Would the same also apply to OpenBSC? Really looking forward to this!
Many thanks
Bnt2025
OpenBTS
-
- Posts: 303
- Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 4:53 pm
Re: OpenBTS
I am not awfully familiar with OpenBSC but it seems like it needs some timestamping capabilities as well. I will try to clear it up with the Osmo folks as to what they need for that, but I would imagine whatever OpenBTS needs this would be able to leverage as well.
-
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 6:42 am
Re: OpenBTS
A BSC is a parent to multiple BTSs. So, with open BSC, people can setup more complicated cellular networks.bpadalino wrote:I am not awfully familiar with OpenBSC but it seems like it needs some timestamping capabilities as well. I will try to clear it up with the Osmo folks as to what they need for that, but I would imagine whatever OpenBTS needs this would be able to leverage as well.
-
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 6:14 am
Re: OpenBTS
Hello,
the board has been pretty quiet on this front recently. How is the development going?
Many thanks
the board has been pretty quiet on this front recently. How is the development going?
Many thanks
-
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 3:23 am
-
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 11:28 am
Re: OpenBTS
Any news?More on this, and full instructions for OpenBTS in early January.
-
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 6:14 am
Re: OpenBTS
Seconded, are their any instructions yet?veranson wrote:Any news?More on this, and full instructions for OpenBTS in early January.
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:43 pm
Re: OpenBTS
I'm also interested in the progress of OpenBTS functionality.
-
- Posts: 303
- Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2013 4:53 pm
Re: OpenBTS
Status is that it's coming along but not quite there yet.
We have the timed FPGA image checked into the main bladeRF git repository under the dev-openbts branch and with the dev-libbladeRF_sync branch, we are able to remove complexity to the RadioDevice implementation for our board. We have a preliminary amount of the transceiver written but not tested.
When we have done enough internal testing that we're comfortable with, we'll probably look to contribute back to the other project and see what works and doesn't work for them.
I don't want to push out a fork of their code to our github since that just creates a lot of confusion.
I hope that has been insightful. Sorry for the long delay in status updates.
Brian
We have the timed FPGA image checked into the main bladeRF git repository under the dev-openbts branch and with the dev-libbladeRF_sync branch, we are able to remove complexity to the RadioDevice implementation for our board. We have a preliminary amount of the transceiver written but not tested.
When we have done enough internal testing that we're comfortable with, we'll probably look to contribute back to the other project and see what works and doesn't work for them.
I don't want to push out a fork of their code to our github since that just creates a lot of confusion.
I hope that has been insightful. Sorry for the long delay in status updates.
Brian
-
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 3:23 am
Re: OpenBTS
Sounds promising. This is exactly what my hope was - integrating the thing into the official OpenBTS branch. A good way, and worth waiting a bit more
Ralph.
Ralph.
-
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 6:14 am
Re: OpenBTS
does this also apply to OpenBSC and the other Osmocom software?
-
- Posts: 455
- Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 8:15 pm
Re: OpenBTS
I believe the efforts right now are specifically focused on getting the bladeRF working with OpenBTS, evaluating the current state of things, and improving libbladeRF/FPGA/firmware to achieve the desired performance. Once things are working there, I'm sure some of the knowledge gained could be applied to getting bladeRF support going for similar projects.bnt2025 wrote:does this also apply to OpenBSC and the other Osmocom software?
Please feel free to help get the ball rolling in the meantime. I think it would be best to create a wiki page/new thread for focused OpenBSC discussions, rather than to continue to grow this thread. Certainly, it would be helpful to devs to have some ideas as to what changes may be needed in the future while still implementing and refactoring things now.
Personally, I'm not too familiar with OpenBSC, so I can't speak to what would have to be added to or changed in libbladeRF/FPGA/firmware to achieve bladeRF support.
I think some tasks that folks could help out on are:
- Identifying and summarizing the interface by which the bladeRF would have to present itself. How does this interface map to the existing libbladeRF interface?
- Identifying what the aformentioned interface requires that the current bladeRF support lacks? As Brian mentioned, metadata such as timestamps are being added to allow for integration of bladeRF support into OpenBTS.
- Are there performance concerns? Do certain functions need to be implemented in the FPGA? (e.g., mod/demod, filters, etc.)
- Writing code, of course!
- Jon
-
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 6:14 am
Re: OpenBTS
As per Jon's suggestion I have created a basic Wiki page about OpenBSC.
https://github.com/Nuand/bladeRF/wiki/OpenBSC
I hope you don't mind but I have copied Jon's suggestions as the basic tasks.
Please feel free to add anything. Adding more guides is the main thing at the moment.
OpenBSC is mainly written in C, unfortunately my experience is mainly in Java so I don't really have a start point.
Many thanks
https://github.com/Nuand/bladeRF/wiki/OpenBSC
I hope you don't mind but I have copied Jon's suggestions as the basic tasks.
Please feel free to add anything. Adding more guides is the main thing at the moment.
OpenBSC is mainly written in C, unfortunately my experience is mainly in Java so I don't really have a start point.
Many thanks
-
- Posts: 156
- Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2013 11:14 pm
Re: OpenBTS
Hi everyone,
We have put together a beta release of OpenBTS support. We are having some issues getting it to work but it may be an issue with our OpenBTS configuration or a problem with our handset units. According to a snippet from my OpenBTS.log ( http://nuand.com/captures/OpenBTS.log ) the MS is able to complete quite a few association steps getting as far as getting to a point where its authenticating with the BTS. Here is the corresponding PCAP for that association http://nuand.com/captures/gsmtap.pcapng .
I am not entirely sure if there is a problem with the underlying timestamping mechanism or if this is, as I said before, a problem with our OpenBTS configuration or handset.
For anyone that is interested in experimenting or debugging with what we have so far, you can take a look at my cloned dev repository at https://github.com/robertghilduta/dev . My last two commits provide a mechanism for overriding the location from which certain repositories are fetched. In this case OpenBTS is fetched from my repository ( https://github.com/robertghilduta/openbts ).
Thanks,
Rob
We have put together a beta release of OpenBTS support. We are having some issues getting it to work but it may be an issue with our OpenBTS configuration or a problem with our handset units. According to a snippet from my OpenBTS.log ( http://nuand.com/captures/OpenBTS.log ) the MS is able to complete quite a few association steps getting as far as getting to a point where its authenticating with the BTS. Here is the corresponding PCAP for that association http://nuand.com/captures/gsmtap.pcapng .
I am not entirely sure if there is a problem with the underlying timestamping mechanism or if this is, as I said before, a problem with our OpenBTS configuration or handset.
For anyone that is interested in experimenting or debugging with what we have so far, you can take a look at my cloned dev repository at https://github.com/robertghilduta/dev . My last two commits provide a mechanism for overriding the location from which certain repositories are fetched. In this case OpenBTS is fetched from my repository ( https://github.com/robertghilduta/openbts ).
Thanks,
Rob