This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/nextepc@lists.osmocom.org/.
Romeu Medeiros medeiros at medeiros.eng.brHello Sukchan, In some situations the CSFB will be realized in a partner network, (Another GSM/3G Network), with this the MNC and MCC will be different. I suggest this configuration format for this case: sgsap: addr: 127.0.0.2 port: 29119 plmn_id: mcc: 001 mnc: 01 dest_plmn_id: mcc: 002 mnc: 02 tac: 4130 lac: 43690 With this, the RegistredLAI will have this information MCC: 002, MNC: 02 and LAI: 43690. If you agree with this I can implement this. Thanks Romeu Medeiros On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 9:03 PM Romeu Medeiros <medeiros at medeiros.eng.br> wrote: > Hello Sukchan, > > > I already go out from the lab today, but Monday I will made this test that > you ask for. > > > Have a great day there. > > Romeu Medeiros > > Em sáb, 13 de jul de 2019 às 21:01, Sukchan Lee <acetcom at gmail.com> > escreveu: > >> Hi Romeu, >> >> I'm really appreciate testing CSFB even though I have never been testing >> this feature in the lab. >> >> BTW, I have one question. If we want to remove Security-Related IE in UE >> Context Modification Request, >> I think NextEPC should not derive kENB in Extended Service Request >> handler. >> >> Nevertheless, I've merged your pull request since it is properly worked >> at first. ^^; >> >> If your lab is available, could you test one more by removing the >> following code? >> >> In src/mme/emm-handler.c >> 586 if (SECURITY_CONTEXT_IS_VALID(mme_ue)) { >> 587 mme_kdf_enb(mme_ue->kasme, mme_ue->ul_count.i32, >> mme_ue->kenb); >> 588 mme_kdf_nh(mme_ue->kasme, mme_ue->kenb, mme_ue->nh); >> 589 mme_ue->nhcc = 1; >> 590 } >> >> Just test it. If my expectation is true, I will fix all other things. >> >> Thank you for your GREAT job! >> >> Best regards, >> Sukchan >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 8:04 AM Romeu Medeiros <medeiros at medeiros.eng.br> >> wrote: >> >>> Hello Sukchan, >>> >>> Now after remove this everything run correctly. >>> >>> [image: image.png] >>> >>> I will made the change more beatiful and pull the modification to the >>> git to you aprove. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Romeu Medeiros >>> >>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 6:50 PM Romeu Medeiros <medeiros at medeiros.eng.br> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I found this in the 3GPP documentations [1]: >>>> >>>> [image: image.png] >>>> >>>> I will change the code to send only the CSFallback indicator in this >>>> case to see if can solve the problem. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> Romeu Medeiros >>>> >>>> 1. >>>> https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_ts/136400_136499/136413/09.10.00_60/ts_136413v091000p.pdf >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 6:35 PM Romeu Medeiros < >>>> medeiros at medeiros.eng.br> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello Sukchan and friends. >>>>> >>>>> I'm trying to use the CSFB in test lab, and every time that nextepc >>>>> send the UEContextModificationRequest, the UE respond with an >>>>> UEContextModificationFaliure [ Protocol-cause=semantic-error ]. >>>>> >>>>> [image: image.png] >>>>> >>>>> I'm looking why I'm getting this. Someone have any idea? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>>> Romeu Medeiros >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 12:15 PM Sukchan Lee <acetcom at gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear Osmocom & NextEPC Community, >>>>>> >>>>>> Today I've added CS Fallback and released NextEPC v0.5.0 >>>>>> >>>>>> So, I'd just like to test this part with Osmocom project, but it >>>>>> seems to be a difficult task. The reason is why I have little knowledge >>>>>> about 2G/3G. Nevertheless, I will try to do it >>>>>> >>>>>> BTW, I don't know if there is anyone who wants to integrate this big >>>>>> thing. >>>>>> Even though I'm not sure if this will help, but let me introduce the >>>>>> configuration of the NextEPC. >>>>>> >>>>>> To use SGsAP, change the mme.conf as follows: >>>>>> >>>>>> # >>>>>> # <sgsap> >>>>>> # >>>>>> # o Single MSC/VLR >>>>>> # sgsap: >>>>>> # addr: 127.0.0.2 >>>>>> # plmn_id: >>>>>> # mcc: 001 >>>>>> # mnc: 01 >>>>>> # tac: 4130 >>>>>> # lac: 43690 >>>>>> # >>>>>> # o Multiple MSC/VLR >>>>>> # sgsap: >>>>>> # - addr: 127.0.0.2 >>>>>> # plmn_id: >>>>>> # mcc: 001 >>>>>> # mnc: 01 >>>>>> # tac: 4131 >>>>>> # lac: 43692 >>>>>> # - addr >>>>>> # - 127.0.0.3 >>>>>> # - fe80::2%lo0 >>>>>> # plmn_id: >>>>>> # mcc: 001 >>>>>> # mnc: 01 >>>>>> # tac: 4132 >>>>>> # lac: 43692 >>>>>> # - name: msc.open5gs.org >>>>>> # plmn_id: >>>>>> # mcc: 001 >>>>>> # mnc: 01 >>>>>> # tac: 4133 >>>>>> # lac: 43693 >>>>>> # >>>>>> >>>>>> FYI, I also attach the pcap that I run with nextepc simulator as >>>>>> below. >>>>>> >>>>>> $ ./tests/testcsfb >>>>>> mo-idle-test : SUCCESS >>>>>> mt-idle-test : SUCCESS >>>>>> mo-active-test : SUCCESS >>>>>> mt-active-test : SUCCESS >>>>>> All tests passed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Feel free to raise any questions about this things. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best Regards, >>>>>> Sukchan >>>>>> >>>>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/nextepc/attachments/20190713/24cfa572/attachment.htm> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image.png Type: image/png Size: 130318 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/nextepc/attachments/20190713/24cfa572/attachment.png> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image.png Type: image/png Size: 217008 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/nextepc/attachments/20190713/24cfa572/attachment-0001.png> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image.png Type: image/png Size: 60539 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/nextepc/attachments/20190713/24cfa572/attachment-0002.png>