Project

General

Profile

Bug #4897

gbproxy2: Re-introduce handling of NS_AFF_CAUSE_FAILURE

Added by laforge 5 months ago. Updated 2 months ago.

Status:
New
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Target version:
-
Start date:
12/08/2020
Due date:
% Done:

50%

Spec Reference:

Description

We need to figure out what exactly to do in situatoins where NS is reporting failures of the underlying netowkr to us, and test those situations.


Related issues

Related to osmo-gbproxy - Feature #4472: Intra-domain connection of OsmoGBPROXY to multiple SGSNs (pooling)In Progress03/29/2020

Related to osmo-gbproxy - Bug #4952: Fix NRI routing in case SGSN is downNew01/15/2021

Associated revisions

Revision f96cac50 (diff)
Added by daniel 2 months ago

Handle GPRS_NS2_AFF_CAUSE_FAILURE

When a complete NSE becomes unavailable gbproxy should notify the other
side (bss/sgsn).
The current code blocks every PtP-BVC (belonging to that BSS) on all SGSNs if
a BSS goes down.

The BSS-side should not be blocked unless no more SGSN connections are
present. We could also remove all BSS nse and wait for those to reconnect.
This is not yet implemented.

Related: OS#4897
Change-Id: I6354a190ec1090a35c27671c72dab9126d0ad794

Revision 1f3470f6 (diff)
Added by daniel 2 months ago

gbproxy: Don't free NSE/BVC0 if SGSN NSE goes down

SGSN NSEs are static and should not be removed. Instead remove all
PtP-BVCs.
BVC0 can't be blocked and will be reset after the NSE becomes available
again. It might be cleaner to remove BVC0 on NS failure and create it
again, but that change is a bit more complicated.

Fixes ttcn3 test after commit f96cac5077 broke them.

Related: OS#4897
Change-Id: Ie0cef38e4423b672f5cba35ae7fc3eb2c4071d5a

History

#1 Updated by laforge 5 months ago

  • Related to Feature #4472: Intra-domain connection of OsmoGBPROXY to multiple SGSNs (pooling) added

#2 Updated by daniel 4 months ago

  • Related to Bug #4952: Fix NRI routing in case SGSN is down added

#3 Updated by daniel 2 months ago

  • % Done changed from 0 to 50

SGSN-side is blocked now when the BSS goes down, see f96cac50

The other side is not implemented yet and the whole thing might change once we have one NSE for every BSS on the SGSN-side (see #4522). Then we don't need to block a BVC at all, we simply take the corresponding NSE down.

Also available in: Atom PDF

Add picture from clipboard (Maximum size: 48.8 MB)