> On 12 Dec 2016, at 18:13, ak-74*** ... <87078838964(a)mail.ru> wrote:
>
> root@osmocombb-VirtualBox:~# osmo-nitb -c ~/.osmocom/open-bsc.cfg -l ~/.osmocom/hlr.sqlite3 -P -C —debug=DRLL:DCC:DMM:DRR:DRSL:DNM
>
> DB: Failed to init database. Please check the option settings.
>
if you look at the debian/control libdbd-sqlite3 needs to be installed to run osmo-nitb. Did you install that?
holger
https://youtu.be/YJ_qkJEFNcg
UGS is a portable system designed to send SMS messages and data to GSM
phones in a pre-defined area.
Unlike existed advertisement systems
UGS sends normal or flash SMS instead of broadcast messages (receipt of
broadcast messages can be disabled by mobile phone user);
UGS is an independent stand-alone system, which does not require any
cooperation with cellular operators.
UGS does not use phone numbers of mobile phones, hence there is no need in
the lists of phone numbers to be obtained from various sources. Those lists
are often not complete, outdated, irrelevant and costly.
The UGS can be used for commercial or security purposes:
Send commercial advertisements, announcements, free gift coupons, useful
information or welcome messages in specific places: shopping areas, banks,
restaurants, train or bus stations, exhibitions, shows, etc.
Send warning messages or requests to the people in the case of emergency.
Send messages with the request to contact police to potential crime
witnesses in the crime areas.
SMS messages can be sent:
To New in the Area or
To Known in the Area or
To pre-defined groups or
To everyone,
The UGS can be installed in a fixed location or carried to the places of
need in a small, hand carry suitcase.
Potential users of the system are small stores, large organizations,
advertisement providers, rescue services, police forces and others.
System can be operated locally or remotely via the Internet.
SMS sent by the system are free of charge; neither owner of the system nor
mobile phone users pay for them.
The system is comprised of compact Base Station Unit and notebook computer.
Because of unique sophisticated algorithm implemented in the system, the UGS
transmits very low power and does not interfere with existed GSM networks.
User can define any phone number or name of the sender, which will appear on
the screens of mobile phones.
Main specifications:
Frequency coverage: 850, 900, 1800, 1900 MHz
Number of SMS: No limitations
Number of handsets: No limitations
System output: From 10mW up to 10w (adjustable)
Power: 220V / 110V / 24V / 12-16V or Batteries
Operation Range: 10...1500 m
SMS language: All languages
--
View this message in context: http://baseband-devel.722152.n3.nabble.com/USRP-Free-BULK-SMS-SMS-device-tp…
Sent from the baseband-devel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Dear Osmocom Community,
[please respect the Reply-To and post all follow-up discussion to this
to openbsc(a)lists.osmocom.org, so we avoid having long threads
cross-posted to several mailing lists.]
>From 2012 to 2016 we were running a series of small, invitation-only
Osmocom Developer Conferences. Access was intentionally restricted
to those community members who have demonstrated an existing track
record of contribution to any of the projects under the Osmocom
umbrella.
This format of a small, tightly knit group of about 20 people has been
successful over the years, and I have received a lot of positive
feedback from past participants.
On the other hand, the Osmocom project has grown in scope and diversity,
and some of those projects don't have all that much relationship to each
other - except being started by people from within the same group.
There's the cellular communications (GSM/GPRS/EDGE/UMTS and hopefully at
some point LTE) protocols which is attracting a lot of professional
users. And then there's pure community projects like rtl-sdr,
OsmocomBB, OsmocomGMR and many other efforts.
Particularly the cellular infrastructure projects (OsmoBTS, OsmoPCU,
OsmoBTS, OsmoNITB, OsmoSGSN, OpenGGSN, OsmoIuh & co) are somehow
"standing out" of the othe projects in the context of having a wider
user bsae, and in that user base also primarily commercial users.
So I'd like to start a discussion on how to possibly change the event
format to accomodate the various interests and parties. I definitely
don't want to loose the "annual meeting of old friends" atmosphere,
while at the same time also opening up to other interested parties.
One idea would be to keep OsmoDevCon as-is and have a separate event
where non-contributing/developing users / sysadmins / system integrators
could also be attending.
Another idea would be to split into a 'user day' and 'developer days'
format. This is something the netfilter developer workshops have been
using for many years, and from my limited insight quite successfully so.
The "user day" is more like a traditional tech conference, with a large
auditorium and talks oriented towards users / sysadmins / integrators of
the software. The "developer days" are the invitation-only part, for
known contributing developers only, similar to what we have at
OsmoDevCon.
Having both events (or both parts of an event) back-to-back has the
advantage that a large number of potential speakers for the 'user day'
are already present, and they don't have to travel yet another time.
One could even structure it further and say we have one user day, one
public 'Osmocom cellular developer day' and then the closed 'OsmoDevCon
classic', maybe reduced from 4 days to 3 or even 2 days only?
What is the general opinion about this?
Are there people lurking on this list who would be interested in
attending a public 'user day' or even 'developer day' about the Osmocom
cellular projects, with presentations and workshops around topics such
as running Osmocom based cellular networks?
In terms of when/where, I would suggest to keep the tradition of April
in Berlin/Germany. But I'm of course very happy if somebody wants to
host it some place else...
Regards, and looking forward to meeting you [again] in 2017,
Harald
--
- Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)
Hey there, I bumped into this error when testing gprsdecode from srldabs.de When I try the sample .dat files provided from srlabs.de it works fine though. Any hints?
Kind Regards
George AndguladzeSenior Software EngineerBusiness Management Technology
www.bmt.ge
Hi,
I didn’t find anything useful yet. Everything seems normal during the IMSI attach procedure (location updating request, authentication request/response, identity request/response …), I can call and send SMS normally but the phone doesn’t get paged in any way. It seems strange that no differences can be seen during the IMSI attach procedure while some sim cards do not work.
On Mar 4, 2016, at 7:13 PM, Dennis Eisenbarth <dennis.eisenbarth(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> GSM specs, it is.
>
> On 04.03.2016 17:32, robert wrote:
>>
>> I read about sim card types since it must be a sim card problem but I didn’t find anything useful.
>>
>>
>> On Mar 4, 2016, at 6:05 PM, Dennis Eisenbarth <dennis.eisenbarth(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> A good start would be a look into the specifications.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 04.03.2016 14:31, robert wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I tried two sim cards one that works fine and another one that doesn’t get paged, I noticed that during the location update procedure everything is exactly the same (using wireshark). The log files are also similar. Although both cards work fine if used in a normal phone (even with a motorola c123/118 …).
>>>>
>>>> Another thing to mention is that some sim cards only work when i stick them on a BTS that has the "SI type 3, GPRS indicator" as follows:
>>>> "3G Early Classmark Sending Restriction: Neither UTRAN, CDMA2000 nor GERAN IU MODE CLASSMARK CHANGE message shall be sent with the Early classmark sending"
>>>> while they can only make calls without being able to receive anything on other BTS where the "SI type 3, GPRS indicator" is as follows:
>>>> "3G Early Classmark Sending Restriction: The sending of UTRAN,CDMA2000 and GERAN IU MODE CLASSMARK CHANGE messages are controlled by the Early Classmark Sending Control parameter"
>>>> I would be very grateful if anyone has some explanations to what is going on.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Robert,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 26, 2016, at 6:30 PM, Tomcsányi Domonkos <domi(a)tomcsanyi.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Robert,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think it would help us out a lot if you could provide at least one complete log file from the output of the mobile app, so we can start having some ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Domi
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> 2016. jan. 26. dátummal, 17:24 időpontban robert steve <robert.steve07(a)gmail.com> írta:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> I would first like to thank all those who participated in this nice project.
>>>>>> I recently started working with osmocombb and was able to have it working fine on a motorola c118.
>>>>>> However, I noticed that some sim cards can connect normally to the BTS, can make calls and send SMS but can’t receive anything. They simply don't get paged. While for some other sim cards everything seems to be working fine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does anyone know what might be causing this issue ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>> Robert
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Hello baseband hacking folks,
I have heard several people complain that they are no longer able to
find/obtain a Motorola C1xx phone or any other Calypso device for
playing with OsmocomBB. I assume these complaints probably come from
people in the EU and other 900/1800 MHz regions, as US band C139 phones
are still readily available on ebay (63 listings as of right now, all
dirt cheap), but either way, I have what I believe to be the proper
solution to the shortage and the crippled nature of all pre-existing
Calypso devices: a new Calypso board.
Back in 2012 Harald Welte posted here saying that his company was
going to be making a new Calypso board for the very same purpose of
addressing the shortage and the deficiencies of pre-existing devices,
but as far as I know, no such product has ever been produced - nor do
I know if whoever was behind that project even got as far as creating
the design for it.
Fast-forwarding to the present, we now have a ready-to-build design
for a Calypso development board called FCDEV3B, which stands for
FreeCalypso development board, triband. It is based on a reuse of the
known-working Calypso modem design from Openmoko, reuse at the level
of physical PCB layout, based on the GTA02 design files which Openmoko
founder Mr. Sean Moss-Pultz released in April of 2015 at my urging.
Back in 2012 Harald was saying that he was only going to release PDF
schematics but not the full design files for his board; I feel
differently about such matters, hence the complete design files for
*my* board are free to the world:
ftp://ftp.freecalypso.org/pub/GSM/FreeCalypso/fcdev3b/
Now we need to get these boards physically made, and toward that end I
have started a crowdfunding campaign:
https://www.gofundme.com/fcdev3b-board-production-2umevjw
In the interest of transparency, I have to disclose (most people know
it already, but I have to state it anyway) that I do not use OsmocomBB
and will never contribute to Osmocom software because I am working on
my own personally preferred alternative GSM MS firmware implementation,
but when it comes to the hardware I seek to build and offer to the
community, there is no reason why it won't work with OsmocomBB - it
should work just fine.
Because my board is a derivative of Openmoko's modem design and the
part that is different between Openmoko's board and mine (the flash
chip - I will populate a higher-capacity chip on the same footprint)
is not used by OsmocomBB software, the images currently built in
board/gta0x/*.highram.bin should work as-is on my FCDEV3B without
needing any code changes.
Hasta la Victoria, Siempre,
M~
Yes, my plan was:
- get osmocom-bb (layer1/rssi) firmware working (without graphics probably)
- use that work side-by-side to integrate into fernvale nuttx
- create a layer1 "app" in nuttx
- port "mobile" app to nuttx
With the goal being that you can call/text from the nuttx shell.
I have the following hardware with which to experiment:
- c139 motorola phones
- pirelli phone
- a few other calypso phones
- seeedstudio rephone (mtk6261)
- sim800 of various types
- several watch phones (dz09 gt08 v9, both 6260 and 6261)
- raw 6260 chips which I hope to design a custom pcb for
My end goal which is far too ambitious is to make a rock-like device which has no ports/holes:
- bluetooth serial to nuttx shell
- qi wireless charging
- accelerometer gestures for basic controls
- bone conducting speaker
- speech synth (sam/espeak) and voice recognition (pocketsphinx)
- all source is included on-device, even to the point that I would like to port all this work to a forth-like language of my own invention so you can debug, learn and experiment on the device
I have so far fixed up the existing mtk-firmware target and was debating whether to submit that small patch or wait until I get some 626x work done. On that front I have the basic registers and an initial BSI power on routine written (but not tested).
Thanks to all the giants upon whose shoulders I stand to do this work,
Craig
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 10/13/16, Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org> wrote:
Subject: Re: nuttx-bb layout? inside or outside nuttx?
To: "Craig Comstock" <craig_comstock(a)yahoo.com>
Cc: "Marcin Mielczarczyk" <marcin.mielczarczyk(a)gmail.com>, "baseband-devel" <baseband-devel(a)lists.osmocom.org>
Date: Thursday, October 13, 2016, 2:09 AM
Hi Craig,
this is just a small note that
I just met Marcin Mielczarczyk (who did
the
existing but still incomplete MTK support work a few years
back) at
Embedded Linux Conf Europe, and
informed him about your work.
It is really exciting for both of us to see
somebody picking this up and
trying to bring
things together.
If I'm
not mistaken, you basically have the following agenda:
* Structure OsmocomBB in a way
that it can be built 'side-by-side into Nuttx
* Build /integrate it from the
fernvale nuttx port that is available
* Implement the bulk of the MTK L1 integration,
i.e. the interface to
the DSP.
And afterwards hope that you
have something that supports either the
Fernvale, SIM800H, Linkit One, or other MTK 2G
baseband chips out there.
Please let me know this was an accurate
understanding.
Regards,
Harald
--
- Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org>
http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a
desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)