9 May
2017
9 May
'17
5:37 p.m.
Hello FreeCalypso and Osmocom communities,
I am in the process of creating an informal organisation representing
the interests of those members of the GSM universe whose interests are
not represented by GSMA etc, and I am inviting you to join me in this
venture. I propose that we name our informal organisation GSMUA,
standing for GSM Users Association, and my vision for this GSMUA is to
be a counter-body (antibody?) to the official GSMA. I just registered
the gsmua.org domain name, but there is no website or mailing list set
up yet. If someone from the Osmocom camp would like to host the
server infrastructure for gsmua.org, I will happily point the DNS to
you, otherwise the FreeCalypso family can host it on our server.
My vision for GSMUA is to represent the interests of GSM end users
(empowered end users who wish to fully own and control all aspects of
their user equipment while operating on public mobile networks in a
fully spec-compliant manner), small boutique manufacturers of GSM
devices (both MS/user equipment and network infrastructure), small
community network operators and others whose interests are not
represented by GSMA etc, especially in cases where our interests are
in direct conflict with the interests of big players such as giant
device manufacturers, giant commercial network operators and
governments.
A key goal of GSMUA is to be project-neutral, that is, every person
and every small company belonging to any of the categories listed
above (empowered end user, small boutique device manufacturer, small
community network operator etc) should be fully welcome regardless of
which specific project they are associated with. As of today there
are at least two different projects offering GSM MS implementations
(OsmocomBB and FreeCalypso) and at least two different projects
offering network-side GSM implementations (Osmocom and OpenBTS), and I
hope that this number of available alternatives will continue to grow:
freedom of choice is always a good thing. But at the present time
there exists no neutral soil on which members of different projects
with a common interest (GSM networks and devices serving the interests
of end users rather than big corporations and governments) and a
common enemy (just named) can meet, and this lack of neutral meeting
ground is the problem which GSMUA is meant to solve.
I also have one practical application for GSMUA in mind already: to
manage and legitimize recycling of wasted IMEI number ranges. By the
official rules of GSMA etc each different *type* of GSM mobile
equipment requires a different TAC, i.e., a range of at least 1 million
IMEI numbers. So if a small boutique GSM device manufacturer makes a
boutique MS device of which no more than 100 units will ever be made,
999900 IMEI numbers have to be wasted by the official rules. While I
don't know of any manufacturer who got a range of 1 million IMEIs and
only made 100 devices, we do have examples like Openmoko GTA01/02 and
Pirelli DP-L10. In the case of Openmoko GTA02 I've been told that
about 15 thousand units were made in total; in the case of Pirelli
DP-L10 it appears that the total number produced was somewhere under
100 thousand. In each case a full range of 1 million IMEIs was
allocated, and at least 900 thousand numbers out of each range are
currently unused and wasted.
If a small boutique manufacturer wishes to offer a boutique GSM MS
product to the general public and wishes to ship each unit with a
world-unique IMEI that stands a good chance of being accepted as valid
by common GSM networks, and the product in question does not qualify
for IMEI allocation by the official rules (e.g., the product is a
development board specifically intended for users to run their own
firmware and connect to live public networks with it, taking full
personal responsibility for their actions) - the situation I found
myself in with my GSM MS development board - I feel that the small
boutique manuf in question should be empowered to squat on a small
subrange of someone else's IMEI range if it is known beyond reasonable
doubt to be wasted and unused.
However, this recycling of wasted IMEI number ranges could be better
organized and given at least some aura of semi-legitimacy if there
were a community body set up to manage it, and this is where my
proposed GSMUA can come in. Once we get our GSMUA up and running and
assign a group of volunteers to be IMEI recycling managers, any small
GSM or 3G+ device manufacturer who needs a small range of IMEI numbers
will be able to request one from GSMUA, and we will allocate and
assign these small subranges out of whatever wasted range we decide to
squat on, ensuring that each requestor gets a different subrange.
So these are my ideas, and I would like to see them turn into reality.
We are going to need a simple website and a community mailing list at
gsmua.org, and for the IMEI recycling service we will need a small
group of volunteers to serve as its managers - I and Das Signal from
FreeCalypso will be happy to serve on that panel, but it would be nice
to also have someone from the Osmocom camp for better neutrality.
Bright Blessings,
Mychaela Falconia,
Mother of FreeCalypso
9 May
9 May
9:44 p.m.
Hi Mychaela,
You brought up a tricky subject and I definitely would be interested to
hear some feedback from someone who dealt with various government bodies in
different countries.
Website hosting is the easy part :)
Thanks,
-Serg
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Mychaela Falconia <
mychaela.falconia(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hello FreeCalypso and Osmocom communities,
I am in the process of creating an informal organisation representing
the interests of those members of the GSM universe whose interests are
not represented by GSMA etc, and I am inviting you to join me in this
venture. I propose that we name our informal organisation GSMUA,
standing for GSM Users Association, and my vision for this GSMUA is to
be a counter-body (antibody?) to the official GSMA. I just registered
the gsmua.org domain name, but there is no website or mailing list set
up yet. If someone from the Osmocom camp would like to host the
server infrastructure for gsmua.org, I will happily point the DNS to
you, otherwise the FreeCalypso family can host it on our server.
My vision for GSMUA is to represent the interests of GSM end users
(empowered end users who wish to fully own and control all aspects of
their user equipment while operating on public mobile networks in a
fully spec-compliant manner), small boutique manufacturers of GSM
devices (both MS/user equipment and network infrastructure), small
community network operators and others whose interests are not
represented by GSMA etc, especially in cases where our interests are
in direct conflict with the interests of big players such as giant
device manufacturers, giant commercial network operators and
governments.
A key goal of GSMUA is to be project-neutral, that is, every person
and every small company belonging to any of the categories listed
above (empowered end user, small boutique device manufacturer, small
community network operator etc) should be fully welcome regardless of
which specific project they are associated with. As of today there
are at least two different projects offering GSM MS implementations
(OsmocomBB and FreeCalypso) and at least two different projects
offering network-side GSM implementations (Osmocom and OpenBTS), and I
hope that this number of available alternatives will continue to grow:
freedom of choice is always a good thing. But at the present time
there exists no neutral soil on which members of different projects
with a common interest (GSM networks and devices serving the interests
of end users rather than big corporations and governments) and a
common enemy (just named) can meet, and this lack of neutral meeting
ground is the problem which GSMUA is meant to solve.
I also have one practical application for GSMUA in mind already: to
manage and legitimize recycling of wasted IMEI number ranges. By the
official rules of GSMA etc each different *type* of GSM mobile
equipment requires a different TAC, i.e., a range of at least 1 million
IMEI numbers. So if a small boutique GSM device manufacturer makes a
boutique MS device of which no more than 100 units will ever be made,
999900 IMEI numbers have to be wasted by the official rules. While I
don't know of any manufacturer who got a range of 1 million IMEIs and
only made 100 devices, we do have examples like Openmoko GTA01/02 and
Pirelli DP-L10. In the case of Openmoko GTA02 I've been told that
about 15 thousand units were made in total; in the case of Pirelli
DP-L10 it appears that the total number produced was somewhere under
100 thousand. In each case a full range of 1 million IMEIs was
allocated, and at least 900 thousand numbers out of each range are
currently unused and wasted.
If a small boutique manufacturer wishes to offer a boutique GSM MS
product to the general public and wishes to ship each unit with a
world-unique IMEI that stands a good chance of being accepted as valid
by common GSM networks, and the product in question does not qualify
for IMEI allocation by the official rules (e.g., the product is a
development board specifically intended for users to run their own
firmware and connect to live public networks with it, taking full
personal responsibility for their actions) - the situation I found
myself in with my GSM MS development board - I feel that the small
boutique manuf in question should be empowered to squat on a small
subrange of someone else's IMEI range if it is known beyond reasonable
doubt to be wasted and unused.
However, this recycling of wasted IMEI number ranges could be better
organized and given at least some aura of semi-legitimacy if there
were a community body set up to manage it, and this is where my
proposed GSMUA can come in. Once we get our GSMUA up and running and
assign a group of volunteers to be IMEI recycling managers, any small
GSM or 3G+ device manufacturer who needs a small range of IMEI numbers
will be able to request one from GSMUA, and we will allocate and
assign these small subranges out of whatever wasted range we decide to
squat on, ensuring that each requestor gets a different subrange.
So these are my ideas, and I would like to see them turn into reality.
We are going to need a simple website and a community mailing list at
gsmua.org, and for the IMEI recycling service we will need a small
group of volunteers to serve as its managers - I and Das Signal from
FreeCalypso will be happy to serve on that panel, but it would be nice
to also have someone from the Osmocom camp for better neutrality.
Bright Blessings,
Mychaela Falconia,
Mother of FreeCalypso
_______________________________________________
Community mailing list
Community(a)freecalypso.org
https://www.freecalypso.org/mailman/listinfo/community
29 May
29 May
10:14 a.m.
Hi Mychaela,
sorry for the late response.
I think there is a legitimate need (for decades!) to represent the
users at entities like GSMA or (much more importantly) the 3GPP and
ETSI. 3GPP (and lesser extent ETSI) is where the relevant specifiations
are written.
Such an user representation would have a role to
* identify where (new) specifications infringe on users rights
* make sure the industry at least hears about what's in the best
interest of users before they discard all of that and implement
whatever they want anyway
* Raise public awareness about new proposals for specifications that are
particularly problematic from a user point of view, therby assert
pressure on the standardizations body before it is too late (spec
finalied).
The areas that I can think of are mostly related to privacy, data
protection, and general "digital rights".
However, doing the above is fundamentally a lobbying organization, and
requires significant funding, starting from membership fees to the
relevant standard bodies, to paying for all the related travel expenses
to attend the relevant meetings, and people with lots of time on their
hands to read the respective draft standards, etc.
I think it would be great to do something here, but I think we as the
"super technical, ultra nerdy" people working on Free Software (and
harwere) in the telecom sphere are typically not in posession of the
right skillset to do so. It's much more about social skills than about
technical skills.
Regarding your proposal: It seems like a contradiction in terms to me if
you establish something called an 'user association' while your interest
is (at least partially) to represent "boutique manufacturers" regarding
IMEI allocations. That's not really of the interest of a *user*. I
think the least concern of a user is how and where a manufacturer gets
his IMEI allocated. Yes, I agree there is something that can be done
regarding TAC allocation (like IEEE OUI / MAC address allocation or USB
vid/pid allocation). But that's not a topic for users.
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)
2 Jun
2 Jun
8:01 a.m.
Hi Harald,
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my GSMUA idea. I agree
with you that representing the interests of users at GSMA/ETSI/3GPP
would a task beyond our means, but I still see social value in
creating our own totally informal group purely for mutual support and
camaraderie. Throughout human history members of various oppressed
minorities have banded together for mutual support, even if that
support is purely emotional and nothing more, and I am currently
experiencing an unmet need for such a group with regard to GSM/2G.
Regarding your proposal: It seems like a contradiction
in terms to me if
you establish something called an 'user association' while your interest
is (at least partially) to represent "boutique manufacturers" regarding
IMEI allocations.
My idea of a recycled IMEI registry was just one potential application
for GSMUA, and the overall idea of GSMUA still appeals to me even if
we don't pursue the recycled IMEI registry idea. As for representing
boutique manufacturers of end user devices in a user association
alongside with actual end users, I don't see much of a contradiction,
as the interests of the two are expected to coincide. Boutique
manufacturers are fundamentally different from mainstream ones: while
mainstream manufs act as users' enemies for all practical purposes
(they prefer to serve the interests of carriers and/or governments
instead, and their entire "security" model sees the user as the enemy),
boutique manufs exist for no purpose except to serve the interests of
underrepresented end users, and given that FLOSS development typically
proceeds by scratching one's own itch, a real-life boutique manuf of
GSM devices will almost certainly make those devices for his or her
own personal use first and foremost, and then offer them for sale in
extremely small volume to others of a like mind.
In my original proposal I outlined the following list of parties whom
I see as the target audience for my proposed GSMUA:
* Empowered end users;
* Small boutique manufacturers for devices for said empowered end users;
* Small community and other non-mainstream network operators, i.e.,
those who operate networks for the empowered end users and their
FLOSS devices to connect to.
A key goal of GSMUA is to be a truly neutral meeting ground where all
of the above can come together, with everyone being equally welcome
regardless of specific project affiliation, if any. The closest thing
that exists so far where all kinds of different people with an interest
in cellular telephony can come together are your OsmoCon and OsmoDevCon
get-togethers, but those are limited to projects that fall under the
Osmocom umbrella, and do not include non-Osmocom projects in the same
general space. My vision for GSMUA is to be more inclusive and more
neutral, a place where people from Osmocom, FreeCalypso, OpenBTS,
YateBTS and others (as well as just persons who are simply interested
in the general subject matter, but not affiliated or involved with any
specific project) can come together (at least online if not physically)
without any of them being in a dominant position.
The very fact that this discussion we are having right now has to be
cross-posted to 3 different mailing lists is an indication of the
problem which my GSMUA proposal is meant to solve: there presently
exists no truly neutral, truly general community mailing list where
*everyone* with an interest in non-big-bucks GSM and other cellular
networks can interact with others in the same field, regardless of
whether their specific interest is in running their own network,
making their own end user phones, or just using one or both of those
as a highly intelligent, highly empowered end user, and without being
specific to any one particular project.
One specific reason why I feel there is a need for people on the
empowered-end-user mobile device side to meet with people on the
network infrastructure and network operations side is the imminent
threat of GSM/2G shutdown by the uncaring major network operators.
There exist people in the world, myself included, for whom life
without GSM/2G would be absolutely intolerable, as GSM/2G is the only
cellular technology for which there exist practically usable FLOSS
implementations on the MS/UE side. In both USA and Canada there is
only one GSM/2G operator left, and if T-Mobile USA and Rogers
completely shut down their GSM/2G networks in another year or two, and
reallocate every last 200 kHz channel in both 1900 and 850 MHz bands
to their stinking 3G/4G/whatever services so no one else can set up
replacement community networks, users of Calypso phones will be
completely screwed.
This is where people in the OpenBTS/OpenBSC/etc projects can come to
the rescue. As I understand it, there are both commercial and
community operators who run their own GSM/2G networks using BTS
hardware and software built and maintained by the Osmocom/OpenBTS/etc
community, and because of the imminent shutdown of GSM/2G services in
"first world" regions, I feel that a bridge needs to be built ASAP
between users of 2G-only Calypso phones on one end and those
non-mainstream community network operators on the other end. To put
it simply, if the evil first world governments take away the last
remaining bit of spectrum from GSM/2G users, we (the latter users)
need to know which remote third world village we should flee to where
we can set up our own OpenBTS/OpenBSC/OsmoNITB/etc GSM/2G network
without having radio regulators show up with tanks the next morning to
shut it down, or where such a community network already exists.
To put the matter in perspective, I will be giving a presentation
about FreeCalypso at REcon in Montreal just two weeks from now, and
the subject of imminent GSM/2G shutdown will be unavoidable. Unless
there exists another person in the world who is as crazy as me and who
would be willing and able to carry out a project similar to
FreeCalypso, but using leaked Qualcomm or MTK sources for some
3G-capable or even LTE-capable chip instead of TI's 2G-only ones (seems
rather unlikely to me that anyone else can be insane enough to do such
a thing), creating a GSM village in some remote 3rd world location
that would welcome refugees from the "first world" fleeing from 3G/4G
tyranny seems like the most proper solution which I should advocate for.
M~
9 Jun
9 Jun
8:11 p.m.
michela are you kidding ( dont worrry iam a kid at twentees)
calypso bb starts from leaked Docs ( if not sorry )
so why qcom code leak is ugly
osmocom is for open softwear not for any specific hardware
so
keeping updated with mainstream hardware is the way
so we may have to throw old one ( realy i never bcos i love it like my pet .old is Gold
for me )
but in concept its the way ( hope you understand it )
greetings for your GSMUA . iam sure and will there for any help.
i hope they will host your project.
its happy to know your the mother of freecalypso.
in softwear world you maybe first mom :)
and i here for osmocom on qcom == osmodroidbb.wordpress.com
if you mind helping me just put your hands on qcom leaked code
i stucked at understanding code.
still now i cant find where tmsi like layer3 things handling in qcom modem proc leaked
code
10 Jun
10 Jun
4:18 a.m.
thayyil09 yil <thayyil(a)yandex.com> wrote:
michela are you kidding ( dont worrry iam a kid at
twentees)
Kidding about what?
calypso bb starts from leaked Docs ( if not sorry )
I don't know what you mean by "calypso bb", but OsmocomBB started from
not only leaked docs, but also leaked *source code* for TI's original
firmware for the chipset in question. Even though OsmocomBB people
have chosen (for license worship reasons) not to make any direct reuse
of TI's original code beyond a couple of L1 header files, they have
extensively studied those TI firmware source leaks in order to gain
the knowledge of how to operate the Calypso hardware and how to
command the Calypso's DSP ROM to perform the functions it needs to
perform for GSM functionality. See here for more juicy details
regarding those two OsmocomBB L1 header files I just mentioned:
https://www.freecalypso.org/pipermail/community/2017-April/000361.html
so why qcom code leak is ugly
Where did I say that it is ugly? I have not yet had a chance to look
at that QC code you keep talking about - I only downloaded it earlier
today and don't have time currently to look at it in any depth, thus I
am not qualified to judge whether it is ugly or beautiful or somewhere
in between.
osmocom is for open softwear not for any specific
hardware
I am not a member of Osmocom, instead I lead my own project
(FreeCalypso) in the same general space, hence the arguments regarding
what Osmocom is or is not have no direct applicability to me or to my
non-Osmocom project.
keeping updated with mainstream hardware is the way
There is no such thing as "the way"; it may be YOUR way, but it is not
*my* way.
its happy to know your the mother of freecalypso.
in softwear world you maybe first mom :)
Well, some of us (me included) subscribe to the view that our poor
planet is *way* overpopulated, hence engaging in biological procreation
(imposing more living and resource-consuming humans on the poor planet)
is akin to a crime. As a result, those of us with maternal instincts
have to find a different outlet for those instincts, such as becoming
the mother of a FLOSS project. :)
Also leaders of FLOSS projects commonly take on titles such as
principal developer, maintainer or even BDFL - but I prefer Mother. :)
and i here for osmocom on qcom ==
osmodroidbb.wordpress.com
I assume you are talking about the QC source leak described on this page:
http://syshwid.blogspot.in/2016/10/build-qualcomm-modem-msm8626.html
(yes, I can read Russian just fine, it's one of my native languages)
When you first posted about it back in April, I went to that page and
the https://drop.me/B439WM mirror it talks about was down - appeared
to have been taken down. But when I tried it again earlier today
while in the process of composing this response to you, it worked, so
I was finally able to download this QC source you've been talking
about.
However, even if this leak is 100% real source and not a semi-src (the
Russian hacker says he was able to make a complete build from this
source, but it doesn't mean that everything is really rebuilt from
source - there could be major important pieces that are in the form of
linkable binary objects, and it would take a lot of work to analyze
the source to see which is the case), I have my doubts that this
MSM8x26 platform would make a good replacement for FreeCalypso. I see
the following (potential) problems:
* According to the marketing info that I could easily find for this
chip(set), it seems to be CDMA/3GPP2-oriented, which is not what I
am interested in. That marketing info seems to imply that the chip
supports UMTS/WCDMA too, but says nothing about GSM support. I
principally refuse to use any chip, chipset or device that does not
support GSM, i.e., I am potentially interested in having support for
UMTS/WCDMA and maybe even LTE *in addition* to GSM/2G, but never
instead of. Furthermore, one of my absolute requirements is to be
able to invert the preference order for network search, i.e., have
the modem always preferentially choose GSM/2G networks if such
service is available, fall back to 3G/UMTS only if no GSM is
available, and use LTE (or more properly VoLTE only, *without* LTE
Internet service) only as the last resort when neither 2G nor 3G is
available.
* This MSM8x26 chip(set) has a ton of extra hardware for making those
smartphones which I detest: 4 CPU cores, a powerful GPU and gawd
knows what other crap. I desire a phone that can only make plain
old phone calls and absolutely positively nothing else, based on a
processor that has just enough horsepower to make those plain old
phone calls and not one iota more, thus having all that extra
application processor power would be a problem for me.
* Where are the chip datasheets and reference board schematics and so
forth that would be needed in order to make our own board with the
chip(set) you are advocating for? Being able to build my own
hardware starting from just chips is an absolute requirement for me,
as I am NOT willing to use an Android slab phone, even it has a
liberated baseband - I want a phone in my own personally preferred
form factor (a "dumbphone" *without* Android), hence I need to be
able to build my own hw in order to package it in the FF I desire.
Overall, it is pretty clear to me that we are on different paths with
very different interests and goals.
M~
6 Jul
6 Jul
11:06 a.m.
Hello,
I am sorry, but you seem to ignore a lot of things making it hard to have a meaningful
conversation that actually brings something to the table.
The leaks you keep mentioning are not comparable to each other at all - like apples and
oranges. Calypso is a relatively simple system - at least compared to Qcom's Hexagon,
and it still took years of work by and effort by talented people to have OsmocomBB
running. So please stop saying that "leak is there what's stopping us".
Qcom's architecture complexity is greater than Calypso's by multiple magnitudes.
Last but not least I for sure would really appreciate if you would use proper punctuation,
complete sentences and correct spelling of the right words. You could be young or old
writing proper emails is always important. If I could do it using a touchscreen device you
could as well. It makes your efforts and ideas look a lot more serious as well.
I am sorry if I offended you, but I felt I need to tell you this and I couldn't stop
myself.
Kind regards,
Domi
2017. júl. 6. dátummal, 10:14 időpontban thayyil09 yil <thayyil(a)yandex.com> írta:
michela are you kidding ( dont worrry iam a kid at
twentees)
calypso bb starts from leaked Docs ( if not sorry )
so why qcom code leak is ugly
osmocom is for open softwear not for any specific hardware
so
keeping updated with mainstream hardware is the way
so we may have to throw old one ( realy i never bcos i love it like my pet .old is Gold
for me )
but in concept its the way ( hope you understand it )
greetings for your GSMUA . iam sure and will there for any help.
i hope they will host your project.
its happy to know your the mother of freecalypso.
in softwear world you maybe first mom :)
and i here for osmocom on qcom == osmodroidbb.wordpress.com
if you mind helping me just put your hands on qcom leaked code
i stucked at understanding code.
still now i cant find where tmsi like layer3 things handling in qcom modem proc leaked
code
2488
days inactive
2546
days old
6 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Harald Welte -
Mychaela Falconia -
Serg l -
thayyil09 yil -
Tomcsányi, Domonkos