https://osmocom.org/https://osmocom.org/favicon.ico?16647414092020-05-01T13:37:55ZOpen Source Mobile Communicationsosmo-gbproxy - Feature #4520: gbproxy: Redundancy between NS-VCs (BSS Side)https://osmocom.org/issues/4520?journal_id=181302020-05-01T13:37:55Zlaforge
<ul><li><strong>Related to</strong> <i><a class="issue tracker-2 status-3 priority-3 priority-high3 closed" href="/issues/4519">Feature #4519</a>: Load Sharing Function in osmo-gbproxy</i> added</li></ul> osmo-gbproxy - Feature #4520: gbproxy: Redundancy between NS-VCs (BSS Side)https://osmocom.org/issues/4520?journal_id=203442020-11-16T18:14:27Zlaforge
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>New</i> to <i>In Progress</i></li><li><strong>Assignee</strong> set to <i>lynxis</i></li><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>0</i> to <i>80</i></li></ul><p>this is already present in the wip-fr branches, but needs testing. See also <a class="issue tracker-2 status-3 priority-3 priority-high3 closed" title="Feature: Load Sharing Function in osmo-gbproxy (Resolved)" href="https://osmocom.org/issues/4519">#4519</a>.</p>
<p>The NS_Emulation in TTCN3 also has load sharing code at this point, it has been manually verified to work.</p> osmo-gbproxy - Feature #4520: gbproxy: Redundancy between NS-VCs (BSS Side)https://osmocom.org/issues/4520?journal_id=205342020-12-08T07:24:41Zlaforge
<ul></ul><p>There's a <code>TC_load_sharing_dl()</code> which consistently passes here, at least when used with NS/FR to the [simulated] BSS.</p>
<p>As we now have automatic executing of the FR tests, we should make sure to enable it there.</p>
This ticket remains open to
<ul>
<li>make sure we have (and automatically execute) a related test for the NS/IP case</li>
</ul> osmo-gbproxy - Feature #4520: gbproxy: Redundancy between NS-VCs (BSS Side)https://osmocom.org/issues/4520?journal_id=213572021-02-19T13:09:45Zdaniel
<ul></ul><p>laforge wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>There's a <code>TC_load_sharing_dl()</code> which consistently passes here, at least when used with NS/FR to the [simulated] BSS.</p>
<p>As we now have automatic executing of the FR tests, we should make sure to enable it there.</p>
This ticket remains open to
<ul>
<li>make sure we have (and automatically execute) a related test for the NS/IP case</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p>So basically we need to execute TC_load_sharing_dl() also for the non-FR tests? Is there anything more to it?</p> osmo-gbproxy - Feature #4520: gbproxy: Redundancy between NS-VCs (BSS Side)https://osmocom.org/issues/4520?journal_id=213582021-02-19T13:11:26Zlynxis
<ul></ul><p>load_sharing for udp has been implemented. The TTCN3 test case needs to be enabled and modified to work also with UDP.</p>
<p><b>TC_load_sharing_dl</b> expects to have 4 NSVCs in the nsei, but the UDP test only has a single one.</p> osmo-gbproxy - Feature #4520: gbproxy: Redundancy between NS-VCs (BSS Side)https://osmocom.org/issues/4520?journal_id=213612021-02-19T16:50:11Zlaforge
<ul></ul><p>Hi Daniel,</p>
<p>On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 01:09:45PM +0000, daniel [REDMINE] wrote:</p>
<blockquote><blockquote>
This ticket remains open to
<ul>
<li>make sure we have (and automatically execute) a related test for the NS/IP case</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p>So basically we need to execute TC_load_sharing_dl() also for the non-FR tests? Is there anything more to it?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I think in FR all the weights are always equal, so we expect a (statistically) equal distribution<br />over all NS-VC within one NSE.</p>
For IP with SNS, the weights can be differnt in two ways:
<ul>
<li>some NS-VC can be data-only while others can be signalling only
<ul>
<li>We should test with at least two of either to see that distributio within each class works</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>NS-VCs within one class (signalling, data) can have different weight
<ul>
<li>we should at least have some basic checks, i.e. that on average, twice the weight<br />leads to about twice the traffic compared to another NS-VC</li>
</ul></li>
</ul>