Hi Anders, It is in ETSI GSM MAP specification "GSM 09.02 version 4.19.1"
<quote> -- short message service operation codes sendRoutingInfoForSM SendRoutingInfoForSM ::= 45 forwardSM ForwardSM ::= localValue 46 ... </quote> There is no distinction between mt-fsm and mo-fsm. Thanks for looking into this. No hurry. Regards, Abhik. On 3/26/07, Anders Broman (AL/EAB) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > In which specification is mt-fsm(MT-ForwardSM?) given with Opcode 46? > I supose a solution would be to introduce a preference if MAPv2 or V3 is > used. > I have little time to look at this currently. > Best regards > Anders > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Abhik Sarkar > Sent: den 26 mars 2007 11:31 > To: Developer support list for Wireshark > Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] gsm_map dissector question > > Hi Anders, > > Thanks for your reply. Attached are sample captures. The MSUs are syslog > encapsulated, so you need to be running SVN rev 21109 or higher. Decode > UDP destination port 7890 as syslog and you will see the MTP3 and higher > layers. > > example1.cap : A simple MAPv2 mt-fsm showing up as mo-fsm. > example2.cap : The gsm_map dissector throwing up a BER decode error > because it thinks there are some extra invalid field beyond the sm-RP-UI > of the mo-fsm, but the extra field is actually the more-messages-to-send > flag in a MAPv2 mt-fsm. > > I had one more example, but I can't find it anymore. I will send it on > if I do find it. > > Best regards, > Abhik. > > On 3/26/07, Anders Broman (AL/EAB) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > If you could supply a sample trace we could see what can be done. > > Best regards > > Anders > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Abhik Sarkar > > Sent: Mon 3/26/2007 9:49 AM > > To: wireshark-dev@wireshark.org > > Subject: [Wireshark-dev] gsm_map dissector question > > > > > > > > Hi List, > > > > I have been capturing and decoding some live traffic on a GSM network, > > > and find a problem in decoding of GSM MAP operations. > > > > The GSM MAP dissector is currently based on 3GPP TS 29.002 v7.5.0. > > This leads to incorrect decoding of packets which are working on lower > > > MAP versions. For example, a MAP v2 ShortMsgMT-Relay gets decoded as > > MAP v3 ShortMsgMO-Relay (because the opcodes are same). This leads to > > all kinds of warnings, and sometimes incorrect decoding. > > > > I don't suppose there is a (simple) way around this, is there? I guess > > > a complex (and resource hungry) method would be for the TCAP dissector > > > to follow dialogs and then pass the application context information to > > > the MAP dissector for MAP to interpret the operation based on the > > application context in addition to the op-code. > > > > I am sorry if this has already been discussed, I searched the > > archives, but could not find anything relevant... perhaps I didn't use > > > the correct search string. > > > > Thanks, > > Abhik. > > _______________________________________________ > > Wireshark-dev mailing list > > Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org > > http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wireshark-dev mailing list > > Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org > > http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wireshark-dev mailing list > Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org > http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev > _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
