Hi again, On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:31:31PM +0430, morteza ali Ahmadi wrote: how will the discussion of fixing problems that appear to happen between the UE and your proprietary SGSN be of benefit to the Osmocom developers and/or users? This list is about open source mobile communications. -- - 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 Morteza, This may be a silly question, but my most immediate and most natural reaction to your inquiry is a little different from Harald's. Harald's response focuses on the notion that FLOSS communities like Osmocom should not be helping proprietary software developers/users, but I see an even more fundamental question in need of answering: just *why* are you implementing your own SGSN, as opposed to using already existing OsmoSGSN+OsmoHNBGW? If you consider the existing Osmocom implementation to be poor and prefer to write your own alternative mostly from scratch (I am often guilty of the exact same behaviour: I just wrote from scratch my own suite of tools for programming SIM cards instead of improving Osmocom community's existing pySim tools), then why are you not releasing your own alternative version as Published Source Software? Perhaps I missed it, but I never saw you post a link to the source for your alternative SGSN. Just trying to understand, Mother Mychaela P.S. Published Source Software (PSS) is my preferred term for ALL software whose source code is freely published on the Internet by the authors or maintainers of the sw in question, regardless of whether it is under a free license or not - thus it is a more expansive category than FLOSS. FLOSS is a proper subset of PSS.