OpenBSC July 2009

openbsc@lists.osmocom.org

19 participants
61 discussions

Re: OpenBSC with 2.5G or 3G mobile devices support? / Tested Phones
by Dieter Spaar 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Hello Nordin, On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 11:21:59 +0200, "Nordin" <bouchtaoui(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Since we haven't done anything for GPRS support, this might be the > reason why a location update is not performed with bsc_hack. The problem you experience with the nanoBTS 1800 most certainly comes from an invalid System Information Type 1. It uses the bitmap type for the channel description which is only valid for GSM900. So all the phones should try to register with the BS-11 but for the nanoBTS 1800 phones which strictly confirm to the specification will ignore it and not try to register (there are some phones which don't care). You can try the "system_information" git branch from Harald, it will most certainly solve the problem. > P.S.: Is everybody on holiday...:) I guess the people are just busy... Best regards, Dieter -- Dieter Spaar, Germany spaar(a)mirider.augusta.de

4 4

Re: OpenBSC with 2.5G or 3G mobile devices support? / Tested Phones
by Nordin 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

I tried the parameters as you suggested for SI 1 as well as SI3, but with no success. But I'm still curious if someone else on the list registered a PDA-like mobilephone (with GPRS support) to his BTS (BS11/nanoBTS1800). If so, I would like to try out his/her SI's settings. I still don't have the latest version as at the moment our firewall doesn't allow to (I ask the networkadmin later for that).

1 0

Re: OpenBSC with 2.5G or 3G mobile devices support? / Tested Phones
by Dieter Spaar 06 Jul '09

06 Jul '09

Hello Nordin, On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 14:44:50 +0200, "Nordin" <bouchtaoui(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I hope this will at least try to do a LOCATION UPDATE REQUEST. > But it suprises me that older mobilephones don't care about SI 1 (and > maybe more information on the BCCH) and just try to register whatever in > the BCCH is. I have further investigated the problem. Besides the fact that the channel allocation in SYSTEM INFORMATION 1 is not correct for GSM 1800, this is probably not the reason for the problem. Most certainly its just one wrong bit, the GPRS indicator in the SYSTEM INFORMATION 3 rest octets. The current setting is 0x80, 0x00, 0x00, 0x2B but it should be 0x80, 0x00, 0x08, 0x2B What might lead to some confusion is the meaning of "L" and "H" in the specification of CSN.1. For the rest octets the bit value is determined by a comparsion (XOR) to the padding byte 0x2B. So the value 0x08 above actually means "L" for the GPRS indicator, which means "No GPRS". Its seem that some phones are really sensible to this setting, some other GPRS capable phones just don't care and register to the network even if there is no GPRS. Best regards, Dieter -- Dieter Spaar, Germany spaar(a)mirider.augusta.de

3 2

Re: OpenBSC with 2.5G or 3G mobile devices support? / Tested Phones
by Dieter Spaar 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

Hello Harald, On Sun, 5 Jul 2009 04:42:20 +0200, "Harald Welte" <laforge(a)gnumonks.org> wrote: > > where did you find this XOR? I just searched through 04.07 and 04.08 and > didn't find any indication thereof. Sure, the padding bit sequence ix 0x2b, so > all spare bits have to be padded with that. But where did you get the XOR > from? I started to search deeper because I was a bit confused how the Message Decoding Tool from Joachim Goeller interpreted the rest octets. I looked at some phone firmware how they do it and found it there. Later I also found a good explanation at http://csn1.info (they sell a tool which can be used to generate message parsing source code for various specifications). > Also, this would mean that if we put explicitly 0x2b into the padding of > our messages, then it would result in all-zero 0x00 on the air, since > > 0x2b xor 0x2b == 0x00 The XOR is actually only used for "L" and "H", basically it means that if a bit at an "L"/"H" position is different from the padding sequence, its an "H". At least this is how I understand it. > I'm now looking at an actual abis trace from a production cell with GPRS > enabled, and it has > > "0x80, 0x00, 0x80, 0x0b" Here is how I would interpret it according to GSM 04.08, 10.5.2.34: Selection Parameter: byte 0: 0x80 ^ 0x2B = 0xAB, (bit 7) -> H (15 bits for parameter follow) Power Offset: byte 2: 0x80 ^ 0x2B = 0xAB, (bit 7) -> H ( 2 bits for parameter follow) System Information 2ter Indicator: byte 2: 0x80 ^ 0x2B = 0xAB, (bit 4) -> L (has no parameters) Early Classmark Sending Control: byte 2: 0x80 ^ 0x2B = 0xAB, (bit 3) -> H (has no parameters) Scheduling if and where: byte 2: 0x80 ^ 0x2B = 0xAB, (bit 2) -> L GPRS Indicator: byte 2: 0x80 ^ 0x2B = 0xAB, (bit 1) -> H ( 4 bits for parameter follow) > During early start of the BTS, SI3 rest octets are set to > > "0x80, 0x00, 0x83, 0x2b" The only difference is that at this stage GPRS is not yet set: GPRS Indicator: byte 2: 0x83 ^ 0x2B = 0xA8, (bit 1) -> L Best regards, Dieter -- Dieter Spaar, Germany spaar(a)mirider.augusta.de

2 2

Re: AW: patches again
by Dieter Spaar 05 Jul '09

05 Jul '09

Hello Andreas, On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:37:51 +0200, "Andreas.Eversberg" <Andreas.Eversberg(a)versatel.de> wrote: > > this was the problem. finally got the measurement reports (--debug > ....:DMEAS). you just need to add to misdn.c: > > case DL_UNITDATA_IND: > > and everything is fine. Great, so this is solved. I noticed one minor problem, its the meaning of the MEAS-VALID flag. The spec says that "0" means "valid" and "1" is "not valid". So if (!(meas_rep.flags & MEAS_REP_F_VALID)) should be changed or the parsing of the measurement result where this flag is set. Best regards, Dieter -- Dieter Spaar, Germany spaar(a)mirider.augusta.de

2 1

updated wireshark patches / call for help
by Harald Welte 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

Hi! I've just committed some recent improvements of the Abis dissection of wireshark to git. There's some initial work on a 12.21 OML decoder in epan/dissectors/packet-abis_oml.c. It will happily decode the common FOM header and tell you the name of the message as well as list all attributes in it. It does not yet understand details on how to parse all the various attributes. If anyone wants to make himself familiar with this part of GSM, get a copy of 12.21, look at OpenBSC or protocol traces and add more of that attribute parsing code! The A-bis/IP dissector has only been improved slightly. If you apply abisip.patch and abis_oml.patch to current wireshark svn, you will be able to decode 94-99% of what you see in any capture between OpenBSC and a nanoBTS. I currently don't have access to a BS-11, so I cannot test the wireshark code with it. In case somebody wants to send me some pcap files of BS-11 traces, either by using the openbsc pcap option or by tracing it through mISDN, I'm more than happy to make sure that it works on thos traces, too. Testing as well as contributed patches are also always welcome! Thanks, -- - Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/ ============================================================================ "Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option." (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)

2 2

Patch 39: WAS: Re: patches again
by Holger Freyther 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

On Sunday 28 June 2009 18:47:31 Andreas.Eversberg wrote: > patch 39: the location update process did not work, if mobile station > uses tmsi when comming from a different network. in this case the > reject-timer must also be started, and we wait for imsi identity > response. in case we can't find the subscriber or if we have an > unimplemented location update, we release location update process and > send a reject. Sorry, to me it seems the patch is doing something else... 1.) if (!subscr) { DEBUGPC(DRR, "<- Can't find any subscriber for this ID\n"); /* FIXME: request id? close channel? */ + release_loc_updating_req(lchan); + gsm0408_loc_upd_rej(lchan, reject_cause); return -EINVAL; } I think we can just move the schedule_reject from two lines below the if to the top. What do you think? 2.) The patch changes the policy from delayed reject (to not make the MS come back immediately) to a direct one. What is the reasoning?

2 1

patches again
by Andreas.Eversberg 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

hi, i did some heavy tests this weekend with many mobile stations at once. with these patches all ressources (channels / subscribers) were released cleanly. even when mobile stations request more than 4 channels at a time (the current SDCCH4 is full), there is no ressource getting stuck anymore. patch 39: the location update process did not work, if mobile station uses tmsi when comming from a different network. in this case the reject-timer must also be started, and we wait for imsi identity response. in case we can't find the subscriber or if we have an unimplemented location update, we release location update process and send a reject. patch 40: in case of a channel breakdown, the signal handler for releasing lchan is called. the wrong pointer was used as lchan. (see last hunk) also we don't need to check use counter of lchan, if we receive an "cause 22 error". the lchan gets released anyway, if use counter becomes 0. (see first hunk). also i think we can force channel release when we receive an error indication. this can easily be tested: remove the battery during active call, then send a message to the mobile station (hang up on the remote). the message cannot be delivered, so the BTS send us an error indication, the channels and the call process gets released. patch 41: the pointer "tall_bsc_ctx" belongs to the gsm_data.c file, not to include file. patch 42: again my traffic channel patch. the mobile requests a channel. in case of a location update, we deliver the requested channel type. if we receive a channel request for other reasons, i force a TCH_F channel. this is requied, because we cannot change (modify) the channel right now. also i check if we have a TCH_F channel when we want to make a call to the mobile. if so, the channel is used, if not, paging is stated as if we would have no channel. so it is possible to call a mobile during location update, when it holds not a TCH_F channel. patch 43: this small fix will not check for given subscriber/imsi here. this is already done in the next "if"-condition. patch 38: still i use this little hacked install patch to install library and include files, so other applications like LCR can use openbsc without refering to the openbsc source directory. i use that install-hook, because i don't know much about autoconf. maybe there is a better way to do that. anyway i don't get any measurement reports at all. i tried two BTS' and used the firmware as described in the wiki. regards, andreas

3 7

AW: patches again
by Andreas.Eversberg 04 Jul '09

04 Jul '09

> UI frames should be reported to userspace as DL_UNITDATA_IND rather than DL_DATA_IND. openbsc/input/misdn.c currently doesn't support DL_UNITDATA_IND in the switch statement of handle_ts1_read. That sounds like the most likely cause. hi harald, this was the problem. finally got the measurement reports (--debug ....:DMEAS). you just need to add to misdn.c: case DL_UNITDATA_IND: and everything is fine. regards, andreas

2 1

ipaccess-config: nanoBTS NVRAM flags support
by Harald Welte 03 Jul '09

03 Jul '09

Hi! ipaccess-config can now set the nanoBTS NVRAM flags. It has the following syntax: ipaccess-config <IP-addr> -n flags/mask so e.g. > ipaccess-config 1.2.3.4 -n 0x400/0x400 will set bit number 10 in NVRAM, whereas > ipaccess-config 1.2.3.4 -n 0x000/0x400 will clear that very bit. A list of known bits that you can set: 0 Static Interface IP configuration 1 Static IP Gateway configuration 8 Secondary OML enable (incoming TCP port 3006) 10 CLI enable (command line interface on serial port) 11 HTTP enable (https server on TCP port 443) 13 SNMP enable If somebody wants to add a '--help' message to ipaccess-config, patches are always welcome. Cheers, -- - Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/ ============================================================================ "Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option." (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

OpenBSC July 2009