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/.
Ivan Kluchnikov Ivan.Kluchnikov at fairwaves.ruHi Holger, > My point was that. Currently I can do: > > 1.) accept-all policy... new subscribers will be allowed to register > send/sms/added to the database but their actually authorized=1 As I know, we set authorized=0 for all new subscribers by default "authorized INTEGER NOT NULL DEFAULT 0, " > > 2.) I decide to change to closed. All previous subscribers are not > allowed in anymore. > > This means I can change policy without updating the database. Yes, this logic will work after my changes too. > I think > it would be nice for the black-list too. For black-list you can do: 1. accept-all policy. New subscribers will be allowed to register send/sms/added to the database with authorized=0 2. Change to black-list. All previous subscribers are not allowed in anymore. New subscribers will be allowed to register send/sms/added to the database with authorized=1 So the logic, which I described above, is what I really want to implement. > It is a layering violation. The DB code should know little about > the gsm_network. It should just save and restore records. We should > assign subscriber->net outside of the code. I think the problem is that db_create_subscriber() function not only saves and restores records, but also creates subscriber. So I believe, that the right way is to add new layer "subscriber" and separate db_create_subscriber() function in two functions like create_subscriber() [subscriber layer] and db_set_subscriber() [db layer]. -- Regards, Ivan Kluchnikov. http://fairwaves.ru