> 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.
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
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.
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.
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)
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)
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
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,
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
Looking at https://osmocom.org/projects/cellular-infrastructure/wiki/Point_Codes
OsmoMSC currently uses 0.23.1 for A-and-Iu,
and 0.23.2 for Iu only if Iu is on a different cs7 instance than A (i.e.
practically never).
Either way that doesn't really make sense to me. If OsmoMSC is connecting to
the same STP for A and Iu, it is sufficient to have one point-code for the two
SSNs for A (BSSAP) and Iu (RANAP) and hence use one cs7 instance for both.
If it is connecting to two different STPs, the point codes do not collide
anyway, and it makes no sense to use a different one for Iu. It only confuses
the defaults, e.g. the wiki page was wrong until I fixed it just now.
I would rather have just 0.23.1 for the MSC for all SSNs.
See ss7_setup() in msc_main.c.
Agreed?
~N
