN and major GSM network components.
> Additionally, if i understood correctly osmocom is much more advanced
> with broad scope and better design than OpenBTS.
> It seems to me that OpenBTS it's almost stalled due to the "commercial
> fork" of the OpenSource project and only fairwaves is contributing to
> the opensource branch.
> I personally really dislike the "Commercial fork" approach where the
> community is used only in the early phase of the project to improve it
> and from a certain point the community doesn't get almost any added value.
> I like much more the dual-licensed approach like AGPL/Commercial (like
> http://pjsip.org) where all the value of the code is publicly released.
> However, my post was related to a question:
> - How complex would be, leveraging existing public OpenBTS code, to
> integrate into the Osmocom project?
> I mean, having a sort of lightweight BTS component speaking A-Bis over
> IP to OpenBSC like the cheap nano ip.access BTS does.
> For what i read now Osmocom have 2 software BTS (Osmo-BTS and Soft-BTS),
> communicating with the A-BIS over IP interface to OpenBSC:
> http://lists.gnumonks.org/pipermail/openbsc/2011-March/002529.html
> http://lists.gnumonks.org/pipermail/openbsc/2010-April/001508.html
> I've read that only a lot of time ago (2009) there was a discussion
> about OpenBTS to OpenBSC integration:
> http://lists.gnumonks.org/pipermail/openbsc/2009-October/000955.html
> At the current stage of development (2011), with Osmocom finally getting
> a Software-BTS part communicating to the Software-BSC side, how really
> complex it would be to integrate the GSM-um related part of OpenBTS into
> the project?
> With that approach the 'GSM-um' interface would be a very simplified
> module of the overall system and osmocom would completely replace
> OpenBTS all-in-one project.
> Am i right?
> -naif
> p.s. Sorry for the cross-posting, i just wanted to explain the idea and
> get the communities feedbacks to understand 'at which point' we are in
> order to think 'what would be required to be done' to achieve that goal.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Xperia(TM) PLAY
> It's a major breakthrough. An authentic gaming
> smartphone on the nation's most reliable network.
> And it wants your games.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-sfdev
> _______________________________________________
> Openbts-discuss mailing list
> Openbts-discuss at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openbts-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/baseband-devel/attachments/20110411/9acd97ce/attachment.html>

More information about the baseband-devel mailing list