Attention is currently required from: neels, pespin, fixeria, msuraev.

dexter has posted comments on this change. ( https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmocore/+/31415 )

Change subject: bts_features: Add features for HR formats (TS 101813 vs. RFC5993) ......................................................................

Patch Set 8:

(1 comment)

File include/osmocom/gsm/bts_features.h:

https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmocore/+/31415/comment/379b4fa6_dda6ba66 PS7, Line 39: _TX

A couple of extra points here: […]

@neels: You are correct. Thats how it works. (In the DSP case the RTP packets are going through l1sap.c as well, but the DSP is generating the payloads.)

@pespin: In a correctly configured setup we should always see the same format in both directions. I also can understand the objections against the "_TX_", so I am fine with dropping that again.

I thought the OML feature flags were introduced for things like this. I also see no other way to find out which BTS model supports which format. The BSC knows that it talks to an osmo-bts, but it does not know if this BTS model is a PHY based model with TS 101318 support or an osmo-trx based model with RFC 5993 support.

Extending IPACC can be also a way, here we can at least be sure that osmo-bts type BTSs will support the extension but we will have to make sure that older osmo-bts versions will tolerate/ignore the extensions. To me this sounds difficult and since the implementation in osmo-mgw is already done I would opt for the OML flag based method.

Please let me know what you think.