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/.
Alexander Chemeris alexander.chemeris at gmail.comOn Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Andreas Eversberg <andreas at eversberg.eu> wrote: > Alexander Chemeris wrote: >> >> NITB supports SMPP, but having SIP MESSAGE support would be a great thing, >> imho. > > you could add your own call control (instead of mncc_builtin or mncc_sock > (LCR)). then you would need to write a call control that links MNCC to SIP. > this is what is done at LCR (gsm.cpp, gsm_bs.cpp, sip.cpp), you could use > that code to parse and generate SIP/MNCC messages. if you want a separate > process, you can use the MNCC socket, but then you gonna write what LCR > already does. Well, in this case we're speaking about SMS, so MNCC is not exactly related. SIP MESSAGE is a way to convey IM messages over SIP and there is a profile for sending SMS over SIP MESSAGE, specified by 3gpp. A short overview of this is available here: http://betelco.blogspot.ru/2009/10/sms-over-3gpp-ims-network.html Speaking of the SIP call control, having an mncc_sip with SIP as an external interface is also a good idea, imho. An important difference with mncc_sock in this case is that mncc_sip should be able to handle timeouts and error cases on both GSM and SIP sides gracefully. I.e. if a link with the SIP server is not 100% stable, it should maintain a consistent state on the GSM side. So to me it looks more like an extension to mncc_internal rather than mncc_sock. And for SIP side a high-level library like reSIProcate/DUM or SofiaSIP should be used to take care of all he corner and special cases of SIP protocol (re-transmission, forking, encryption, TCP support, etc). Then we would have an ideal SIP speaking solution, much better than OpenBTS. -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ООО УмРадио http://fairwaves.ru