Other UMTS AKA algorithms than MILENAGE (notably TUAK) support K sizes
of up to 256bit, or mandate a OP/OPc size of 256 bit.
Let's extend our database schema to accommodate such larger sizes.
Change-Id: Ibbde68484c904507a15c35cbfdf88cd47d0c7039
So far we supported a "xor" algorithm in osmo-hlr, without specifying
whether it's the XOR-3G or the (different) XOR-2G algorithm.
Furthermore, it was buggy in the sense that it permitted the XOR[-3G]
for 2G authentication data in the database.
This patch
* renames existing "xor" to "xor-3g"
* disallows "xor-3g" usage with 2G authentication data
* introduces support for XOR-2G as "xor-2g" in the VTY
Change-Id: I039a1f84fda54a908a82fe621e7fd078cb85e4c6
Depends: libosmocore.git I0ee0565382c1e4515d44ff9b1752685c0a66ae39
Each VLR requesting auth tuples should use a distinct IND pool for 3G
auth. So far we tied the IND to the GSUP peer connection; MSC and SGSN
were always distinct GSUP peers, they ended up using distinct INDs.
However, we have implemented a GSUP proxy, so that, in a distributed
setup, a remotely roaming subscriber has only one direct GSUP peer
proxying for both remote MSC and SGSN. That means as soon as a
subscriber roams to a different site, we would use the GSUP proxy name
to determine the IND instead of the separate MSC and SGSN. The site's
MSC and SGSN appear as the same client, get the same IND bucket, waste
SQNs rapidly and cause auth tuple generation load.
So instead of using the local client as IND, persistently keep a list of
VLR names and assign a different IND to each. Use the
gsup_req->source_name as indicator, which reflects the actual remote
VLR's name (remote MSC or SGSN).
Persist the site <-> IND assignments in the database.
Add an IND test to db_test.c
There was an earlier patch version that separated the IND pools by
cn_domain, but it turned out to add complex semantics, while only
solving one aspect of the "adjacent VLR" problem. We need a solution not
only for CS vs PS, but also for 2,3G vs 4G, and for sites that are
physically adjacent to each other. This patch version does not offer any
automatic solution for that -- as soon as more than 2^IND_bitlen
(usually 32) VLRs show up, it is the responsibility of the admin to
ensure the 'ind' table in the hlr.db does not have unfortunate IND
assignments. So far no VTY commands exist for that, they may be added in
the future.
Related: OS#4319
Change-Id: I6f0a6bbef3a27507605c3b4a0e1a89bdfd468374
D-GSM will store in the HLR DB whether a locally connected MSC has attached the
subscriber (last_lu_seen[_ps]), or whether the attach happened via a GSUP proxy
from a different site.
Add columns for this separately in this patch.
Change-Id: I98c7b3870559ede84adf56e4bf111f53c7487745
Location Updating procedures from both CS and PS overwrite the same
last_lu_seen field of a subscriber. For upcoming D-GSM it will be important to
distinguish those, because only CS attaches qualify for MSISDN lookup.
Add column last_lu_seen_ps, and upon PS LU, do not overwrite last_lu_seen, so
that last_lu_seen now only reflects CS LU.
In the VTY, dump both LU dates distinctively.
Change-Id: Id7fc50567211a0870ac0524f6dee94d4513781ba
Instead of a switch() for each version number with identical switch cases
except for the function name, use an array of function pointers and loop.
Also print a success message after each individual version upgrade, instead of
only one in the end (see change in db_upgrade_test.ok).
Change-Id: I1736af3d9a3f02e29db836966ac15ce49f94737b
The osmo-hlr DB schema indicates a hlr_number column and references it as 3GPP
TS 23.008 chapter 2.4.6. However, chapter 2.4.6 refers to the "MSC number",
while the "HLR number" is chapter 2.4.7.
Taking a closer look, 2.4.6 says "The MSC number is [...] stored in the HLR",
while 2.4.7 says "The HLR number may be stored in the VLR". As quite obvious,
the HLR does not store the HLR number. This was a typo from the start.
The osmo-hlr code base so far does not use the hlr_number column at all, so we
get away with renaming the column without any effects on the code base.
However, let's rather make this a new schema version to be safe.
Change-Id: I527e8627b24b79f3e9eec32675c7f5a3a6d25440
We have a database schema upgrade path, but so far nothing that verifies that
we don't break it. It almost seems like the user data weren't important to us!?
Add a db upgrade test:
- Create a db with an .sql dump taken from a db created with an old osmo-hlr,
producing DB schema version 0.
- Run osmo-hlr --db-upgrade --db-check
- Verify that the upgrade exited successfully.
- Verify that restarting with the upgraded DB works.
If python tests are enabled, also:
- create a new database using the new osmo-hlr (just built).
- replay a VTY transcript to create subscribers as in the old snapshot.
- replay some sql modifications as done in the old snapshot.
- Get a list of sorted table names,
- a list of their sorted columns with all their properties,
- and dump the table contents in a column- and value-sorted way.
- Compare the resulting dumps and error if there are any diffs.
(This is how I found the difference in the imei column that was fixed in
I68a00014a3d603fcba8781470bc5285f78b538d0)
Change-Id: I0961bab0e17cfde5b030576c5bc243c2b51d9dc4
