Feature #3619
closed
Feature #3618: Inter-MSC hand-over support
GSUP protocol extension for inter-MSC HO
Added by laforge over 5 years ago.
Updated almost 5 years ago.
Description
Inter-MSC hand-over traditionally requires signalling on the MAP based "E" interface between MSCs. As OsmoMSC doesn't have MAP, we have to add the related bits to GSUP.
This includes the questions on how to represent the equivalent to the persistent TCAP dialogue that exists throughout a call in MAP. It also includes the question on how to identify the target MSC, and how to route the message to a given destination MSC (via OsmoHLR as GSUP router).
- Status changed from New to In Progress
- Assignee set to neels
- Priority changed from Normal to High
Hi neels, osmith: Please keep this ticket status updated as you've been working on this for many weeks but there were not updates here. It's important to be able to track progress in tickets!
Looks like a duplicate issue was created in #3774, and we have only updated that one.
The last status from my end was, that I've submitted a patch for the GSUP messages and addressed the review points. It was not merged yet, because Neels said:
In general, I would like to keep this patch unmerged before I have osmo-msc's inter-MSC HO pretty much complete and working. Likely more insights and needs about the protocol will arise from chiseling out the details. But it would be nice to continue the review process nevertheless; just not merge it yet (so we don't need to worry about api compat later).
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/#/c/libosmocore/+/12860/
So I've looked into other tasks in the meantime.
Can I close this issue and add the checklist items to the other issue's checklist?
- Has duplicate Feature #3774: implement GSUP messages for inter-MSC handover added
- Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
- % Done changed from 0 to 100
merged to libosmocore master and used in osmo-msc master
- Status changed from Resolved to In Progress
- % Done changed from 100 to 90
- Status changed from In Progress to Closed
Closing in favor of #3774. I don't think there's a point in keeping both open and updating them both.
Also available in: Atom
PDF
