We notice that when libosmocore debian packages built on opensuse.org end up on
the cumulus3 host, we get
/usr/src/packages/BUILD/tests/testsuite.dir/at-groups/9/test-source: line 25: 26402 Illegal instruction $abs_top_builddir/tests/conv/conv_gsm0503_test
(unfortunately I have no full logs, they were rotated away)
All other hosts we hit so far apparently work fine.
a) debian packages should be usable on the largest set of CPUs, we should not
build with CPU instructions we can't guarantee to be supported. So I guess we
need a --without-sse configure option in libosmocore. Makes sense?
b) I'm puzzled that the same host that built conv_gsm0503_test fails to run it.
Is our SSE check in libosmocore's configure.ac broken? How to verify?
c) would be nice to find out what kind of host cumulus3 is; so far we know only
that it is an x86_64. https://build.opensuse.org/monitor
Ideas? Experience?
~N
Hi!
Support for SMPP Delivery Receipt / GSM03.40 Status Report has been
now merged into master.
If you developed your own ESME, this may require changes on your side
so things doesn't break.
Basically, you have to make sure your ESME deals with esm_class =
Delivery Receipt SMPP messages.
MS GSM 03.40 SMSC SMPP 3.4 ESME
| | |
| SMS-DELIVER | |
|<----------------------------| |
| GSM 04.11 RP-ACK | |
|---------------------------->| |
| | DELIVER-SM |
| | esm_class = Delivery Receipt |
| |------------------------------->|
| | DELIVER-SM-RESP |
| |<-------------------------------|
| | |
In a nutshell: Your ESME should not assume a DELIVER-SM always convey a
SMS, so such DELIVER-SM should NOT be bounced back to the corresponding
SMSC as a normal SUBMIT-SM since it does not represent a SMS.
Your ESME also needs to send a Delivery Acknowledgement to the mobile
station of origin, the one that sent the SMS, so the SMSC can deliver
the corresponding GSM03.40 SMS-STATUS-REPORT.
MS GSM 03.40 SMSC SMPP 3.4 ESME
| | |
| | SUBMIT-SM |
| | esm_class = Delivery Ack |
| |<-------------------------------|
| | SUBMIT-SM-RESP |
| |------------------------------->|
| | |
| SMS-STATUS-REPORT | |
|<----------------------------| |
| GSM 04.11 RP-ACK | |
|---------------------------->| |
| | |
Please, see at recent updates on utils/smpp_mirror.c, I made a number of
small patches so I could this utility to test my patches that, I think,
should be help understand the changes that you have to do on your ESME:
http://git.osmocom.org/openbsc/log/openbsc/src/utils/smpp_mirror.c
Let me know if you have any question/concern.
Thanks!
Hi All,
I’m not sure if this is a valid question but still I’m going to try.
I just updated from my old version of OSMOCOM to the latest one.
Upon trying to test the updated version, it seems that the ring back tone, the one that rings in the Caller (Anum/Mobile Originating) side if the call started to ring on the Callee (BNUM/Mobile Terminating) side, is missing.
Can anyone direct me to the right path where to check it?
Below are the configuration files used for each OSMOCOM elements.
Best Regard,
Ron Menez
ron.menez(a)entropysolution.com<mailto:ron.menez@entropysolution.com>
Again it is brought to my attention that my gerrit review causes annoyance.
There is a recurring theme here, so I'd like to address all patch submitters.
I feel like it's a Good Thing to mark *everything* I notice: "I've read your
patch, and these are all the details I found, in case you'd like to address
them." I see it as a courtesy towards the patch submitter.
For some reason though I turn out to upset rather than help?? My (wrong?)
impression is that these are normal reviews as I've given them as well as
received them hundreds of times over the last decade+. In my world, adjusting
my patches N times is normal, I make mistakes all the time. But I certainly
don't want to upset: I'd really like to find out what I can change to make
everyone's hacking smoother.
In all my previous projects I got used to very high code scrutiny, and when
starting on Osmocom, Holger's review of my patches has continued on the same
high level ... often I had to revisit large amounts of my code.
Thus primed, I find it hard to ignore irregularities: most of them mean the
code becomes less stable or less maintainable/readable.
Usually I'm trying to understand what the patch does or intends, and want to
make sure future readers of the code can also understand easily. The idea is to
save time in the long run.
If you disagree with me or see inconsistencies, please let me know, whether a
patch is merged or not. Maybe I oversaw something or maybe I'm just plain
wrong.
The mood I'd like to convey is: "yes, I trust you that all these patches are an
improvement. I invested some of my time in your work with the goal to merge it
soon. And here's everything that caught my attention; do you agree?"
Ideally we can reach high code standards and at the same time collaborate
productively.
None of my gerrit comments or -1 votes are intended to convey emotion...
Feel free to mail or jabber or talk to me, also privately, on these
issues anytime! And feel free to ignore nitpicks if you don't care enough.
~N
Hello devs,
I am using a 3.5G nano starter kit and I have a problem, hopefully
someone can give me some advice.
When I use the kit in a location with very little 3G coverage it works
great, I scan for 3G networks, the phone sees a network '90170' and can
register without any problems.
However if I try the same thing in a location that has very good macro
3G coverage from several network operators, the phone can longer see my
nano cell.
I assume the problem is due to frequency reuse and the nanocell is using
the same UARFCN as one of the macro cells.
Does anyone have any advice on how best to find a clear frequency band
to use?
Also does anyone know if I have to reboot the ip.access after changing
the UARFCN using
set rfParamsCandidateList=({9800, 401, 1})
Regards
--
Alan R Evans
KAGE Design Services Ltd
Tel: +44 7891 773415
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Hi,
I have noticed that when there are many MS connecting to my BTS if I try to page (call or send SMS) a specific MS it takes a long time and sometimes just fails. Is there a way to give a higher priority for paging under high network loads ?
from vty:
Current Channel Load:
CCCH+SDCCH4: 100% (4/4)
TCH/F: 100% (2/2)
SDCCH8: 100% (40/40)
best regards,
Hey André,
since https://gerrit.osmocom.org/2465 is merged, do you have a patch ready that
enables the build cache for openbsc.git/contrib/jenkins.sh?
The slowness of the openbsc-gerrit builds is a drag...
We could throw more build slaves at it, but it makes sense to give the build
cache a chance first.
~N
We are trying to setup this AP as part of the 3.5G Osmocom project.
We have the software stack operational and are now preparing the nano
for testing.
When we try to login via telnet at port 8090 we are getting a constant
refusal to connect:-
root@osm/openbsc/openbsc/src/ipaccess# telnet 192.168.192.30 8090
Trying 192.168.192.30...
telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused
The device seems to be locked as indicated by the leds on the front panel.
We have tried resetting the nano to see if this would help but to no avail.
Any ideas as to how to access the device for initial configuration?.
Thanks
John
Hi,
> And I found it's possible to acrivate some setting in
> OnmoNITB but how can I do the actual request? I cannot
> find anything in the user manual, vty manual or in the menu...
This request is being sent automatically every time when
a dedicated channel between MS and BTS is established.
With best regards,
Vadim Yanitskiy.
Dear developers,
I found that RRLP requests are possible within OsmoNITB.
http://security.osmocom.org/trac/wiki/RRLP
The popular Free Software implementations of the GSM network OpenBSC
<http://openbsc.osmocom.org/> and OpenBTS <http://openbts.sourceforge.net/>
both support RRLP inquiries to mobile phones
And I found it's possible to acrivate some setting in OnmoNITB but how can
I do the actual request? I cannot find anything in the user manual, vty
manual or in the menu...
Thanks in advance!