On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 5:52 AM, Tom Tsou <[email protected]> wrote: > What you are probably thinking of is the multi-ARFCN branch and > derived code, which explicitly separated the beacon carrying channel. > In that codebase, retransmissions were limited to the C0 TRX and the > filler table on non-C0 channels was loaded with zeros. Osmo-TRX does > not make this distinction and treats both channels are possible C0 > beacons.
Yes, I was speaking about the multi-ARFCN branch, as that's what we tested most deeply and which we used in production. > I agree that Independent channel configuration of the filler table is > the correct approach. You mean that it'll be configurable at runtime on per-TRX basis? That'll be a nice way. -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ООО УмРадио http://fairwaves.ru
