This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.
Harald Welte laforge at gnumonks.orgHi all,
On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 02:33:04PM +0100, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote:
> > First of all congratulations to all people involved in this project.
> > I am new to this list but I watch the project for some time. I have some
> > questions and maybe some ideas how to make this project testers or enthusiasts
> > friendly.
>
> welcome! From my point of view the barrier is not lack of packages or
> documentation but more the lack of affordable hardware.
I whole-heartedly agree.
> > * Did somebody try to build OpenBSC on SPARC architecture? I have some Sun
> > servers that I would like to use for this project. Same thing like before,
> > some pre-compiled packages would be nice for SPARC.
>
> Not tham I am aware of.
Well, we have to be careful here. So far, to the best of my knowledge,
OpenBSC has been tested (and deployed) on x86, x86_64 and ARM, all in
little endian mode.
Running OpenBSC on a big endian platform like SPARC or PPC might run us
into some trouble, especially if the endianness of bit-fields is
different, a lot of our definitions in
libosmocore/include/osmocom/gsm/protocol/ will have to be adapted/fixed.
So I would suggest to at least first verify OpenBSC works for you on
x86/x86_64 or ARM, and then proceed to SPARC32/SPARC64 in a next step.
If you encounter a given bug, you can always test against x86 in order
to see if it is caused by the architecture difference or a general bug.
> > There is not so much documentation how to configure the parameters of OpenBSC,
> > SGSN and BTS so a web interface also would be nice and very helpful.
I agree there is not much documentation, but it is a community project
and we invite everyone to contribute not only in code but also in
documentation. There are at least several dozen people on this list who
have successfully installed and used OpenBSC, and who have the skills to
write and/or improvde documentation - as opposed to the handful of
people who actually are working hard to improve and extend the code.
Also, regarding a web interface: Tens of thousands of network
administrators world wide are able to work with cisco style interfaces
on routers and switches without any problem. Agreed, there is good
documentation available. But I'm really against some kind of web
interface. Operating a GSM network should be done by people who have at
least some level of technical understanding of what they are doing.
If we appear to make it usable by everone, even people with zero
technical knowledge, we can assume that they will run RF equipment in
configurations which are neither legal nor safe and which will only get
them in trouble eventually.
So yes, there should be better reference documentation and
guides/HOWTOs. But please don't talk about making this software usable
to non-technical people.
--
- Harald Welte <laforge at gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)