9 Feb
2017
9 Feb
'17
4:39 a.m.
[cid:9b893015-fe6c-4d05-9933-7169f767fc97]
________________________________
From: OpenBSC <openbsc-bounces(a)lists.osmocom.org> on behalf of
openbsc-request(a)lists.osmocom.org <openbsc-request(a)lists.osmocom.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 9:00:47 AM
To: openbsc(a)lists.osmocom.org
Subject: OpenBSC Digest, Vol 28, Issue 6
Send OpenBSC mailing list submissions to
openbsc(a)lists.osmocom.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.osmocom.org/mailman/listinfo/openbsc
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
openbsc-request(a)lists.osmocom.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
openbsc-owner(a)lists.osmocom.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of OpenBSC digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: weekly test report (w5 2017) (Ivaylo Kostov)
2. Re: weekly test report (w5 2017) (Harald Welte)
3. Re: weekly test report (w5 2017) (Neels Hofmeyr)
4. Re: OpenBSC Digest, Vol 28, Issue 5 (Rajitha peiris)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 16:33:26 +0100
From: Ivaylo Kostov <ikostov(a)sysmocom.de>
To: Neels Hofmeyr <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de>
Cc: Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org>rg>, openbsc(a)lists.osmocom.org
Subject: Re: weekly test report (w5 2017)
Message-ID: <06726d26-d66f-d48d-cf9d-533178a13ada(a)sysmocom.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Hi Neels,
Yes. I do have TCH/F_PDCH dynamic timeslots in the test procedure.
regards,
Ivaylo
On 08.02.2017 16:26, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
(found this mail stuck in my outbox, sending late)
On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 10:09:23AM +0100, Ivaylo Kostov wrote:
------------------------------
- Ivaylo Kostov <ikostov(a)sysmocom.de> <mailto:ikostov@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
------------------------------
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 16:45:57 +0100
From: Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org>
To: Neels Hofmeyr <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de>
Cc: Ivaylo Kostov <ikostov(a)sysmocom.de>de>, openbsc(a)lists.osmocom.org
Subject: Re: weekly test report (w5 2017)
Message-ID: <20170208154557.2rmslkrzuqlv7xc4@nataraja>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi all,
On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 04:26:11PM +0100, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
Hi Harald,
I see. What was communicated to me was that NITB channel configuration
TCH/F_TCH/H_PDCH is not supported with nanoBTS.
I will have in mind that nanoBTS does not support HR (v1) codec.
Yes, we discussed TCH/F_TCH/H_PDCH for the nanoBTS. I remember to be surprised
because from some discussion it appeared that the nanoBTS supports HR, and I
was expecting TCH/F only.
While talking about codecs, the ip.access nanoBTS *should* in fact support the
TCH/F_PDCH dynamic timeslots. Ivaylo, could you check whether that is part of
your testing procedure and add it if not?
~N
-- While talking about codecs, the ip.access nanoBTS
*should* in fact support the
TCH/F_PDCH dynamic timeslots. Ivaylo, could you check whether that is part of
your testing procedure and add it if not?
libbsc should be extended to handle those restrictions, i.e. reject a
configuration containing HR codec or a osmocom-style dynamic channel on
a bts model 'nanobts'.
Similarly, the BS11 should reject any codec except HRv1, FR and EFR
(i.e. no AMR).
In reality there are also older nanoBTSs that don't support AMR (as far
as I remember), but that shouldn't prevent us from having at least the
most basic checks in place.
For osmo-bts, we need a more sophisticated hand-shaking mechanism, as
there are many different hardware/PHYs (and associated versions)
supported by it. This is left for further study ;)
--
- 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)
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 00:43:35 +0100
From: Neels Hofmeyr <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de>
To: Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org>
Cc: Ivaylo Kostov <ikostov(a)sysmocom.de>de>, openbsc(a)lists.osmocom.org
Subject: Re: weekly test report (w5 2017)
Message-ID: <20170208234335.GB27422(a)my.box>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 04:45:57PM +0100, Harald Welte wrote:
libbsc should be extended to handle those
restrictions, i.e. reject a
configuration containing HR codec or a osmocom-style dynamic channel on
a bts model 'nanobts'.
i.e. checks on the VTY level.
Seems like we want an issue for that: https://osmocom.org/issues/1946
~N
