- OpenBSC - lists.osmocom.org

Is there a maximum separation in Mhz for ARFCNs on one BTS?
by Keith Whyte 01 Jul '16

01 Jul '16

Hi all, Would somebody who is familiar with the relevant part of the GSM spec be able to comment? I'm wondering if there's any issue in GSM running a dual TRX BTS with two ARFCNs on opposite ends of the band? For example, in GSM850, this would mean the downlinks could be on 869.2 and 893.8 Mhz so the phone could have to tune across a wider range between the SDCCH and TCH for example. Thanks!

2 1

osmo-nitb/osmo-bts-trx: Logging traffic on A-bis interface
by Sebastian Stumpf 01 Jul '16

01 Jul '16

Hi all, I wanted to check if the bts - bsc communication works properly with my configuration. For example, if my osmo-nitb does send the system information messages to the bts. I tried the vty logging interface of osmo-bts and logged some messages, but they were not the messages I expected. I configured the groups rsl, oml, rll, rr and abis to "notice", all to "everything" and everything else to "error" and got following log output (lots of these and nothing else): ... <0006> scheduler.c:405 PH-RTS.ind: chan=CCCH chan_nr=0x90 link_id=0x00 fn=993588 ts=0 trx=0 <0006> scheduler.c:341 PH-DATA.req: chan_nr=0x90 link_id=0x00 fn=993588 ts=0 trx=0 ... PH-RTS.ind and PH-DATA.req seem to come from layer1 SAP, the osmo-trx and have probably nothing to do with the SI messages. Is traffic on abis generally not logged or is my log config faulty? I ended up configuring the gsmtap interface for osmo-bts and could so see the uplink/downlink in wireshark and could see that the SI information is properly sent. But gsmtap only works for the air interface. What is the best way for logging/sniffing the communication on the A-bis interface? With kind regards, Sebastian Stumpf

3 2

Re: GPRS on osmo-trx not working
by Alexander Chemeris 30 Jun '16

30 Jun '16

On Jun 29, 2016 10:04 PM, "Tom Tsou" <tom(a)tsou.cc> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Neels Hofmeyr <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de> wrote: > Another non-startup error message I found is bad PDTCH and PTCCH and > blocks under ideal RF signal conditions. It appears that you have seen > this behavior as well. > > DL1C <0006> scheduler_trx.c:835 Received bad data frame at fn=372020 > (12/104) for PTCCH > DL1C <0006> scheduler_trx.c:918 Received bad PDTCH block ending at > fn=310516 (76/104) for PDTCH > > The cause of these errors with excellent signal is the following piece > of code where zero-filled buffers are passed to the decoder. I have no > idea why this is done. Removing the code prevents the bad PDTCH/PTCCH > blocks with no loss of GPRS functionality. > > diff --git a/src/common/scheduler.c b/src/common/scheduler.c > @@ -1598,10 +1598,6 @@ int trx_sched_ul_burst() > > func(l1t, tn, fn, chan, bid, bits, rssi, toa); > } else if (chan != TRXC_RACH && !l1cs->ho_rach_detect) { > - sbit_t spare[148]; > - > - memset(spare, 0, 148); > - func(l1t, tn, fn, chan, bid, spare, -128, 0); > } Each L2 frame consists of several L1 bursts, so you need to accumulate them all before you can pass them to Viterbi for decoding. If I remember this part of the code correctly, this zeroing is required to make this work when there are lost bursts. E.g. if you need 4 bursts, but you only received bursts 0, 1 and 2 you should let the device know that your missing burst 3. If you don't do that, decoder won't run at all and to will miss what could be a decodable frame. By disabling this code you essentially start decoding only perfect frames, which are obviously decoded fine in perfect conditions. I.e. this only makes the actual problem, whatever it is. Please excuse typos. Written with a touchscreen keyboard. -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris CEO Fairwaves, Inc. https://fairwaves.co

2 1

scope of scheduler.c and trx_sched_*
by Neels Hofmeyr 29 Jun '16

29 Jun '16

I notice that apparently osmo-bts-trx is the only caller of the trx_sched_* API, yet it is implemented in common/scheduler.c and compiled to libl1sched.a. Is osmo-bts-trx really the only caller? Also in osmo-bts-trx, the "trx" to me means SDR, like B200. But any BTS has one or more TRXs. So why isn't it osmo-bts-sdr? That's why I thought: maybe trx_sched_ is for all BTS models? Thanks for any clarification / confirmation :) ~Neels -- - Neels Hofmeyr <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de> http://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Alt-Moabit 93 * 10559 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschäftsführer / Managing Directors: Harald Welte

2 1

osmotrx init problem
by Max 29 Jun '16

29 Jun '16

Hi. I've got following problem while trying to make osmotrx work in multitrx setting on USRP B210: sudo chrt 20 ./Transceiver52M/osmo-trx -c 2 sudo chrt 15 ./src/osmo-bts-trx/osmo-bts-trx -t 2 -c ~/.config/osmocom/osmo-bts-mtrx.cfg -d DRTP:DCC:DRSL:DOML:DL1C:DTRX The bts quits from trx_if.c after checking "if (tcm->critical) {...". The command sequence seems to be the same for both phy0.0 and phy0.1 However 0.0 one accepts SETTSC command and 0.1 rejects it: trx_if.c:380 transceiver (phy0.1) rejected TRX command with response: 'RSP SETTSC 1 7' So far I fail to see where this difference comes from. Full log: <0001> oml.c:1249 Initializing OML attribute definitions <000b> trx_if.c:560 Open transceiver for phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD POWEROFF' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD POWEROFF' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:560 Open transceiver for phy0.1 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP POWEROFF 0' <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[0] (150 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[1] (180 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[2] (180 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[3] (1680 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[4] (520 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[5] (165 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[6] (1680 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD POWEROFF' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD POWEROFF' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP POWEROFF 0' <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD RXTUNE 1783400' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD RXTUNE 1783400' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD TXTUNE 1878400' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETTSC 7' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD POWERON' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETRXGAIN 1' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETPOWER 0' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 0 4' <0005> paging.c:545 Paging: BS_AG_BLKS_RES = 0 != 1 not fully supported <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP RXTUNE 0 1783400' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD TXTUNE 1878400' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP TXTUNE 0 1878400' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETTSC 7' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETTSC 0 7' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD POWERON' to phy0.0 <0005> paging.c:545 Paging: BS_AG_BLKS_RES = 0 != 1 not fully supported <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 1 7' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 2 13' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 3 13' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 4 13' <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP POWERON 0' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETRXGAIN 1' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETRXGAIN 0 1' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETPOWER 0' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETPOWER 0 0' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 0 4' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 0 4' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 1 7' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 1 7' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 2 13' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 2 13' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 3 13' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 3 13' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 4 13' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 4 13' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 5 13' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 5 13' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 5 13' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 6 13' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 6 13' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 6 13' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 7 13' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 7 13' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 7 13' <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD RXTUNE 1783800' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD RXTUNE 1783800' to phy0.1 <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD TXTUNE 1878800' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETTSC 7' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 0 7' <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP RXTUNE 0 1783800' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD TXTUNE 1878800' to phy0.1 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP TXTUNE 0 1878800' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETTSC 7' to phy0.1 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETTSC 1 7' <000b> trx_if.c:380 transceiver (phy0.1) rejected TRX command with response: 'RSP SETTSC 1 7' <0001> bts.c:203 Shutting down BTS 0, Reason TRX-CTRL-MSG: CRITICAL <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD POWEROFF' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD POWEROFF' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP POWEROFF 0' <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[0] (150 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[1] (180 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[2] (180 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[3] (1680 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[4] (520 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[5] (165 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:547 Ignoring T200[6] (1680 ms) as sent by BSC due to suspected LAPDm bug! <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD POWERON' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD POWERON' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETRXGAIN 1' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETPOWER 0' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 0 4' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 1 7' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 2 13' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 3 13' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 4 13' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 5 13' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 6 13' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 7 13' <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP POWERON 0' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETRXGAIN 1' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETRXGAIN 0 1' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETPOWER 0' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETPOWER 0 0' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 0 4' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 0 4' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 1 7' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 1 7' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 2 13' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 2 13' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 3 13' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 3 13' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 4 13' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 4 13' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 5 13' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 5 13' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 6 13' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 6 13' <000b> trx_if.c:169 Sending control 'CMD SETSLOT 7 13' to phy0.0 <000b> trx_if.c:348 Response message: 'RSP SETSLOT 0 7 13' <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 0 7' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 1 1' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 2 1' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 3 1' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 4 1' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 5 1' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 6 1' <000b> trx_if.c:222 Adding new control 'CMD SETSLOT 7 1' <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <0001> oml.c:884 ADM state already was Unlocked <000b> trx_if.c:138 Clock indication: fn=999376 <000b> trx_if.c:470 TX burst tn=0 fn=999396 pwr=0 <000b> trx_if.c:470 TX burst tn=1 fn=999396 pwr=0 <000b> trx_if.c:470 TX burst tn=2 fn=999396 pwr=0 ... -- Max Suraev <msuraev(a)sysmocom.de> http://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Alt-Moabit 93 * 10559 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschaeftsfuehrer / Managing Director: Harald Welte

2 1

[PATCH 1/2] add basic .gitignore
by Neels Hofmeyr 28 Jun '16

28 Jun '16

From: Neels Hofmeyr <neels(a)hofmeyr.de> --- .gitignore | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 43 insertions(+) create mode 100644 .gitignore diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore new file mode 100644 index 0000000..3e0ee03 --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitignore @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@ +# build results +*.o +*.lo +*.la + +# tests +CommonLibs/BitVectorTest +CommonLibs/ConfigurationTest +CommonLibs/F16Test +CommonLibs/InterthreadTest +CommonLibs/LogTest +CommonLibs/RegexpTest +CommonLibs/SocketsTest +CommonLibs/TimevalTest +CommonLibs/URLEncodeTest +CommonLibs/VectorTest + +# automake/autoconf +*.in +.deps +.libs +.dirstamp +*~ +Makefile +config.log +config.status +config.h +config.guess +config.sub +config/* +configure +compile +aclocal.m4 +autom4te.cache +depcomp +install-sh +libtool +ltmain.sh +missing +stamp-h1 + +# vim +*.sw? -- 2.1.4

1 3

[PATCH] configure.ac: check for boost/config.hpp header
by Neels Hofmeyr 28 Jun '16

28 Jun '16

From: Neels Hofmeyr <neels(a)hofmeyr.de> --- configure.ac | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac index 6c6ca2e..c4db4d2 100644 --- a/configure.ac +++ b/configure.ac @@ -119,6 +119,9 @@ AM_CONDITIONAL(ARCH_ARM_A15, [test "x$with_neon_vfpv4" = "xyes"]) PKG_CHECK_MODULES(LIBUSB, libusb-1.0) +AC_CHECK_HEADER([boost/config.hpp],[], + [AC_MSG_ERROR([boost/config.hpp not found, install e.g. libboost-dev])]) + dnl Output files AC_CONFIG_FILES([\ Makefile \ -- 2.1.4

1 0

openBSC paging issue
by robert 28 Jun '16

28 Jun '16

Hi, when trying to work with multiple BTS as noted in http://umtrx.org/multi-bts-with-osmocom-and-a-single-umtrx/ , I faced a problem related to paging. When I start the BTS, I can send SMS to any connected phone but after a few minutes no SMS is sent and I can’t even make calls. I noticed that the target phone is not being paged anymore. If I restart the openBSC instance the old pending messages get sent sometimes. Also if I run the same code but with only one OSMO-BTS instance, everything works fine. I would really appreciate some help. Best regards,

1 0

iphone backdoor?
by Max 22 Jun '16

22 Jun '16

Hi. While testing I've got iphone (non-jailbroken) which regularly attempts to send following sms to number 447537410247 (uk?): REG-REQ?v=3;t=C335D183C5A2FC0E2501543EBCEB8263D55683FB63A2E8CAF98B8874D940263F;r=165209558 without asking user for anything. Is this some sort of Apple's backdoor? Or GCHQ is so bored that they are trying to spy on me? :) Have you guys seen this before? -- Max Suraev <msuraev(a)sysmocom.de> http://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Alt-Moabit 93 * 10559 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschaeftsfuehrer / Managing Director: Harald Welte

4 4

multitrx with osmotrx
by Max 21 Jun '16

21 Jun '16

Hi. I've noticed check for device type around Transceiver52M/UHDDevice.cpp:772 - seems like USRP B200 is not supported for multitrx configurations: sudo chrt 20 ./Transceiver52M/osmo-trx -c 2 sudo chrt 15 ./src/osmo-bts-trx/osmo-bts-trx -c ~/.config/osmocom/osmo-bts-trx.cfg -i 192.168.122.1 -t 2 Where does this limitation comes from? Is it just smth which is not implemented (yet) or it's impossible to implement due to X and Y? -- Max Suraev <msuraev(a)sysmocom.de> http://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Alt-Moabit 93 * 10559 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschaeftsfuehrer / Managing Director: Harald Welte

6 6