Attention is currently required from: daniel, neels.

Patch set 3:Code-Review -1

View Change

2 comments:

• Commit Message:

  • Patch Set #2, Line 20: Procedure", but doesn't

    The way how its specified in the ASN.1 syntax: […]

    Context where that syntax for the PDUs of each procedure is defined, using ASN.1 information object classes:
    ```
    WITH SYNTAX {
      INITIATING MESSAGE &InitiatingMessage
      [SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME &SuccessfulOutcome]
      [UNSUCCESSFUL OUTCOME &UnsuccessfulOutcome]
      [OUTCOME &Outcome]
      PROCEDURE CODE &procedureCode
      [CRITICALITY &criticality]
    }
    ```

    so if there's no SUCCESSFUL OUTCOME and no UNSUCCESSFUL OUTCOME present in the definition of a given PROCEDURE, then it may never occur on the wire.

• Commit Message:

  • Patch Set #3, Line 18:

    A RAB Assignment response is indicated as
    'successfulOutcome' or 'unsuccessfulOutcome' or 'outcome'.
    3GPP TS 25.413 specifies RAB Assignment as a "Class 3 Elementary
    Procedure", but doesn't seem to specify which of these three 'outcome'
    types to use for Class 3. In the field we've seen 'successfulOutcome'
    and 'outcome'.
    

    I beg to differ. it is very clearly specified:

    ```
    rAB-Assignment RANAP-ELEMENTARY-PROCEDURE ::= {
       INITIATING MESSAGE RAB-AssignmentRequest
       OUTCOME RAB-AssignmentResponse
       PROCEDURE CODE id-RAB-Assignment
       CRITICALITY reject
    }
    ```
    no `SUCCESSFUL OTUCOME` and no `UNSUCCESSFUL OUTCOME` are possible here.

    If you want to do anything, then we should print an error and reject those. The fact that our code may even exercise such a path is only because we're using improper asn1 tooling that doesn't fully understand ASN.1 object information classes. A proper ASN.1 decoder would never even call the user code when receiving messages with a clear syntax error.

To view, visit change 37393. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.