Re: [Openbts-discuss] Device doesn't see network at all (openbts-uhd + usrp2 + wbx)

[Alexander C. <ale...@gm...>]

Hi David,

As a long term supporter of OpenBTS community and the open-source
telecom in general, I can't help but object. Aggressive approach like
that doesn't work well for a community.

On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 06:54, David A. Burgess <dbu...@jc...> wrote:
>
> OK, so here's a message to everyone who is trying to run OpenBTS on a stock
> USRP and trying to get their everyday cellphone to camp to it: STOP BEING STUPID.
> What Kurtis suggests below is a strongly recommended mode of operation: Do not run
> OpenBTS in a band that is also used by public networks in your area.  I say this routinely.
> I put it in a wiki.  Nobody is listening. At least once a week, some kid trying to run
> OpenBTS on a stock USRP in the same band as their local cellular carriers posts to
> the list saying "OpenBTS doesn't work". It doesn't work because you didn't bother to read
> the wiki or understand the technology before turing on a radio transmitter in a licensed
> band, a band used to provide a critical public service, and, whether you know it or not,
> inviting all of your neighbors' phones (not just your own) to jump on to your little network.
> (See my other recent post, "you were warned".)

You will be surprised how many people actually read the wiki
carefully. I know, because they point to it when they buy our
ClockTamers. The amount of questions we're still getting means only
that community is growing really fast. Solution for this is to create
yet another wiki page or an entry to FAQ which say this clear and
concise message, so instead of typing the answer again and again, we
could just answer with a link.

Another great thing for the community would be a list of all possible
problems with a first-time setup of OpenBTS. There are much more of
them then just a clock issue - e.g. Asterisk setup, antennas, etc. A
concise and to-point troubleshooting guide for newbies will solve a
good deal of questions on this list. I'd love to see someone taking
the task to create at least an initial version of such document.

> Besides making clocking much less of an issue, operation in a non-standard band also
> greatly decreases the likelihood that you will end up in prison or paying heavy fines for
> disrupting a public network.  This is no joke and your local public cellular network is not
> a toy.

I should note that, operation in a non-standard band for your country
may impose much more threat on you. They're non-standard for a good
reason - something else is operating there. Probably a military
system. Probably a public safety system. Probably an aircraft
communication channel. By operating in a non-standard band without
researching the topic for your exact location you can break something
much more important then just a public cellular network. Consequences
my be much worse if you break, e.g. some military wireless link.

Then, you don't take into account differences between countries. E.g.
in some European countries you can legally transmit in some part of
1800 (IIRC) band, and in other countries regulations may be different.
So it looks like you're trying to enforce something based only on US
law and regulations. This is a wrong way for an international
community.

> This kind of clueless, careless  operation is what makes me constantly question
> continued support for the USRP in the public release: it makes the barrier to access
> too low to keep out irresponsible people.  When someone runs OpenBTS in their local
> public-carrier cellular band (usually just because they are too cheap/lazy to get a proper
> multi-band unlocked phone)

Her is an interesting technical question. Most if not all of my test
phones are quad-band. What is an order of bands scanning for a phone
when I turn it on? If it starts with a band which it used previously,
then your suggestion is useless - phone will find your incumbent telco
signal first and will not able to see your signal. To really get your
suggestion working you probably need a phone where you can choose a
band of operation. And this is much harder then just a "multi-band
unlocked phone".
(also my comment about disrupting non-cellular networks apply)

> they are creating a real threat to public safety and those of us responsible for offering
> this source code to the public do not care to be a party to that.  I have tried before
> to give friendly advice to push people in the right direction and already know from
> experience that it is a waste of time, so the next someone disregards this advice I will
> try something new: deleting threads from the archive and banning people from the list.
>
> To the rest of the OpenBTS community, I apologize, but we need to start enforcing
> some standards for responsible operation.

Enforcing is a bad word for the community. Keep in mind you're not a
law enforcement agency and you run an international community.
Stop crying, stop enforcing - create a traction towards the right
direction. People like Harald could help in understanding what is the
right thing to do to create this traction. Probably more good
documentation would help.

Especially bad would be if you start banning newbies and thus create a
hostile environment for newcomers.

I strongly recommend you to rethink your community relationship model
and do more facilitation, steering and goal-setting work rather then
punishment. It would be much more useful for the community if we see
more mails from you with the former mood rather then with the latter.

-- 
Regards,
Alexander Chemeris.