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/.
Neels Hofmeyr nhofmeyr at sysmocom.deI noticed the MSC test that wants osmo-msc to repeat a Paging to the BSC and hNodeB. After fixing the Iu tests, I wanted to get this last ttcn3-msc-test working, so I was about to implement repeated Paging from osmo-msc, but the more I think about it, the less it makes sense to me. The commit log in osmo-ttcn3-hacks says: Repeating will improve the reachability of MS when a Paging is lost or not received because the MS is moving between states. This reasoning seems flawed to me, because the BSC / hNodeB is between the MSC and the MS, and the BSC *does* repeat Paging. That should cover MS moving between states. The link between MSC and {BSC,hNodeB} is considered reliable, and AFAICT nothing really gets better when repeating a Paging request to the BSS. It could make sense to maybe repeat Paging with a larger/more general Cell Identifier List? But why not send the full list in the first place? Also 3GPP TS 48.008 3.1.10 Paging says: A single PAGING message across the MSC to BSS interface contains information on the cells in which the page shall be broadcast. I interpret the "A single" as: there is no repetition of Paging requests toward the BSS, and that's also what makes most sense to me infrastructurally. Is there any spec indicating repeated Paging from the MSC? I would actually remove the test TC_lu_and_mt_sms_paging_repeated. If that's the wrong call, we should specify how osmo-msc should repeat Paging. Before that, having the test makes little sense... What do you guys think? ~N -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/openbsc/attachments/20191104/66e19efe/attachment.bin>