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/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.
Harald Welte laforge at gnumonks.orgHi Dieter, On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 11:23:31AM +0200, Dieter Spaar wrote: > On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:02:17 +0200, "Harald Welte" <laforge at gnumonks.org> wrote: > > > > Do you get an error message (SET ATTRIBUTE NACK) if you try to set it? > > I have not looked at the response, but LMT says "unrecognized value" > or something like that if I query the TRX attributes. The BS-11 seems > to use "6" if something larger than 6 is sent. which I think is logical and might actually be demanded by the spec. > The nanoBTS 1800 however does not start if an invalid value for > NM_ATT_RF_MAXPOWR_R is sent, the green LED is just blinking. ok. I suppose it sends an ATTRIBUTE NACK and thus doens't perform the state transitions required to activate the TRX. > Yes, and looking at the test report of the BS-11 seems to indicate that > there are 15 steps possible for dynamic adjustment (probably used only > if BTS power control is enabled). ok. > > MS power control (the dynamic adjustment of MS power) should be used even > > now, otherwise I would not understand my observation of the phone bursts > > becoming much lesss loud in the speakers after the initial few very loud > > bursts. > > I can only report the results of a short test. According to LMT, the > MS power control is currently disabled when bsc_hack is used (at least > the version I use). If I enable it and additionally enable the whole > power control of the BS-11, I can see that the MS power is changed. > I guess the same is true for the BS power. mh. I see. Seems like there is some more research required here. With the recent "L1 Info" IE decoding that I committed, we should always see the actual RF power in dBm used by the MS during reception of measurement results. > > 1) whatever we use as BS POWER value in ACTIVATE CHANNEL on a TCH/SDCCH8 > > on the C0 does not make any changes to the acutal TX power > > Difficult to measure for me with the current setup (ARFCN of the > traffic channel is the same as the BCCH channel). To find out if the > BS power of the traffic channel is modified, I have to switch to a > different ARFCN for traffic. No, this is actually the inverse test: MAke sure the power does _not_ change if TCH and BCCH are on the same TRX and we send different BS POWER values for the TCH CHANNEL ACTIVATE. Right now we send a value of 15 (!). > > 2) if we activate a channel on the second TRX, do we see the BTS power > > adjusted according to BS POWER in ACTIVATE CHANNEL ? > > Does bsc_hack already support the second TRX ? I've once manually hacked it into it and was using it for a test. But there's no real integrated/automatic support yet, no. Sorry. I think the latter will be much easier once we have changed to a full vty-based configuration, since we suddenly need to deal with different ARFCN's and command line arguments are just not really a good idea to put all this information into. > > 3) if we use a BS POWER CONTROL message on the CCCH on C0 of an otherwise idle > > BTS, do we see a power change on the TRX ? > > I can only measure it if I switch the ARFCN to a different channel than > used by the BCCH. I don't think the BTS will modify the BCCH power. CCCH is the channel that contains the BCCH. So I'm actually asking for what you "don't think", i.e. an attempt to alter the BS POWRE on the TRX that carries the BCCH. As far as I read the specs, there should be no technical reason why it should not respond to this request. Whether or not it implements it this way, we don't know. -- - Harald Welte <laforge at gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/ ============================================================================ "Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option." (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)