Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
You are probably using a buggy version of Wireshark. I'm using version 1.4.0rc1
(SVN Rev 33190 from /trunk-1.4).
According to your capture, you don't have an IP-SM-GW between the two clients.
You MUST have one. To understand how binary SMS are used in IMS (or LTE)
networks please refer to:
http://betelco.blogspot.com/2009/10/sms-over-3gpp-ims-network.html
Original comment by boss...@yahoo.fr
on 4 Jan 2011 at 2:05
You are right about the gateway - its SMS functionality is disabled in
configuration at the moment. I will enable it tomorrow and continue testing.
You are also right about Wireshark, sorry - I have too many versions around.
The 1.4.2 shows that the Boghe app sent SMS-DELIVER-REPORT in its RP-DATA.
According to the article you refer to, it should send SMS-SUMBIT, I think. It
is the MO case, right?
Original comment by victorx...@gmail.com
on 4 Jan 2011 at 2:31
According to your capture file (sms_test.cap) the RP-DATA sent from Boghe is
correct.
Do you have any other capture with this issue?
Original comment by boss...@yahoo.fr
on 10 Jan 2011 at 7:33
I have created a separated issue, and it has a similar capture file attached.
What do you mean - correct? Does Wireshark show SMS_SUBMIT for you?
Original comment by victorx...@gmail.com
on 10 Jan 2011 at 7:47
Yes I have seen it but the result shown by wireshark is incorrect as it ignores
the smsc address information (TS 23.040 section 9.1.2.5). The first octet (TS
23.040 section 9.2.2.2) is 0x11 (SMS-SUBMIT) instead of 0x04 (SMS-DELIVER).
Original comment by boss...@yahoo.fr
on 10 Jan 2011 at 10:29
Having a gateway configured, I sent a binary message using another application
which sends SMS-SUBMIT, and then the GW (10.1.10.221) sent SMS-DELIVER to the
Boghe (10.1.10.111), see the attached snoop file.
As a result, the Boghe shows some rubbish instead of text, and sends RP-ACK
with TPDU unknown to Wireshark - it shows the GSM data as 'reserved' type
instead of SMS-DELIVER-REPORT.
I don't know why the gateway sent three packets to different ports but it
should not cause any problems, I assume.
Original comment by victorx...@gmail.com
on 12 Jan 2011 at 3:50
Attachments:
Version 1.0.58 should fix the issue.
Original comment by boss...@yahoo.fr
on 6 Feb 2011 at 6:56
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
victorx...@gmail.com
on 4 Jan 2011 at 9:37Attachments: