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/.
Keith Whyte keith at rhizomatica.orgOn 23/05/18 16:55, Harald Welte wrote: > For example, I'm not sure if we'd actually reject a periodic LU at a > time where that IMSI is not marked as attached already before. Do we > reject such a LU and somehow force the MS to perform an "IMSI ATTACH" > type LU, or doe we accept it as an implicit attach? From quick observation on legacy openBSC, we just accept the PERIODIC LUR for a "detached" MS and update the LAC in the HLR. So maybe the easiest thing to do is maintain this state somewhere else - with the processing of the alert on the ESME side. This is about Search and Rescue use, where the aim is to send informative SMS to an MS that connects 1st time, but not on every periodic LUR. Not necessarily on every IMSI Attach either, although that would be acceptable. But best to store an "intro sent" state in the ESME, even if only in memory. Another way to do it might be to connect something to the subscriber-create-on-demand routine that generate an SMS, but then if the phone was disconnected, changed hands, and reconnected, the new owner would not be informed..