OpenBSC November 2017

openbsc@lists.osmocom.org

21 participants
43 discussions

Pysim error: SW match failed
by Martin Nagy 16 Aug '25

16 Aug '25

Hi all, After buying a super Sim Kit (16 in 1) from China, I tried the reader (green PCB inside a blue transparent plastic case with a blue LED) and SIM (identified as a fakesupersim) with pysim tool. However i am getting the following error: /pySim-prog.py -n 26C3 -c 49 -x 262 -y 42 -z 1234 -j 1 -t auto Insert card now (or CTRL-C to cancel) Autodetected card type fakemagicsim Generated card parameters : > Name : 26C3 > SMSP : e1ffffffffffffffffffffffff058100945555ffffffffffff000000 > ICCID : 8949262427518313026 > MCC/MNC : 262/42 > IMSI : 262422461512085 > Ki : 7b74741a1ee14337ec23f9ab92a13648 > OPC : ccd867d60797d8d45354a51b3ef568ff Programming ... Traceback (most recent call last): File "./pySim-prog.py", line 530, in <module> card.program(cp) File "/home/nadicek/pysim/pysim/pySim/cards.py", line 231, in program self._scc.update_binary('6f30', hplmn + 'ff' * (tl-3)) File "/home/nadicek/pysim/pysim/pySim/commands.py", line 53, in update_binary return self._tp.send_apdu_checksw(pdu) File "/home/nadicek/pysim/pysim/pySim/transport/__init__.py", line 87, in send_apdu_checksw raise RuntimeError("SW match failed ! Expected %s and got %s." % (sw.lower(), rv[1])) RuntimeError: SW match failed ! Expected 9000 and got 9804. I checked mailing lists and haven’t found anybody who had similar problem with pysim. Also I have tried forcing different models of SIM, but nothing is working. Obviously I can remove this check from the script file (__init__.py in /pySim/transport), however somebody had a reason to put such condition there. I would like to ask if it is safe to remove that line of code and the purpose of that line of code. Thanks a lot and best regards Martin

3 3

Re: Help with sccp library
by mosbah abdelkader 07 Jul '25

07 Jul '25

> I don't understand. This callback will be called with data you need to write > to the network. In case of MTP Level3 you will need to wrap that around the > msgb you got. I means: is the interaction with mtp3 layer implemented (is sending sccp data by mtp3 implemented by the library?)? Also, what about the reception of data from mtp3 layer. is that implemented in the sccp lib. I am asking these questions because I see the code of mtp3 in the lib but no significant call is present in the sccp part of the lib. Thank you for your help.

4 3

dynamic traffic channels
by Neels Hofmeyr 20 May '25

20 May '25

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 10:05:28AM +0200, Harald Welte wrote: > [translated from german] > is it certain that we switch a channel to PDCH only when > gprs mode != none? A TS can be GSM_PCHAN_TCH_F_PDCH; those are the only ones for which we send a PDCH ACT message. We send a PDCH ACT message - during init (CHANNEL OML's state changed to enabled -> send PDCH ACT), - and upon channel release ack when pchan == GSM_PCHAN_TCH_F_PDCH. So the question is, when we receive a channel release ack, could that be the PDCH release and we switch PDCH right back on by accident? No, because we only receive a chan rel ack when the *TCH/F* is being released. That is because the PDCH release is initiated "internally" from the PDCH DEACT, and thus this condition in common/rsl.c rsl_tx_rf_rel_ack() catches on, which existed before dyn PDCH: if (lchan->rel_act_kind != LCHAN_REL_ACT_RSL) { LOGP(DRSL, LOGL_NOTICE, "%s not sending REL ACK\n", gsm_lchan_name(lchan)); return 0; } In rsl_rx_rf_chan_rel() the rel_act_kind is set to LCHAN_REL_ACT_RSL, but not in the rsl_rx_dyn_pdch(). This is analogous to the ip.access way -- the ip.access nanobts replies to a PDCH DEACT with a PDCH DEACT ACK and doesn't send a separate channel release ack. Maybe we could set rel_act_kind to some new LCHAN_REL_ACT_IPAC_DYN_PDCH for clarity? (But we shouldn't actually send a release ack, to stay compatible.) Even though it works as-is, we should indeed add another flag check: - We do check the flags that no ACT/DEACT is already pending; - And we do send a PDCH DEACT only if ts->flags & TS_F_PDCH_ACTIVE; - But we would send a PDCH ACT despite ts->flags & TS_F_PDCH_ACTIVE. This should never happen, but it would make sense to ensure that. ~Neels

3 5

GAPK status update
by Vadim Yanitskiy 03 Dec '17

03 Dec '17

Dear Osmocom community, I have been working on GAPK (GSM Audio Packet Knife) for some time, and now I would like to share some achievements. Previously GAPK was represented as a single binary that could be called with some command line arguments in order to perform required operations. This is only handy for humans, but not for other programs, which may also need to perform some format / codec conversations or audio capture / playback. One of such programs is the mobile from OsmocomBB project. Currently, when you're making a voice call, both audio capture and playback are only possible on the L1 side, i.e. on a Calypso based phone. Of course, the audio stream can be redirected via MNCC socket, but this is not what a regular OsmocomBB user would like to do. Moreover, there is a lack of AMR codec support. Also, there is another GNURadio based project named GR-GSM. In short, this is a set of blocks for GSM signal reception, demodulation and further processing. At the moment, one has TCH Full Rate decoding capabilities only. Audio playback is not supported yet. Having these projects in my mind, I have got an idea of creating a shared library from the GAPK source code. And, a few days ago I was managed to get the audio playback working in OsmocomBB. I hope, this library will be also usable for other projects. Brief list of changes were made: - Composed a shared library named libosmogapk - All exposed symbols have got an 'osmo_gapk' prefix - Added a pkg-config manifest and a symbol export map - Integrated the Osmocom logging framework - Benchmarking is now disabled by default - Processing queue now based on the linuxlist - Fixed program exit due to ALSA buffer underrun - Fixed ALSA audio playback from file - Old gapk application was renamed to 'osmo-gapk' and linked against the library - Adjusted verbosity level (normal / debug) - Fixed I/O combinations (ALSA, RTP, file...) check All changes could be found at the fixeria/lib branch of GAPK. I hope to see them merged, and open for discussions ;) With best regards, Vadim Yanitskiy.

2 4

Re: osmo-bts-trx init problem
by Vadim Yanitskiy 02 Dec '17

02 Dec '17

Hi, > <000b> trx_if.c:409 transceiver (phy0.0) rejected TRX command > with response: 'RSP SETTSC -1' > > What is the problem and how can fix it? The OsmocomBB transceiver is a legacy transceiver, so please add the following line to your 'osmo-bts.cfg': osmotrx legacy-setbsic And please let me know about the results, I'll correct the wiki. With best regards, Vadim Yanitskiy.

5 8

LimeSDR support in osmocom:{nightly,latest} package feeds
by Harald Welte 29 Nov '17

29 Nov '17

Dear all, starting from today, we're packaging LimeSuite and (as needed) other dependencies required for using osmo-trx/osmo-bts-trx with LimeSDR in the network:osmocom:nightly and network:osmocom:latest feeds. The package versions are fixed and are not tracking "master" of e.g. limesuite. Only the Osmocom packages are tracking master. Due to the unfortunate fact that the first LimeSuite with osmo-trx support (17.09.0) requiring a cmake later than what Debian 8 ships, LimeSDR support is not working with all of the Distributions/Versions that the rest of the Osmocom stack supports. It appears that LimeSuite also has some build issues on ARM architectures, about which I've submitted an upstream bug report at https://github.com/myriadrf/LimeSuite/issues/151 But at least for x86_64 and i586 architecture, LimeSDR should be supported by the Osmocom package feeds , on Debian 9.0, Ubuntu 16.04, 16.10, 17.04 and 17.10. We will shortly use those packages as part of our osmo-gsm-tester setup at the sysmocom lab, at which point they should receive extensive testing. Regards, Harald -- - 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

Eclipse TITAN public release of SS7/SIGTRAN core protocols
by Harald Welte 27 Nov '17

27 Nov '17

Hi all, I've mentioned this many months before, but Ericsson has now (well, a month ago) finally made a public announcement about the public release of their SS7/SIGTRAN core protocols in TTCN-3. You can read more about it at https://www.eclipse.org/forums/index.php/t/1089686/ - where they actually even refer to us as being the trigger to release them. There are still many tests to write beyond those currently existing. Most recently I wrote a set of MGCP tests for our new osmo-mgw, which Philipp is now using to iron out some kinks in the codebase. The past week I've been working on simulating the minimal subset of N numbers of BSCs and N numbers of MSCs from a single test suite in order to test osmo-bsc_nat, and specifically the "IMSI-based routing to different MSCs" feature that Daniel has been working on. It's still work in progress, but definitely the by far most complex TTCN-3 project that I've written so far. After completing that, I would like to spend some more time on OsmoBTS and OsmoBSC related tests. The difficulty here is that the more we get to the RAN / air interface, the less existing prtoocols / codecs exist, so e.g. A-bis RSL would first have to be implemented. The good part is that it's actually super easy using the expressive syntax of the TITAN "raw" codec. Basically you define the structure of the data in files like http://git.osmocom.org/osmo-ttcn3-hacks/tree/library/GSM_RR_Types.ttcn and you don't have to write a single line for encoding/parsing :) Regards, Harald -- - 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

Re: RFC: new type for NAS/EPS in gsmtap.h and question
by Shinjo Park 27 Nov '17

27 Nov '17

2017년 11월 23일 목요일 오후 10시 34분 47초 CET에 Harald Welte 님이 쓴 글: > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 09:47:25PM +0100, Martin Heusse wrote: > > Harald, Shinjo, > > please find below is a tiny patch to add > > #define GSMTAP_TYPE_LTE_NAS 0x12 > > to packet-gsmtap.h > > and the corresponding code that uses it. > > great, feel free to push this to the wireshark gerrit. > > I've made a corresponding change in libosmocore, see > https://gerrit.osmocom.org/5018 > Forwarding the discussion at Wireshark gerrit at https://code.wireshark.org/ review/#/c/24554/4: Devices dumping NAS messages can give both encrypted and plain messages. At least for Qualcomm LTE basebands it is true. Therefore using sub_type for differentiating encrypted and plain NAS messages were discussed there. This will likely introduce another modifications to gsmtap.h, and therefore want to discuss more about this topic also here. Shinjo -- Shinjo Park <pshinjo(a)sec.t-labs.tu-berlin.de> Security in Telecommunications <sec.t-labs.tu-berlin.de> TU Berlin / Telekom Innovation Laboratories Ernst-Reuter-Platz 7, Sekr TEL 17 / D - 10587 Berlin, Germany Phone: +49 30 8353 58272

1 0

OSMO-IUH
by Radiarisainana Sitraka 27 Nov '17

27 Nov '17

Hello, I heard that it's possible to connect to a femtocell without knowing Ki and Opc... of the sim-card like the conferences of Nico Golde and Ranvinshar on the poisoning the femtocell.My question is , is it possible to make the same with the osmo-iuh on the future !? Chears,

2 1

load based handover
by Neels Hofmeyr 24 Nov '17

24 Nov '17

Hi Jolly, my current task is to implement load based handover between BTS, and in old tradition of adopting your code to implement dynamic timeslots on osmo-{bts,bsc}, I am now looking at the openbsc.git jolly/new_handover branch. I notice that, on that branch, there are improvements on the "old" handover, followed by a new elaborate handover_2 algorithm, which looks very sane at first sight, paired with an elaborate test suite. So my question is whether handover_2.c has some obvious shortcomings or open issues that need to be resolved before I can consider merging that to OsmoBSC's master branch. Should we still keep the "old" handover decision code around as well for particular reasons, or would it make sense to adopt handover_2.c by default? Is one better than the other in particular situations? And ... do you remember any high level conclusions from when you implemented the branch, things I should be aware of when testing and adopting the code? Did it work out as expected? How well tested is it? Thanks! ~N

2 1

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

OpenBSC November 2017