Also indicate in msc_vlr_test_gsm_authen.c that we're indeed sending no
capability to do R99 in the Classmark 1 during LU request.
Change-Id: Id79a77ca1f218d55dad21d9dd3de92445fb5d6bf
Clearly distinguish between Ciphering Mode Command on GERAN and Security Mode
Control on UTRAN.
Cosmetic: explicitly verify the key strings in the testing code (not only in
the expected output).
Change-Id: Ica93ed06c4c63dc6768736d25231de8068001114
Actually call msc_vlr_set_ciph_mode() and wrap away a_iface_tx_cipher_mode()
and ranap_iu_tx_sec_mode_cmd(). Hence we'll see decisions and errors in
msc_vlr_set_ciph_mode() as well.
Change-Id: Id23bc245d4b5707edcd27c44db272fbb211bf9bd
Three recently merged commits take the msc_vlr_tests in a wrong direction.
The IMSI is usually encoded in the hex streams. The rationale behind hex
streams is that it is a) easily copied from a wireshark trace and b) exactly
the bytes as sent by an actual phone. It is hard to parameterize the IMSI
because we would have to employ our encoding functions, which I intentionally
want to keep out of the loop here.
The test number should not appear in the normal test output, so that adding a
test or changing their order does not affect expected output for following
tests. The nr is simply for manual invocation, only seen when invoked with -v.
Revert
- "VLR tests: always print test parameters"
b0a4314911.
- "Expand VLR tests"
d5feadeee8.
- "Move IMSI into test parameters"
093300d141.
Change-Id: Ie1b49237746751021da88f6f07bbb9f780d077c9
This is another left-over VTY command from the OsmoNITB days.
If such functionality is desired, it must be implemented in OsmoHLR,
but not here.
Related: OS#2528
Change-Id: Icf0897c47388e49ba7886b55acc728a6f7d213fe
For each test print:
* the test number
* IMSI
Unfortunately tests are organized in such a way that we don't know the
number of particular test in advance. Nevertheless, it make sense to
always print it regardless of -v option presense.
Related: OS#2864
Change-Id: I2e1d7701f5322d2311f32b796148a8b414f53b8e
The VLR code seems to have the assumption that there is one particular
algorithm to be used, as opposed to one of a set of algorithms.
What's missing is basically to decide when/where to pick the best
algorithm within the capabilities of the phone (classmark) and the
network configuration (net->a5_encryption_mask). So far, libvlr has no
notion of classmark. Rather, libmsc has.
Why does the VLR care about the particular algorithm at all? The VLR
should probably simply decide if it should use encryption or not, and if
so, the MSC will figure which algorithm to use.
Change-Id: I5ed80ca2086560a5975a758ec568a034a9a8ab89
In I8de7c01f9ea1d66c384e57449c4140186f5ce6c5, libosmocore introduced
shorter names in gsm48_pdisc_names, which has implications on the
expected test output
Change-Id: I4421872a0d609dd50a6b911b928aa5e111d1ad24
* move log helpers to generic header
* log subscriber update
It's handy for troubleshooting issues with subscriber update via GSUP
from HLR.
Change-Id: I1958aeeb3ea99831c7e2c5ee9a6b59834baf4520
When hunting a conn use count bug, it was very hard to figure out who's (not)
using the conn. To ease tracking down this bug and future bugs, explicitly name
what a conn is being reserved for, and track in a bit mask.
Show in the DREF logs what uses and un-uses a conn. See the test expectation
updates, which nicely show how that clarifies the state of the conn in the
logs.
On errors, log them, but don't fail hard: if one conn use/un-use fails, we
don't want to crash the entire MSC before we have to.
Change-Id: I259aa0eec41efebb4c8221275219433eafaa549b
Neels Hofmeyr
Harald Welte