Attention is currently required from: neels.

View Change

6 comments:

• File upf/CPF_ConnectionHandler.ttcn:

  • Patch Set #1, Line 29: type component CPF_ConnHdlr extends StatsD_ConnHdlr {

    Isn't this "CPF" an "SMF"? or is "CPF" some standaried name for a more generic thing?

  • Patch Set #1, Line 96: //connect(self:PFCP_PROC, vc_PFCP:CLIENT_PROC);

    this can be dropped?

• File upf/UPF_Tests.ttcn:

  • Patch Set #1, Line 177: private function f_parse_gtp_action(out GTP_Action ret, charstring str) return boolean {

    Do we really want to have tests based on VTY output?

  • Patch Set #1, Line 627: private function f_ruleset_endecaps(GTP_Action gtp) return PFCP_Ruleset

    "endecaps" shounds really confusing term.

  • Patch Set #1, Line 635: private function f_session_est(inout PFCP_session s, PFCP_Ruleset rules) runs on CPF_ConnHdlr {

    ***_establish? otherwise it's difficult to gasp whether it's a "established" checking function or actually doing the establishment.

• File upf/expected-results.xml:

  • Patch Set #1, Line 2: <testsuite name='HNB_Tests' tests='0' failures='0' errors='0' skipped='0' inconc='0' time='MASKED'>

    UPF_Tests?

To view, visit change 29420. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.