Attention is currently required from: pespin.

Patch set 4:Code-Review +1

5 comments:

Patchset:
- Patch Set #4:
  Ok, I see, and agree with this.
  Below some petty details below.
  First petty detail: we could squash it into that other patch.
File src/libosmo-mgcp/mgcp_network.c:
- Patch Set #4, Line 838: osmo_sockaddr_port(&conn->end.addr.u.sa) == 0) {
  the most concise restriction would be:
  - validate the IP address if present,
  - and validate the port if present, independently.
  I mean, in this patch we skip both checks if one of them is not set. Instead we can skip only the port number check if port == 0, and skip only the address check if address == ANY.
  (That's mainly why it's so compelling to just skip sender validation for early IuUP entirely; doing checks properly rejiggers this entire function.)
- Patch Set #4, Line 841: announce
  "not all hNodeB", but some are happily sending RAB Assignment success before IuUP Initialization.
  I find "MGCP client" confusing here, the hNodeB obviously does not talk MGCP protocol.
- Patch Set #4, Line 842: ASs
  (RAB Assignment Response at HNBGW)
- Patch Set #4, Line 843: MDCX
  Writing "MDCX" is too specific: it is up to the client to do CRCX with SDP all-in-one or adjust with MDCX later.
  I'd rather write:
```
 Hence the MGW may not yet know the remote IuUP address and port at the time of receiving IuUP Initialization from the hNodeB.
```

To view, visit change 35176. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.