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
> 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
Hi,
My name is Brackley Cassinga Form DRC, we run a community network called
pamoja net where we offer gsm services using osmocom open source software
and OC Base station.
Recently I have tried to install another base station as the same installed
but I could not find any resource guiding through all the steps to take to
run NIB on a base station.
I'm currently running Ubuntu and I will appreciate if you could guide me on
the installation of BSC,hlr,MSC , in order to run a basic gsm network.
Thank you. Regards
--
*Ir Brackley heshima Casinga **Pacifique*
*CEO and Founder of kwanzatechnologie*
KwanzaTechnologies ,GlobalElectronics
+243977265291 | +243977265291 | Pcassinga(a)gmail.com/
brackley(a)ensemblepourladifference.org
www.kwantechnologies.jimdosite.com <http://www.kwantechnologies.com/> |
Skype: Brackley cassinga <https://webapp.wisestamp.com/#>
Av Semliki N 43
Hello All,
I am working on get OpenBSC connected to a 3rd party MSC, I read from the
Osmo document that I can use the bsc only mode and the osm-bsc instead of
the osmo-nitb.
Currently I had osmo-trx-uhd, osmo-bts-trx, osmo-bsc, and osmo-stp
configured and and running, but I see a lot of below error logs in the
osmo-stp console:
```````````````````````````
DLSS7 <000c> osmo_ss7.c:1468 asp-asp-dyn-0: xua_srv_conn_cb():
sctp_recvmsg() returned 56 (flags=0x80)
DLM3UA <000f> m3ua.c:722 asp-asp-dyn-0: Received M3UA Message (XFER:DATA)
DLM3UA <000f> m3ua.c:541 asp-asp-dyn-0: m3ua_rx_xfer
DLM3UA <000f> m3ua.c:580 asp-asp-dyn-0: m3ua_rx_xfer(): M3UA data header:
opc=337=0.42.1 dpc=185=0.23.1
DLSS7 <000c> osmo_ss7_hmrt.c:278 m3ua_hmdc_rx_from_l2(): dpc=185=0.23.1 not
local, message is for routing
DLSS7 <000c> osmo_ss7_hmrt.c:258 MTP-TRANSFER.req for DPC 185: no route!
````````````````````````````
On the BSC console, I am seeing a lot of:
```````````````````````````````
<0007> a_reset.c:106 A-RESET(msc-0)[0xb76ce0]{DISC}: (re)sending BSSMAP
RESET message...
<0007> osmo_bsc_sigtran.c:93 Sending RESET to MSC:
RI=SSN_PC,PC=0.23.1,SSN=BSSAP
```````````````````````````````
Can anyone identify what is the issue here?
Appreciates!
Regards,
Weiqi
I think here is a bug:
char *osmo_quote_str_c(const void *ctx, const char *str, int in_len)
{
char *buf = talloc_size(ctx, OSMO_MAX(in_len+2, 32));
if (!buf)
return NULL;
return osmo_quote_str_buf2(buf, 32, str, in_len);
}
We may allocate more than 32 bytes (see OSMO_MAX()) but still allow to write
only 32 bytes?
Looks like the allocated len should be stored in a local variable to pass to
osmo_quote_str_buf2().
And if I'm right, what is the 32 for? At least 32??
~N
Dear Osmocom community,
A question about this part of code - function sgsn_ggsn_ctx_drop_pdp:
http://git.osmocom.org/osmo-sgsn/tree/src/gprs/gprs_sgsn.c#n720
The second branch of the condition (hard-dropping) is called even when the phone
is registered, and hence no Deactivate PDP Context Request is sent to the phone.
Due to that, the phone doesn't know that the PDP Context was deleted on the
network side and keeps acting as if it is still active -> the PS isn't working
when this happens.
Any suggestions/thoughts on how this can be fixed?
Thanks
Kind regards,
Mykola
Hi all,
Have anyone tried Osmo GSM stack (including the trx) with the LimeNet
Micro with the Pi compute module? My question is if it is stable enough
for any real deployment or just another toy for the lab.
With the USB3 LimeSDR, after a few hours I _always_ get a broken trx,
with lots of failure messages...
Thanks,
Rafael Diniz
Rhizomatica
Hi,
As I'm looking into adding a generic cell modem framework to the linux
kernel (to create session netdevs etc.), I started looking for a
metadata encapsulation, a la Radiotap (I'm a wifi guy :-) ).
So obviously, I found gsmtap, but for my use case it doesn't really
address most of the interesting data, and it got me wondering. So a few
questions, if I may:
1) Why the design with encapsulating it in UDP? Radiotap is just a raw
header without IP etc. in front, and you use it with tcpdump,
wireshark or similar tools on the local system. What's the value in
having something "network transparent"?
2) The format of gsmtap doesn't seem very extensible, but I guess a new
version could be made that has a TLV-based format or so. I'd have
argued that a new version isn't even needed, but the length field is
only 8 bits right now which seems too short.
(speaking of versions - the docs say "version, set to 0x01 currently"
but "#define GSMTAP_VERSION 0x02")
3) Does the packet data follow the gsmtap header? It's not really clear
to me based on reading the wireshark code.
In particular, the data I'm thinking of is higher-level things, like the
session ID for a frame when it's going through the kernel, or perhaps a
flow label on RX, etc.
Also, vendor-specific data would be useful, e.g. to encapsulate the
device-specific headers like QMI, where such metadata is encapsulated in
a vendor- or device-specific way, which you'd want to see for debugging
certain things, but for other things the generic "session ID" type
information - encoded in a vendor-agnostic way - would be better to show
in wireshark.
Since it doesn't seem possible to use gsmtap in the current version,
would it make sense to define a new gsmtap that (say) has version 3 or
something, followed by an overall length and TLVs? I do note that this
wouldn't be compatible with the current wireshark code as it doesn't
check the version, just shows it...
Or would it make more sense to define a new ARPHDR_WWANTAP like
ARPHDR_IEEE80211_RADIOTAP and just use that instead of encapsulating in
IP/UDP, and then have a completely new (extensible) protocol inside of
that? I'm not really sure I see the point of UDP encapsulation anyway.
Thanks,
johannes
