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 Neels, On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 06:47:43AM +0100, Neels Hofmeyr wrote: > The really interesting part then is the 24.007 11.2.3.2 N(SD) sequence number > patching. Took me a moment to realize that when the one BSC wants to send CC > DTAP while the other has advanced in N(SD) sequence numbering, the DTAP sent > from TTCN3 is rejected as duplicate because TTCN3 has lost the MS state. So > some way or other .. we need to manually tweak the TTCN3 N(SD) state to match > the actual DTAP flow, or keep a common MS state in TTCN3 that sorts this out > across BSCs. That's another indication that somehow the component architecture of the test isn't right. Either one goes for the "single component with two BSSAP ports [one for each emulated BSC]" approach I suggested in my previous e-mail, or one has to separate the "simulated MS component" from the "simulated BSC component". This way you could "disconnect" a test port between the MS and BSC0 and re-connect that port to BSC1, while the MS component retains all of its state. Sounds more complex to implement than the "single component with two BSSAP ports" approach. 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)