TLLI problems and proposed solution

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.org
Tue Jul 30 17:25:05 UTC 2013


Hi Holger,

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 09:20:38AM +0200, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote:

> The engineer in me.. used git gui blame on the file and I found the commit
> that added the foreign tlli lookup.

thanks.

> 1.) I do the lookup based on the tlli...
> 2.) if the tlli is foreign.. I convert it and make another lookup
> 3.) I create the LLME on the fly or return NULL

seems reasonable.

> Or shall we do this... "oh we know this subscriber already" at a
> higher level in GMM? E.g. notice that it is a routing area update...
> and then free the new llme and do a tlli assignment for the foreign
> tlli?

That is probably the cleaner approach.  I'm wondering why there is no
information in the spec regarding that case, or at least why I haven't
been stumbling accross it.

If it is done at LLC level, it seems the more 'defensive' / tolerant
approach, because we don't expect the first LLC message on a new BTS to
be a GMM/RAU message.  I'm not sure if this is guaranteed by the specs.

If the first LLC message on the new cell is a user data message, then
the GMM/RAU based approach of adressing this problem would not work.

Regards,
	Harald
-- 
- 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)




More information about the OpenBSC mailing list