7 Dec
2022
7 Dec
'22
11:08 p.m.
On 12/8/22 01:26, Mychaela Falconia wrote:
Because you're known to hijack threads on this (and not only this)
mailing list and turn them into propaganda of your projects. Even in
this thread I see lengthy description of what your software is capable
of, which components exist, how they talk to each other, and why e.g.
osmo-sip-connector is not as good as your alternatives...
I was not following FreeCalypso mailing lists from the beginning, but I
don't remember seeing anybody from Osmocom joining there and saying:
"hey, your approach is not as good as mine, look at our alternatives".
Of course, valid criticism is always welcome, as well as patches are.
And I love to see people sharing here what they are working on, but IMO
it should not be that aggressively advertised as you do sometimes.
I am not entitled to teach you how to behave in mailing lists nor I am
given the right to force any rules here. I could simply ignore your
lengthy mails and focus on feedback from the other participants, but I
would rather be explicit here.
All in all, it's not about whoever likes or dislikes you, whoever likes
or dislikes your development preferences, and not about gender
discrimination. Let's stay close to the topic and be nice to each
other. Thanks for your understanding!
--
- Vadim Yanitskiy <vyanitskiy at 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
My point was (and still remains) that I see the very
idea of virtual
RAN as utterly pointless. Sure, it is a "cool" hack, you can feel all
awesome and proud that you did it, but what in the world does it
actually accomplish?*Especially* if we are talking about*voice*
testing - surely voice is the one test scenario in which a virtual
setup is at its*most* useless? I can kinda-sorta-see some signaling
test scenarios where your virtual setup would provide some limited
value: you've made some change to OsmoBSC or OsmoMSC or OsmoHLR, and
while a test with an MS implementation that isn't your own is still
required later, you could do a first-pass sanity check with your own
MS - so I will grant you that use case.
Quick answer: testing. Back in 2017 fake_trx.py was just a hack to test
trxcon against OsmoRAN/OsmoCNI stack, while ptrkrysik was independently
working on the gr-gsm based PHY. At some point Sysmocom started writing
conformance tests for osmo-bts-trx based on fake_trx.py + trxcon, which
eventually evolved into a decent testsuite (260 test cases) [1][2].
In 2018 Harald gave a talk about "the state Osmocom TTCN-3 Test Suites"
[3], where among the other testsuites he covered ttcn3-bts-test.
The virtual setup was also useful for testing voice calls because
recently I worked on integrating GAPK I/O into the mobile app. This is
a part of the SDR PHY project we are currently working on. I did some
tests with a Motorola C1xx, but I actually needed to make sure that
voice works when using trxcon.
[1] https://cgit.osmocom.org/osmo-ttcn3-hacks/tree/bts
[2] https://jenkins.osmocom.org/jenkins/view/TTCN3/job/ttcn3-bts-test/
[3] https://media.ccc.de/v/UGHHW3
Does your mobile app now
feature integration with libosmogapk and various codec libs plus ALSA,
to the point where your PC speakers and mic become the speaker+mic set
of the virtual MS? If the answer to that last question is yes, then I
can see how you could do some voice testing (although still not
replacing further testing with a standard phone) with your virtual MS
*if* the other end of the test call is a PSTN gateway or a PBX with
melody and echo test numbers, etc. But you were suggesting a test
scenario with*two* instances of mobile app, one calling the other -
just where is the actual test,*what* would be tested (and how, if
both run on the same PC that has only one speaker output and only one
mic input) in this specific scenario which you included?
Yes, it does [4][5]. Some patches are still in Gerrit waiting for code
review, but in general it's already in a good shape. As I said above, I
needed to make sure that trxcon handles TCH stuff properly.
[4] https://osmocom.org/issues/3400
[5]
https://cgit.osmocom.org/osmocom-bb/commit/?id=df7fa3e296d97332161ed78be95c…
But I think I see where I may have gone astray in my
response to your
post: you said "you guys", and I failed to grasp your intent behind
that wording. You see, I made the innocent mistake of assuming that
you said "you guys" when really meaning plural-you of all genders -
but now I am thinking that I was wrong in my interpretation, you
probably meant "you guys" as explicitly excluding women. [...]
No, I don't really care about genders here. All I wanted to discuss is
voice testing, not limiting nor discriminating potential participants in
any way. I am not a native English speaker, but reading the Internet I
see there is no consensus on whether "guys" is gender-neutral. Maybe
"you folks" would have been a better fit.
Yes, we know. It's not the
first time you're advertising it here.
And what exactly is wrong with it?
ThemWi system sw is an add-on to
OsmoCNI, it was developed specifically to work together with OsmoCNI
and can't work without it, hence I argue that it should be on-topic
here. Furthermore, you yourself always include links to code
repositories in your own posts, even when they are Osmocom repos which
everyone on this ML would be presumed to know about (e.g., your link
to gapk repo in your previous follow-up) - therefore, if there is a
discussion involving an area where ThemWi additions to OsmoCNI are
relevant and useful, I will remind people of the existence and
availability of this option.