Hi Holger, On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 11:11:13AM +0100, Holger Freyther wrote: > I might not have time until next week to replicate it (and my nanobts is not > with me right now either). IIRC (my first memory but the commit message points > me to it as well): I struggled a lot to parse ipaccess-find (IPAC_MSGT_ID_GET) > from the nanoBTS.
Ah. ok. I've not looked at ipaccess-find/UDP in a long time. Only at the normal procedure at OML/RSL start-up. > It seemed it was disobeying a reasonable TLV structure and the closest I found > back then seemed to have been this patch? Could you check if the testcase > matches > an ipaccess-find result? Yes, I will check for that. The test case definitely does not match the IPA CCM seen inside OML/RSL from a nanoBTS, not even from the first traces I have from 2010. > I will try to find some next during the week to have a look. I think the pointer to ipaccess-find was sufficient, thanks. -- - Harald Welte <[email protected]> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/ ============================================================================ "Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option." (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)
