Attention is currently required from: daniel, laforge, pespin.

View Change

1 comment:

• File sgsn/SGSN_Tests.ttcn:

  • Patch Set #6, Line 3748: f_pdp_ctx_act(apars);

    @axilirator@gmail. […]

    I believe PCAPs would do a better job explaining what's going on.

    https://osmocom.org/attachments/download/8165/SGSN_Tests.TC_sgsn_context_req_in.pcapng.gz -- here is a PCAP file recorded with the previous patch revision (5).

    • [packet 456] MS sends GMM `Activate PDP Context Request` with the `Requested PDP Address` IE being empty (wireshark displays `Dynamic addressing`);
    • [packet 476] SGSN sends GTPC `Create PDP Context Request` with the `End user address` IE being empty (expecting GGSN to assign it?);
    • [packet 478] GGSN (the testsuite) responds with `Create PDP Context Response`, but **not including** the `End user address` IE;
    • [packet 487] SGSN responds with GMM `Activate PDP Context Accept` with the `PDP Address` IE being empty (wireshark displays `Dynamic addressing`);
    • [packet 489] the testsuite sends `SGSN Context Request`;
    • [packet 492] SGSN responds with `SGSN Context Response` containing no `PDP Context` IE -- this makes the testcase fail.

    This is basically a), `apars.addr.addressInfo := omit` by default.

    This is also the case for the other (existing) testcases in SGSN_Tests.ttcn, see https://jenkins.osmocom.org/jenkins/view/TTCN3/job/ttcn3-sgsn-test/2318/artifact/logs/sgsn-tester/SGSN_Tests.TC_attach_pdp_act.pcap.gz for instance. Or any other `SGSN_Tests.TC_attach_pdp_act_...` testcase.

    The testsuite (virtual GGSN) assigns no IP address, and osmo-sgsn happily accepts that. I don't know if this is right or wrong, you're saying it's not right?

To view, visit change 36601. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.