Hello, Harald,
I am reusing the libosmovty in my program. And hence my program must
have the same license (AGPL-3.0), mustn't it?
Also, the question regarding the copyright message in the terminal:
Should I leave the "Copyright (C) 201* by Harald Welte..." string or
should I add my name and company there alongside yours. Or can I just
leave my name there?
With best wishes,
Mykola
Hi Community,
Does anyone tried to use the Cell Broadcast feature in osmo?
https://osmocom.org/projects/cellular-infrastructure/wiki/Cell_Broadcast
Is there specific SDRs that supports this feature?
Best Regard,
Ron Menez
ron.menez(a)entropysolution.com<mailto:ron.menez@entropysolution.com>
Hi Ron,
> Does anyone tried to use the Cell Broadcast feature in osmo?
> Is there specific SDRs that supports this feature?
I have not tried personally, but I would like to clarify one thing.
CBCH is implemented in the higher *software* layers, so it doesn't
depend on a specific SDR device. The problem is that it isn't (yet)
implemented for osmo-bts-trx, a BTS variant for SDR devices...
Moreover, I believe it should be quite easy to implement this,
so any patches are welcome ;)
With best regards,
Vadim Yanitskiy.
Hi Holger,
I'm getting back to the following libosmocore commit introduced in 2015:
> commit f558ed4bb9c0f00997b8f97c2b251a574c1a64c4
> Author: Holger Hans Peter Freyther <holger(a)moiji-mobile.com>
> Date: Tue Jun 2 15:52:06 2015 +0200
I can see what you are doing, but I have absolutely no idea as to why.
AFAICT, the IPA CCM ID TLVs have the following structure:
* 16bit length field
* one byte tag
* optional payload
The length field *includes* the tag, so the actual payload length is the value
encoded in the length field minus one.
This means that the existing/classic ipa_ccm_idtag_parse() always returns one
byte too much for the length of the IPA payload. I'm trying to address this in
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/#/c/libosmocore/+/10216/
Your commit introduces ipa_ccm_idtag_parse_off(), which introduces a noffset field.
However, that offset is used not only to compute the actual "payload" size, but
it's also used for computing the subsequent CCM information elements. Hence, I cannot
use any non-zero offset to parse a CCM blob.
I also don't see any of our code using the ipa_ccm_idtag_parse_off() function, except
the test case - where the test case seems to use a different encoding as seen on the
wire, i.e. it uses only a single-byte length field.
So if the function was just added for that test case, why not structure the data
used in the test to reflect the on-the-wire protocol reality?
There must be some genius rationale behind it, but I'm unable to figure it out.
Maybe you still remember? Thanks!
--
- 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,
The OpenBSC tools have turned into an impressive collection of tools.
It is great to see this huge effort being done successfully! I was
searching around on the osmocom site for information about LTE.
Either, I am very bad at searching, or there is not so much
information about that subject. I was wondering about the plans for
LTE, if there are any such plans?
I am writing this taking into account that in the country where I
live, the major telecom providers plan to shut down the 3G
infrastructure already next year, leaving only 2G and 4G running. In
some years, they also want to shut down 2G (which I have heard has
already been done some places across the Atlantic)
I found a few other projects related to LTE: nextepc [1] and srsLTE
[2]. I see that nextepc has been mentioned in a thread related to
OsmoDevCon 2018, but I cannot see so much more information. Is the
plan maybe some time to incorporate srsLTE and nextepc into osmocom
infrastructure? Is there currently any cooperation? Or will there be
some new and fresh LTE code in osmocom?
Mainly, I was just wondering whether you can shed some light on /
discuss this subject.
Thank you very much.
Best regards
Ruben Undheim
[1] https://github.com/acetcom/nextepc / http://nextepc.org/
[2] nhttps://github.com/srsLTE/srsLTE.git
Hello,
I bougth one ip.access nano3G in ebay, it seem to have a custom firmware
for an operator that does not work in my country I want to know how to
reflash it with the correct firmware to run openbsc. Can anybody help me?
Best regards and a lot of thanks in advance.
Hi!
I will be doing extensive hardware maintenance + upgrades today in a
data center, which means that gnumonks.org and some other related
systems will be offline for some amount of time today, particularly
during the morning and early afternoon (MESZ time zone).
The only Osmocom system/service affected is people.osmocom.org.
It's just likely that you will receive notifications about e-mail delays
to my personal e-mail address, but those will be automatically
re-transmitted after the systems are back online.
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)
Hey guys,
I'm a bit disappointed that I see more merges to osmo-bsc master that tweak
MGCP and codec preferences, moving things around files and so on. Please please
do not merge this kind of stuff now, I really cannot use any of that while I'm
turning insane to finally get the osmo-bsc refactoring out of the door. It's
really mean to load merge conflicts on top of that.
If fixes really need quick merging, please do everything in your might to AVOID
moving functions around and changing file names. That's ... yeah, you get the
picture.
What is also more than welcome is to work on the branch tip of
neels/inter_bsc_ho and apply cosmetic moves to that. Just please not between
current master and the refactoring.
(And to test that branch would also be welcome, if time permits.)
Another alternative is to *talk* to me.
Many thanks.
~N
Hi Philipp,
just now I'm trying to use pySim to read a SIM card, but I notice:
ImportError: No module named pytlv.TLV
I can find no pytlv in the debian packaging; and I notice this dependency was
added only recently. When going back to
859e0fd1ce08699930064c12fb9f7908ef972b50 I can use pySim fine without that.
a) I think the readme should hint at dependencies that pySim requires, which
should include pytlv and where to find it.
b) In python, it is easy to import pytlv only in case it is actually used,
which would simplify dependencies for users that don't need to "get file/record
length from FCP (USIM)" -- would that make sense?
What are your thoughts?
~N
TLDR: Tried to find another way of managing changes to a large patch on gerrit
by submitting a merge-commit, but turns out not so useful. Just sharing findings.
When I fix and change the current large osmo-bsc refactoring patch, on the one
hand I'd like to squash new changes into it to commit the correct result right
away. On the other hand, I want to keep the new changes in separate reviewable
bits, so that reviewers don't need to read the entire patch again, and so that
the new changes can be reviewed one by one, separately.
So far my strategy was to add a new patch set for each small change. Now I
thought it might make sense to have a non-fast-forward merge combining commits
and review that. I tried it in the sandbox repos.
Turns out that gerrit will have one patch for the merge-commit including the
smaller commits, showing all combined changes. However, there will also be
separate patches in the list for each single part of that merged commit. So
there will be a series of small commits onto current master that need to be
reviewed and merged one-by-one. And in the end that is followed by one
basically useless merge-commit; meaning, if we got as far as accepting the
smaller parts of that merge, we don't need to also merge that empty
merge-commit, master already has gotten the smaller bits as separate commits.
So the conclusion is that indeed pushing new small patch-sets onto the same
large commit makes the most sense, and where changes stand on their own,
separate follow-up patches make sense.
~N
