OpenBSC

openbsc@lists.osmocom.org

16 participants
4200 discussions

Patch/Driver for Sangoma E1 interface ?
by Carcellelist 27 Jan '10

27 Jan '10

Hi there, Has anyone been working on using OpenBSC with a Sangoma E1 card connected to the BTS ? I guess they would be some patches to add to the generic driver to have it fully working and recognized within the OpenBSC framework ? The last thread I saw related to Sangoma was from Oystein : http://lists.gnumonks.org/pipermail/openbsc/2009-August/000821.html Cheers, Xavier.

1 0

adding an input to openbsc
by K2 26 Jan '10

26 Jan '10

Hi What needs to be changed in openbsc in order to add a new input ? I'm currently developing a GAN protocol stack, and would like to add it to openbsc so it could deal with the DTAP msg coming from GAN regards, -- k2

3 3

maybe there is an select problem
by Andreas.Eversberg 23 Jan '10

23 Jan '10

hi, while porting the select.c to LCR, i found the problem: the unix select function returns a set of file descriptors to be handled. the result-loop (the loop after the select()) is called again, if more than one descriptor is removed by the callback funtion. this may lead to a another call to the callback function, because the bits of the FD_SETs do not change and still set. i think we must clear these bits, if they are handled, so the handler will not be called twice in case of a "restart" of that loop. regards, andreas

2 1

Re: phone without encryption
by Dieter Spaar 21 Jan '10

21 Jan '10

Hello Andreas, On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:30:17 +0100, "Andreas.Eversberg" <Andreas.Eversberg(a)versatel.de> wrote: > > some stupid question: if a phone does not support any encryption, is it > possible to use it on an official GSM network? (authentication works, of > course) if so, what phone might it be? I did a quick check, at least Vodafone and T-Mobile here in Germany reject the Location Update Request with "Network Failure" (0x11) if they get a classmark without any encryption available. The registration works with the same phone if the classmark indicates that encryption support is available. The test was done with a phone where I can modify the classmark data. Best regards, Dieter -- Dieter Spaar, Germany spaar(a)mirider.augusta.de

1 0

phone without encryption
by Andreas.Eversberg 20 Jan '10

20 Jan '10

hi, some stupid question: if a phone does not support any encryption, is it possible to use it on an official GSM network? (authentication works, of course) if so, what phone might it be? regards andreas Mit freundlichen Grüßen, .-. /'v'\ (/ \) ------------------------------------------------------------------"-"- |_| i.A. Andreas Eversberg Network Operations / 2nd Level Data - KC Internet Versatel Nord GmbH Nordstr. 2 D-24937 Flensburg Fon: +49-461-9099749 | Fax: +49-461-909960749 andreas.eversberg@versatel.de@versatel.de | www.versatel.de Sitz der Gesellschaft: Flensburg, Registergericht: Flensburg, HRB 3395 FL Geschäftsführer: Dr. Hai Cheng, Dr. Max Padberg, Joachim Bellinghoven

2 1

parsing config file problem
by Nordin CrazyHacker 13 Jan '10

13 Jan '10

Hello list, I have a nanobts1800 and installed openbsc on Debian yesterday (from git). After building the project and configured the bts on the network, I executed bsc_hack with -c openbsc.cfg.nanobts. But it failed to execute with the following error: <0005> bsc_init.c:860 Failed to parse the config file: 'openbsc.cfg.nanobts' I haven't modified the config file, I haven't modified anything at all in openbsc. Any idea? Thanks.

1 0

Commit [39315c4] breaks BTS configuration
by Daniel Willmann 12 Jan '10

12 Jan '10

Hello, the commit "[OML] parse attributes depending on BTS type" seems to break bsc_hack completely since it's no longer possible to add a new BTS. This happens because the VTY config sytem first tries to allocate a BTS of type UNKNOWN and later changes that type when the type statement is encountered. I have commited a patch in daniel/fixes that registers a BTS of type unknown so the code should work as before (tested with a BS11). Maybe it is smarter to change the way the gsm_bts_alloc function works instead (so you don't need to provide a type there), I'm not sure about that. Regards, Daniel Willmann

2 1

bs11_config showing less info
by Daniel Willmann 11 Jan '10

11 Jan '10

Hello, I've noticed that recent versions of bs11_config don't show all the infos they used to. commit eb429b7b44f1c39548a1995cb93484b9cbe2996e Author: Sylvain Munaut <tnt(a)246tNt.com> Date: Mon Oct 26 20:19:59 2009 +0100 [TLV] Split the parser into 'parse loop' and 'parse single value' seems to be the problem. If I revert it bs11_config query shows more information again. I've looked at the patch, but so far couldn't find out what it does differently. I'll keep looking, but maybe someone else has an idea. Regards, Daniel Willmann

3 3

Branches update & things to consider for merging
by Sylvain Munaut 07 Jan '10

07 Jan '10

Hi, I've just tested code I started at 26c3 but didn't get a chance to test and I updated my various branches. Here's a little status : sylvain/rrlp : This contains only changes to rrlp-ephemeris. Mostly fixes and more support to provide assistance data. Also asn1c patches to fix bugs and a script for people to generate their own test data.ubx from their receiver (to get up-to-date / local data). sylvain/pending: Various things / fixes I made that I consider ready to be reviewed / merged. I tested it all on both my nanoBTS 139. sylvain/encryption: The current state of my encryption support work. I rebased it and used the db structure you pushed for encryption. Everything but the last 3 patches are pre-work / preparation / fixes and are imho OK. The last 3 patches are the real implementation and I also think they're in pretty good shape. Tested and working here :) Limitations includes : No Kc re-use & No MT encryption yet. sylvain/encryption_testing: More encryption work, based on sylvain/encryption but not done/ready. Only pushed so that people can have a peek ... Cheers, Sylvain

2 5

Stack corruption from set_system_infos
by Holger Freyther 07 Jan '10

07 Jan '10

Hi Harald, I have a stack corruption due the above method and here is my analysis of the problem... set_system_infos is having a u_int8_t array with 23 bytes on the stack and is asking to generate system infos into this array... Now what happens is: 1.) some system information types structs are already bigger than the 23 bytes... 2.) this does not take the rest octets into account.. I would like to fix it like this: 1.) Turn bitvec_spare_padding to return void 2.) In the rest_octets_siX method return the bit_vec.data_len 3.) Change the generate_siX to return the sizeof the struct + return value of the rest_octets_siX instead of the fixed MACBLOCK_LEN (23) 4.) always use this rc value instead of the size of the buffer... (due to 1. of the above we set truncated values as well) do you have a better idea? would you just increase the buffer size? z.

2 3

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

OpenBSC