https://osmocom.org/https://osmocom.org/favicon.ico?16647414092016-11-09T10:03:23ZOpen Source Mobile CommunicationsOsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=23922016-11-09T10:03:23Zlaforge
<ul><li><strong>Priority</strong> changed from <i>Normal</i> to <i>High</i></li></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=30292017-02-09T21:53:39Zlaforge
<ul><li><strong>Related to</strong> <i><a class="issue tracker-2 status-1 priority-1 priority-lowest" href="/issues/1946">Feature #1946</a>: Add checks to the BSC VTY to prevent configurations known to not work</i> added</li></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=30302017-02-09T22:12:45Zlaforge
<ul><li><strong>Assignee</strong> set to <i>msuraev</i></li></ul>The BTS should report via OML after connection [or after inquiry?]:
<ul>
<li>OsmoBTS version number string</li>
<li>OsmoPCU version number string (if any connected, or maybe at PCU connection time?)</li>
<li>OsmoBTS variant (sysmo, octphy, trx, lc15, ...)</li>
<li>per-TRX PHY version number (taken from DSP of sysmo/octphy/lc15, taken from OsmoTRX in case of omso-bts-trx)</li>
<li>per-TRX nominal transmit power</li>
<li>BTS sub-model (osmo-bts-sysmo supports 1002, 1020, 1100, 2050)</li>
<li>a bit-mask of capabilities (that can be extended in length as needed by future versions, like classmark in GSM L3)</li>
</ul>
To expand a bit on the capabilities that need reporting via the bit-masks (one for the BTS, separate one for each TRX):
<ul>
<li>TRX: codec capabilities (hr/fr/efr/amr-hr/amr-fr)</li>
<li>TRX: band capabilities (850/900/1800/1900, maybe even the exotic ones like 400/450?)</li>
<li>TRX: dynamic TCH/F_PDCH (IPA style)</li>
<li>TRX: dynamic TCH/F_TCH/H_PDCH (Osmocom style)</li>
<li>TRX: DTXd (separate bits for each codec)</li>
<li>BTS: generation of OML alerts</li>
<li>BTS: AGCH/PCH proportional allocation</li>
<li>BTS: CBCH support</li>
</ul>
<p>The feature-bit definitions should probably be part of a shared header file (maybe put them in gsm_data_common)?</p>
<p>The OML message exchange should then transfer the capability bit-mask from the 'struct gsm_bts' and 'struct gsm_bts_trx' from OsmoBTS into that of libbsc (OsmoBSC/OsmoNITB(. The libbsc code can then take those capabilities into consideration when trying to configure or use the BTS.</p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=33682017-03-14T14:18:23Zlaforge
<ul></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=33882017-03-15T10:45:50Zmsuraev
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>New</i> to <i>In Progress</i></li></ul><p>After reading 3GPP TS 52.021, there seems to be several options:</p>
<p>- for sending OsmoPCU version string we can re-use § 8.8.2 Failure Event Report using manufacturer-defined NM_PCAUSE_T_MANUF with osmocom-specific sub-types for versions as it's unlikely to be already known when we report capabilities to BSC.</p>
<p>- for reporting capabilities we have several options:<br />1) use §8.8.1 State Changed Event Report - unsolicited report from BTS, without ack/nack<br />2) use §6.10.1 Get Attributes - request by BSC</p>
<p>In case of 1) we can use either §9.4.48 Site Inputs TLV (up to 128 parameters with boolean state) or §9.4.7 Availability Status TLV (octet per feature with pre-defined status encoding like "In test", "Not installed" etc) for feature sets. BTS variant and sub-model can be encoded using §9.4.28 Man.dep. State TV which give us up to 255 variants.</p>
<p>In case of 2) we can use §8.11.3 Get Attribute Response with §9.4.64 Get Attribute Response Info. This way we can request any attributes from §9.4 using §9.4.26 List of Required Attributes TLV.</p>
<p>The 2) seems to be more flexible (we can stuff BTS version into §9.4.62 SW Description TV for example) on the other hand we already using 1) actively. Overall I think we should use 2) unless it's somehow incompatible with other BTS hw we support.</p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=33902017-03-15T12:15:06Zlaforge
<ul></ul><p>I agree, we should use get_attributes</p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=33962017-03-16T20:40:41Zmsuraev
<ul><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>0</i> to <i>10</i></li></ul><p>Gerrit 2093 has been merged with changes necessary for backward compatibility between new BSC and old BTS.</p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=34422017-03-22T10:31:22Zmsuraev
<ul></ul><p>Related gerrit 2144 is under review.</p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=34982017-04-10T08:40:46Zmsuraev
<ul><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>10</i> to <i>20</i></li></ul><p>Gerrit 2144, 2161 were merged, 2165, 2166, 2087 are under review, additional patches will follow.</p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=35122017-04-11T11:54:07Zmsuraev
<ul><li><b>Checklist item</b> <input type='checkbox' class='checklist-checkbox' disabled> <i>OsmoBTS version number string</i> added</li><li><b>Checklist item</b> <input type='checkbox' class='checklist-checkbox' checked disabled> <i>OsmoPCU version number string</i> added</li><li><b>Checklist item</b> <input type='checkbox' class='checklist-checkbox' disabled> <i>OsmoBTS variant</i> added</li><li><b>Checklist item</b> <input type='checkbox' class='checklist-checkbox' disabled> <i>per-TRX PHY version number</i> added</li><li><b>Checklist item</b> <input type='checkbox' class='checklist-checkbox' disabled> <i>per-TRX nominal transmit power</i> added</li><li><b>Checklist item</b> <input type='checkbox' class='checklist-checkbox' disabled> <i>BTS sub-model</i> added</li><li><b>Checklist item</b> <input type='checkbox' class='checklist-checkbox' disabled> <i>a bit-mask of capabilities </i> added</li></ul><p>PCU version number is handled by <a class="issue tracker-2 status-5 priority-3 priority-high3 closed" title="Feature: make use of OML Alert (Closed)" href="https://osmocom.org/issues/1615">#1615</a>.</p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=35312017-04-18T16:26:27Zmsuraev
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>In Progress</i> to <i>Stalled</i></li></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=38182017-05-09T12:44:55Zmsuraev
<ul></ul><p>Gerrit 2165, 2166, 2087, 2544 merged, 2545 is under review, additional patches will follow.</p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=41162017-05-29T09:58:57Zmsuraev
<ul><li><b>Checklist item</b> <input type='checkbox' class='checklist-checkbox' checked disabled> <i>OsmoBTS version number string</i> set to Done</li><li><b>Checklist item</b> <input type='checkbox' class='checklist-checkbox' checked disabled> <i>OsmoBTS variant</i> set to Done</li><li><b>Checklist item</b> <input type='checkbox' class='checklist-checkbox' checked disabled> <i>BTS sub-model</i> set to Done</li><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>20</i> to <i>50</i></li></ul><p>Gerrit 2545 has been merged.</p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=41212017-05-29T15:38:36Zmsuraev
<ul></ul><p>Gerrit 2784, 2785 are merged; 2783, 2786, 2794, 2797, 2799, 2800 are under review.</p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=41872017-05-30T16:53:00Zmsuraev
<ul><li><b>Checklist item</b> deleted (<strike><i>a bit-mask of capabilities </i></strike>)</li><li><b>Checklist item</b> <input type='checkbox' class='checklist-checkbox' disabled> <i>BTS bit-mask of capabilities</i> added</li><li><b>Checklist item</b> <input type='checkbox' class='checklist-checkbox' disabled> <i>TRX bit-mask of capabilities</i> added</li></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=42352017-06-02T19:07:26Zneelsnhofmeyr@sysmocom.de
<ul><li><strong>Related to</strong> <i><a class="issue tracker-1 status-5 priority-3 priority-high3 closed" href="/issues/2316">Bug #2316</a>: osmo-bts aborts on sysmoBTS</i> added</li></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=42402017-06-02T20:51:50Zneelsnhofmeyr@sysmocom.de
<ul></ul><p>I have reverted 9eeb0b1a136fc8c24a86cb4d832c264674c10db0 in d36b3a84638d6db940387f0e18c98855202f554d.<br />Explanation in <a class="external" href="http://git.osmocom.org/osmo-bts/commit/?id=d36b3a84638d6db940387f0e18c98855202f554d">http://git.osmocom.org/osmo-bts/commit/?id=d36b3a84638d6db940387f0e18c98855202f554d</a></p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=42492017-06-06T15:28:37Zmsuraev
<ul><li><strong>Related to</strong> <i><a class="issue tracker-1 status-5 priority-2 priority-default closed" href="/issues/2317">Bug #2317</a>: multibts setup produce unnecessary OML warning</i> added</li></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=42512017-06-06T15:29:42Zmsuraev
<ul></ul><p>Note: due to <a class="issue tracker-1 status-5 priority-2 priority-default closed" title="Bug: multibts setup produce unnecessary OML warning (Closed)" href="https://osmocom.org/issues/2317">#2317</a> it'll not work if BTS is configured in OpenBSC with number higher than 0 because corresponding OML requests will be ignored by BTS.</p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=42652017-06-12T15:15:26Zmsuraev
<ul><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>50</i> to <i>60</i></li></ul><p>Merged: 2783, 2794, 2797, 2800, 2786, 2799.</p> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=66922017-12-10T20:06:15Zlaforge
<ul><li><strong>Project</strong> changed from <i>OpenBSC</i> to <i>OsmoBSC</i></li><li><strong>Category</strong> deleted (<del><i>libbsc</i></del>)</li></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=77352018-02-22T00:38:26Zmsuraev
<ul><li><strong>Assignee</strong> changed from <i>msuraev</i> to <i>dexter</i></li></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=94072018-05-17T13:59:18Zlaforge
<ul><li><strong>Priority</strong> changed from <i>High</i> to <i>Normal</i></li></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=133242019-02-12T18:39:51Zlaforge
<ul><li><strong>Related to</strong> <i><a class="issue tracker-1 status-3 priority-3 priority-high3 closed" href="/issues/3799">Bug #3799</a>: OsmoBSC send OML "Get Attributes" with wrong length value</i> added</li></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=140352019-04-18T10:58:18Zfixeria
<ul><li><strong>Related to</strong> <i><a class="issue tracker-1 status-3 priority-3 priority-high3 closed" href="/issues/3938">Bug #3938</a>: Get Attribute Response parsing is broken: NM_ATT_SW_DESCR is ignored</i> added</li></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=170432020-01-08T22:28:21Zlaforge
<ul></ul> OsmoBSC - Bug #1614: better identification of BTS model / capabilities to BSChttps://osmocom.org/issues/1614?journal_id=182742020-05-12T12:11:34Zlaforge
<ul><li><strong>Assignee</strong> deleted (<del><i>dexter</i></del>)</li></ul>