Category Archives: GSM

2G / Global System for Mobiles

All about Global Title Translation & SCCP Routing

GSM, History, Mobile Networks, RFCs & Standards, , ,

This is the next post in my series on SS7, and today we’re taking a look at SCCP the Signalling Connection Control Part (SCCP).

High Level

Global Title uses the routing features from SCCP, which is another layer on top of MTP3.

SCCP allows us to route on more than just point code, instead we can route based on two new fields, Subsystem Number and Global Title.

Subsystem Number is the type of system we are looking to reach, ie an HLR, MSC, CAMEL Gateway, etc.

The Global Title generally looks like an E.164 formatted phone number, and often it is just that.

Somewhere along the chain (typically at the end of it) an STP somewhere needs to perform Global Title Translation to analyse the SCCP header (Subsystem Number, Point Code & Global Title) and finally turn that into a single point code to route the MTP3 message to.

The advantage of this is we are no longer just limited to routing messages based on Point Code.

This is how the international SS7 Network used for roaming is structured and addressed – All using Global Title rather than Point Codes.

The need for SCCP

For starters, after all this talk of MTP3 and Point Codes, why the need to add SCCP?

Let’s go back in time and look at the motivators…

1. Address space is finite

Point codes are great, and when we’ve spoken about them before, I’ve compared them to IPv4 address, but rather than ranging from 0.0.0.0 to 255.255.255.255 (32 bits on IPv4) international signaling point codes range from 0.0.0 to 7.255.7 (14 bits).

The problem with IPv4’s 32 bit addresses is they run out. The problem with the ITU International Signaling Point Codes is that they too, are a limited resource with only 16,383 possible ISPCs.

~700 operators worldwide each with ~100 network elements would be 70k point codes to address them all – That’s not going to fit into our 16k possible Point Codes.

Global Title fixes this, because we’re able to use E.164 phone number ranges (which are plentiful) for addressing, we’re still not at IPv6 levels of address space, but pretty hefty.

2. Service Discovery by Subsystem

Now imagine you’re a VLR looking to find an HLR. The VLR and the HLR are both connected to an STP, but how does the VLR know where to reach the HLR?

One option would be to statically set every route for the Point Code of every HLR into every possible VLR and visa-versa, but that gets messy fast.

What if the VLR could just send a request to the STP and indicate that the request needs to be routed to any HLR, and the STP takes care of finding a SS7 node capable of handling the request, much a Diameter Routing Agent routes based on Application ID.

SCCP’s “Subsystem Number” routing can handle this as we can route based on SSN.

3. Service Discovery by MSISDN

Having an SMS destined to a given MSISDN requires the SMSc to know where to route it.

Likewise an MSC wanting to call a given number.

There’s a lot of MSISDN ranges. Like a lot. Like every phone mobile number.

Having every a table on every SSP/SCP in the network know where every MSISDN range is in the world and what point code to go through to reach it is not practical.

Instead, being able to have the SCP/SSPs (like our MSC or SMSc) send all off-net traffic to an STP frees us the individual SCP/SSPs from this role; they just forward it to their connected STP.

Our STP can analyse the destination MSISDN and make these routing decisions for us, using Global Title Translation based on rules in the Global Title Table on the STP.

For example by adding each of the domestic / national MSISDN ranges/prefixes into the Global Title Table on the STP (along with the corresponding point code to route each one to), the STP can look at the destination MSISDN in the message and forward to the STP for the correct operator.

Likewise a route can match anything where the Global Title address is outside of the local country and send it to an international signaling provider.

Global title takes care of this as we can route based on a phone number.

4. Tokenistic Security

By “Hiding” network elements behind Global Titles, you don’t expose as much information about your internal network, and the only way people can “find” your network elements would be scanning through all the possible addresses in your (publicly advertised) Global Title range (wardialing is back baby!).

But the phrases “Security” and “SS7” don’t really belong together…

The SCCP Header

The SCCP header has a Called Party and a Calling Party, and this is where the magic happens.

These can be made up for any number of 3 parts:

  • Global Title Address
  • Subsystem Number
  • Point Code

We can route on any combination of these.

To indicate we’re using SCCP, we set the Signaling Indicator bit in the M3UA / MTP3 message to SCCP:

Great, now we can look at our SCCP header.

It looks like there’s a lot going on, but we can see the calling and called party (888888888 is called by 9999999999) with the Subsystem number set (888888888 is called for subsystem HLR, from 999999999 which is a VLR).

The closest TCP/IP analogy I can think of here is that of port numbers, there’s still an IP (Point code) but the port number allows us to specify multiple applications that run at a higher layer. This analogy falls down when we consider that the Point Code is generally set to that of your STP, not the final STP.

For this to work, we’ve got to have at least one Signaling Transfer Point in the flow, where we send the request to.

Somewhere (generally at the end of the chain of STPs), an STP is going to perform Global Title Translation.

What does this look like? Well let’s have a look at my GT table for the example above, in my lab network, I’ve got two nodes attached (via M3UA but could equally be on MTP3 links), my test MAP client where I’m originating this traffic, and an SMS Firewall, I can see they’re both up here:

Now knowing this I need to setup my SCCP routing for Global Title. In the screenshot above, the Called Party was 888888888 with Subsystem Number 7. Inside the SCCP request, there’s a few other fields, the Translation Type we have set to 0, Global Title Indicator is 4 (route on Global Title), while Numbering Plan Indicator is 1 (ISDN) and Nature of Address Indicator is 4 (International).

So on my Cisco ITP I define a GTT Selector to target traffic with these values, Translation Type is 0, Global Title Indicator is 4, Number Plan is 1 and the Nature of Address Indicator is 4.

So we’d define a Global Title Translation selector like the one below to match this traffic:

cs7 instance 0 gtt selector GLOBAL_tt0 tt 0 gti 4 np 1 nai 4

But that’s only matching the group of traffic, it’s not going to match based on the actual SCCP Called Party. So now I need to define a translation for each Global Title address (Called /Calling party) or prefix I want to route, I’ve setup anything starting with 888 to route to the `SMSFirewall` ASP endpoint.

cs7 instance 0 gtt selector GLOBAL_tt0 tt 0 gti 4 np 1 nai 4
     gta 888  asname SMSFirewall gt ssn 6

I could stop here and my request addressed to 888888888 would make it to the SMSFirewall ASP, but the response never would, like in all SS7 routing, we need to define the return route translation too, which is what I’ve done for 999999 to route to the TestClient.

Lastly I’ve added a wildcard route, this means if this STP doesn’t know how to resolve a GT address matching the rules in the top line, it’ll forward the request to the STP at point code 1.2.3 – This is how you’d do your connection to an IPX / Signaling exchange.

Debugging this can be a massive pain in the backside, but if you enable logging you can see when GT rules are not matched, like in the example below.

If your network is quiet enough, it’s sometimes easier to just make your rules based on what you observe failing to route.

So with those routes in place, when we send a request with the Global Title called party starting with 8888888 it’s routed to M3UA ASP SMSFirewall, which handles the request, and then sends the response back to the MAPClient M3UA ASP.

MAP – SendRouting Information for SM – locationInfoWithLMSIMAP

GSM, Mobile Networks, ,

The other day I was facing an issue with our SMSc inter-working with another operator via MAP.

Our SRI-for-SM responses were relayed back to their nodes, but it was like it couldn’t parse the message.

I got some “known good” traffic to compare this against to work out what we’re doing wrong.

The difference in the two examples below is subtle, but it’s there – On the example on the left (failing) we are including an msc-number in the locationInfoWithLMSI field, while on the right we’ve got a “Network Node Number”.

“Okay” I thought to myself, we’re just doing something wrong with the encoding of the MAP body, so I did my usual diff trick from Wireshark:

Oddly in the raw form both these values decode the same, if I feed the values on the left into our decoder, and then encode, I get the values on the right, with the exact same hex body – and this is all ASN.1; so there’s very little room for error anyway.

So what gives? Why does Wireshark show one MAP body differently to the other, with the same hex bytes?

Well, the issue is not within my GSM MAP body and the content I include there, but rather in the TCAP layer above it, specifically the `application-context-name`.

We’re indicating support for GSM MAP v3 (0.4.0.0.1.0.20.3), while the other operator is using MAPv2 ( 0.4.0.0.1.0.20.3 ) even though their IR.21 indicates it should be GSM MAP v3.

Now our SRI-for-SM responses are based on the GSM MAP version received, rather than reported as supported, and we don’t have to deal with this for handling requests anymore.

OPc vs OP in SIM keys

5G SA, GSM, LTE, Mobile Networks, RFCs & Standards, SDM, Security, SIM Cards, , , , ,

Years ago I wrote an article looking at how Key generation works inside SIM cards for LTE & 5G-NR.

I got this great question the other day:

Hello Nick, thank you for the article.
What is the use of the OPc key to be derived from OP key ?
Why can’t it just be a random key like Ki ?

It’s a super good question, and something I see a lot of operators get “wrong” from a security best practices perspective.

Refresher on OP vs OPc Keys

The “OP Key” is the “operator” key, and was (historically) common for an operator.

This meant all SIMs in the network had a common OP Key, and each SIM had a unique Ki/K key.

The SIM knew both, and the HSS only needed to know what the Ki was for the SIM, as they shared a common OP Key (Generally you associate an index which translates to the OP Key for that batch of SIMs but you get the idea).

But having common key material is probably not the best idea – I’m sure there was probably some reason why using a common key across all the SIMs seemed like a good option, and the K / Ki key has always been unique, so there was one unique key per SIM, but previously, OP was common.

Over time, the issues with this became clear, so the OPc key was introduced. OPc is derived from mushing the K & OP key together. This means we don’t need to expose / store the original OP key in the SIM or the HSS just the derived OPc key output.

This adds additional security, if the Ki for a SIM were to be exposed along with the OP for that operator, that’s half the entropy lost. Whereas by storing the Ki and OPc you limit the blast radius if say a single SIMs data was exposed, to only the data for that particular SIM.

This is how most operators achieve this today; there is still a common OP Key, locked away in a vault alongside the recipe for Coca-cola and the moon landing set.

But his OP Key is no longer written to the SIMs or stored in the HSS.

Instead, during the personalization process (The bit in manufacturing where SIMs get the unique data written to them (The IMSI & keys)) a derived OPc key is written to the card itself, and to the output files the operator then loads into their HSS/HLR/AuC.

This is not my preferred method for handling key material however, today we get our SIM manufacturers to randomize the OP key for every card and then derive an OPc from that.

This means we have two unique keys for each SIM, and even if the Ki and OP were to become exposed for a SIM, there is nothing common between that SIM, and the other SIMs in the network.

Values stores on the LTE / EUTRAN / EPC Home Subscriber Server (HSS) including K Key, OP / OPc key and SQN SequenceNUmber

Do we want our Ki to leak? No. Do we want an OP Key to leak? No. But if we’ve got unique keys for everything we minimize the blast radius if something were to happen – Just minimizes the risk.

The meaning of 3GPP-Charging-Characteristics

EPC, GSM, LTE, Mobile Networks, SDM, , ,

How does one encode / interpret the value of this AVP / IE was the question I set out to answer.

TS 29.274 says:

For the encoding of this information element see 3GPP TS 32.298

TS 32.298 says:

The functional requirements for the Charging Characteristics as well as the profile and behaviour bits are further defined in normative Annex A of TS 32.251

TS 32.251 Annex A says:

The Charging Characteristics parameter consists of a string of 16 bits designated as Behaviours (B), freely defined by Operators, as shown in TS 32.298 [51]. Each bit corresponds to a specific charging behaviour which is defined on a per operator basis, configured within the PCN and pointed when bit is set to “1” value.

After a few circular references I found this is imported from 32.298.

Finally we find some solid answers hidden away in TS 132 215, under the Charging Characteristics Profile index.

Charging Characteristics consists of a string of 16 bits designated as Profile (P) and Behaviour (B), shown in Figure 4.
The first four bits (P) shall be used to select different charging trigger profiles, where each profile consists of the
following trigger sets:

  • S-CDR: activate/deactivate CDRs, time limit, volume limit, maximum number of charging conditions, tariff
    times;
  • G-CDR: same as SGSN, plus maximum number of SGSN changes;
  • M-CDR: activate/deactivate CDRs, time limit, and maximum number of mobility changes;
  • SMS-MO-CDR: activate/deactivate CDRs;
  • SMS-MT-CDR: active/deactivate CDRs.

The Charging Characteristics field allows the operator to apply different kind of charging methods in the CDRs.
A subscriber may have Charging Characteristics assigned to his subscription. These characteristics can be supplied by the HLR to the SGSN as part of the subscription information, and, upon activation of a PDP context, the SGSN forwards the charging characteristics to the GGSN on the Gn / Gp reference point according to the rules specified in Annex A of TS 32.251 [11].

This information can be used by the GSNs to activate CDR generation and control the
closure of the CDR or the traffic volume containers (see clause 5.1.2.2.23) and is included in CDRs transmitted to nodes handling the CDRs via the Ga reference point. It can also be used in nodes handling the CDRs (e.g., the CGF or the billing system) to influence the CDR processing priority and routing.

These functions are accomplished by specifying the charging characteristics as sets of charging profiles and the expected behaviour associated with each profile.

The interpretations of the profiles and their associated behaviours can be different for each PLMN operator and are not subject to standardisation. In the present document only the charging characteristic formats and selection modes are specified.

The functional requirements for the Charging Characteristics as well as the profile and behaviour bits are further defined in normative Annex A of TS 32.251 [11], including the definitions of the trigger profiles associated with each CDR type.

The format of charging characteristics field is depicted in Figure 4. Px (x =0..3) refers to the Charging Characteristics Profile index. Bits classified with a “B” may be used by the operator for non-standardised behaviour (see Annex A of TS 32.251 [11]).

Right, well hopefully next time someone goes looking for this info you’ll find it a bit more easily than I did!

SMS over Diameter for Roaming SMS

EPC, GSM, LTE, Mobile Networks, RFCs & Standards, , , ,

I know what you’re thinking, again with the SMS transport talk Nick? Ha! As if we’re done talking about SMS. Recently we did something kinda cool – The world’s first SMS sent over NB-IoT (Satellite).

But to do this, we weren’t using IMS, it’s too heavy (I’ve written about NB-IoT’s NIDD functions and the past).

SGs-AP which is used for CSFB & SMS doesn’t span network borders (you can’t roam with SGs-AP), and with SMSoIP out of the question, that gave us the option of MAP or Diameter, so we picked Diameter.

This introduces the S6c and SGd Diameter interfaces, in the diagrams below Orange is the Home Network (HPMN) and the Green is the Visited Network (VPMN).

The S6c interface is used between the SMSc and the HSS, in order to retrieve the routing information. This like the SRI-for-SM in MAP.

The SGd interface is used between the MME serving the UE and the SMSc, and is used for actual delivery of the MO/MT messages.

I haven’t shown the Diameter Routing Agents in these diagrams, but in reality there would be a DRA on the VPLMN and a DRA on the HPMN, and probably a DRA in the IPX between them too.

The Attach

The attach looks like a regular roaming attach, the MME in the Visited PMN sends an Update Location Request to the HSS, so the HSS knows the MME that is serving the subscriber.

S6a Update Location Request to indicate the MME serving the Subscriber

The Mobile Terminated SMS Flow

Now we introduce the S6c interface and the SGd interfaces.

When the Home SMSc has a message to send to the subscriber (Mobile Terminated SMS) it runs a the Send-Routing-Info-for-SM-Request (SRR) dialog to the HSS.

The Send-Routing-Info-for-SM-Answer (SRA) back from the HSS contains the info on the MME Diameter Host name and Diameter Realm serving the subscriber.

S6t – Send-Routing-Info-for-SM request to get the MME serving the subscriber

With this info, we can now craft a Diameter Request that will get sent to the MME serving the subscriber, containing the SMS PDU to send to the UE.

SGd MT-Forward-Short-Message to deliver Mobile Terminated SMS to the serving MME

We make sure it’s sent to the correct MME by setting the Destination-Host and Destination-Realm in the Diameter request.

Here’s how the request looks from the SMSc towards our DRA:

As you can see the Destination Realm and Destination-Host is set, as is the User-Name set to the IMSI of the UE we want to send the message to.

And down the bottom you can see the SMS-TPDU, the same as it’s been all the way back since GSM days.

The Mobile Originated SMS Flow

The Mobile Originated flow is even simpler, because we don’t need to look up where to route it to.

The MME receives the MO SMS from the UE, and shoves it into a Diameter message with Application ID set to SGd and Destination-Realm set to the HPMN Realm.

When the message reaches the DRA in the HPMN it forwards the request to an SMSc and then the Home SMSc has the message ready to roll.

So that’s it, pretty straightforward to set up!

Android and Emergency Calling

GSM, IMS / VoLTE, LTE, Mobile Networks, RFCs & Standards, SDM, SIM Cards, VoIP, , , , , , ,

In the last post we looked at emergency calling when roaming, and I mentioned that there are databases on the handsets for emergency numbers, to allow for example, calling 999 from a US phone, with a US SIM, roaming into the UK.

Android, being open source, allows us to see how this logic works, and it’s important for operators to understand this logic, as it’s what dictates the behavior in many scenarios.

It’s important to note that I’m not covering Apple here, this information is not publicly available to share for iOS devices, so I won’t be sharing anything on this – Apple has their own ecosystem to handle emergency calling, if you’re from an operator and reading this, I’d suggest getting in touch with your Apple account manager to discuss it, they’re always great to work with.

The Android Open Source Project has an “emergency number database”. This database has each of the emergency phone numbers and the corresponding service, for each country.

This file can be read at packages/services/Telephony/ecc/input/eccdata.txt on a phone with engineering mode.

Let’s take a look what’s in mainline Android for Australia:

You can check ECC for countries from the database on the AOSP repo.

This is one of the ways handsets know what codes represent emergency calling codes in different countries, alongside the values set in the SIM and provided by the visited network.

Shiny things inside Cellular Diplexers

EUTRAN, GSM, Mobile Networks, RF, ,

I recently ended up with a few Commscope RF combiners from a cell site, they’re not on frequencies that are of any use to us, so, let’s see what’s inside.

The units on the bench are Commscope Diplexer units, these ones allow you to put a signal between 694-862Mhz, and another signal between 880-960Mhz, on the same RF feeder up the tower.

It’s a nifty trick from the days where radio units lived at the bottom of the tower, but now with Remote Radio Units, and Active Antenna Units, it’s becoming increasingly uncommon to have radio units in the site hut, and more common to just run DC & fibre up the tower and power a radio unit right next to the antenna – This is especially important for higher frequencies where of course the feeder loss is greater.

Diplexer unit before it is maimed…

Anywho, that’s about all I know of them, after the liberal application of chemicals to remove the stickers and several burns from a heat gun, we started to get the unit open, to show the zillion adjustment bolts, and finely machined parts.

A lot of screws
Bonus TMA

Thanks to Oliver for offering up the bench space when I rocked to up to their house with some stuff to pull apart.

A look at Advanced Mobile Location SMS for Emergency Calls

5G SA, GSM, IMS / VoLTE, LTE, Mobile Networks, , , , , , , , ,

Advanced Mobile Location (AML) is being rolled out by a large number of mobile network operators to provide accurate caller location to emergency services, so how does it work, what’s going on and what do you need to know?

Recently we’ve been doing a lot of work on emergency calling in IMS, and meeting requirements for NG-112 / e911, etc.

This led me to seeing my first Advanced Mobile Location (AML) SMS in the wild.

For those unfamiliar, AML is a fancy text message that contains the callers location, accuracy, etc, that is passed to emergency services when you make a call to emergency services in some countries.

It’s sent automatically by your handset (if enabled) when making a call to an emergency number, and it provides the dispatch operator with your location information, including extra metadata like the accuracy of the location information, height / floor if known, and level of confidence.

The standard is primarily driven by EENA, and, being backed by the European Union, it’s got almost universal handset support.

Google has their own version of AML called ELS, which they claim is supported on more than 99% of Android phones (I’m unclear on what this means for Harmony OS or other non-Google backed forks of Android), and Apple support for AML starts from iOS 11 onwards, meaning it’s supported on iPhones from the iPhone 5S onards,.

Call Flow

When a call is made to the PSAP based on the Emergency Calling Codes set on the SIM card or set in the OS, the handset starts collecting location information. The phone can pull this from a variety of sources, such as WiFi SSIDs visible, but the best is going to be GPS or one of it’s siblings (GLONASS / Galileo).

Once the handset has a good “lock” of a location (or if 20 seconds has passed since the call started) it bundles up all of this information the phone has, into an SMS and sends it to the PSAP as a regular old SMS.

The routing from the operator’s SMSc to the PSAP, and the routing from the PSAP to the dispatcher screen of the operator taking the call, is all up to implementation. For the most part the SMS destination is the emergency number (911 / 112) but again, this is dependent on the country.

Inside the SMS

To the user, the AML SMS is not seen, in fact, it’s actually forbidden by the standard to show in the “sent” items list in the SMS client.

On the wire, the SMS looks like any regular SMS, it can use GSM7 bit encoding as it doesn’t require any special characters.

Each attribute is a key / value pair, with semicolons (;) delineating the individual attributes, and = separating the key and the value.

Below is an example of an AML SMS body:

A"ML=1;lt=+54.76397;lg=-
0.18305;rd=50;top=20130717141935;lc=90;pm=W;si=123456789012345;ei=1234567890123456;mcc=234;mnc=30; ml=128

If you’ve got a few years of staring at Wireshark traces in Hex under your belt, then this will probably be pretty easy to get the gist of what’s going on, we’ve got the header (A”ML=1″) which denotes this is AML and the version is 1.

After that we have the latitude (lt=), longitude (lg=), radius (rd=), time of positioning (top=), level of confidence (lc=), positioning method (pm=) with G for GNSS, W for Wifi signal, C for Cell
or N for a position was not available, and so on.

AML outside the ordinary

Roaming Scenarios

If an emergency occurs inside my house, there’s a good chance I know the address, and even if I don’t know my own address, it’s probably linked to the account holder information from my telco anyway.

AML and location reporting for emergency calls is primarily relied upon in scenarios where the caller doesn’t know where they’re calling from, and a good example of this would be a call made while roaming.

If I were in a different country, there’s a much higher likelihood that I wouldn’t know my exact address, however AML does not currently work across borders.

The standard suggests disabling SMS when roaming, which is not that surprising considering the current state of SMS transport.

Without a SIM?

Without a SIM in the phone, calls can still be made to emergency services, however SMS cannot be sent.

That’s because the emergency calling standards for unauthenticated emergency calls, only cater for

This is a limitation however this could be addressed by 3GPP in future releases if there is sufficient need.

HTTPS Delivery

The standard was revised to allow HTTPS as the delivery method for AML, for example, the below POST contains the same data encoded for use in a HTTP transaction:

v=3&device_number=%2B447477593102&location_latitude=55.85732&location_longitude=-
4.26325&location_time=1476189444435&location_accuracy=10.4&location_source=GPS&location_certainty=83
&location_altitude=0.0&location_floor=5&device_model=ABC+ABC+Detente+530&device_imei=354773072099116
&device_imsi=234159176307582&device_os=AOS&cell_carrier=&cell_home_mcc=234&cell_home_mnc=15&cell_net
work_mcc=234&cell_network_mnc=15&cell_id=0213454321

Implementation of this approach is however more complex, and leads to little benefit.

The operator must zero-rate the DNS, to allow the FQDN for this to be resolved (it resolves to a different domain in each country), and allow traffic to this endpoint even if the customer has data disabled (see what happens when your handset has PS Data Off ), or has run out of data.

Due to the EU’s stance on Net Neutrality, “Zero Rating” is a controversial topic that means most operators have limited implementation of this, so most fall back to SMS.

Other methods for sharing location of emergency calls?

In some upcoming posts we’ll look at the GMLC used for E911 Phase 2, and how the network can request the location from the handset.

Further Reading

https://eena.org/knowledge-hub/documents/aml-specifications-requirements/

SMS Transport Wars?

5G SA, GSM, IMS / VoLTE, LTE, Mobile Networks, RFCs & Standards, VoIP

There’s old joke about standards that the great thing about standards there’s so many to choose from.

SMS wasn’t there from the start of GSM, but within a year of the inception of 2G we had SMS, and we’ve had SMS, almost totally unchanged, ever since.

In a recent Twitter exchange, I was asked, what’s the best way to transport SMS?
As always the answer is “it depends” so let’s take a look together at where we’ve come from, where we are now, and how we should move forward.

How we got Here

Between 2G and 3G SMS didn’t change at all, but the introduction of 4G (LTE) caused a bit of a rethink regarding SMS transport.

Early builders of LTE (4G) networks launched their 4G offerings without 4G Voice support (VoLTE), with the idea that networks would “fall back” to using 2G/3G for voice calls.

This meant users got fast data, but to make or receive a call they relied on falling back to the circuit switched (2G/3G) network – Hence the name Circuit Switched Fallback.

Falling back to the 2G/3G network for a call was one thing, but some smart minds realised that if a phone had to fall back to a 2G/3G network every time a subscriber sent a text (not just calls) – And keep in mind this was ~2010 when SMS traffic was crazy high; then that would put a huge amount of strain on the 2G/3G layers as subs constantly flip-flopped between them.

To address this the SGs-AP interface was introduced, linking the 4G core (MME) with the 2G/3G core (MSC) to support this stage where you had 4G/LTE but only for data, SMS and calls still relied on the 2G/3G core (MSC).

The SGs-AP interface has two purposes;
One, It can tell a phone on 4G to fallback to 2G/3G when it’s got an incoming call, and two; it can send and receive SMS.

SMS traffic over this interface is sometimes described as SMS-over-NAS, as it’s transported over a signaling channel to the UE.

This also worked when roaming, as the MSC from the 2G/3G network was still used, so SMS delivery worked the same when roaming as if you were in the home 2G/3G network.

Enter VoLTE & IMS

Of course when VoLTE entered the scene, it also came with it’s own option for delivering SMS to users, using IP, rather than the NAS signaling. This removed the reliance on a link to a 2G/3G core (MSC) to make calls and send texts.

This was great because it allowed operators to build networks without any 2G/3G network elements and build a fully standalone LTE only network, like Jio, Rakuten, etc.

VoLTE didn’t change anything about the GSM 2G/3G SMS PDU, it just bundled it up in an SIP message body, this is often referred to as SMS-over-IP.

SMS-over-IP doesn’t address any of the limitations from 2G/3G, including limiting multipart messages to send payloads above 160 characters, and carries all the same limitations in order to be backward compatible, but it is over IP, and it doesn’t need 2G or 3G.

In roaming scenarios, S8 Home Routing for VoLTE enabled SMS to be handled when roaming the same way as voice calls, which made SMS roaming a doddle.

4G SMS: SMS over IP vs SMS over NAS

So if you’re operating a 4G network, should you deliver your SMS traffic using SMS-over-IP or SMS-over-NAS?

Generally, if you’ve been evolving your network over the years, you’ve got an MSC and a 2G/3G network, you still may do CSFB so you’ve probably ended up using SMS over NAS using the SGs-AP interface.
This method still relies on “the old ways” to work, which is fine until a discussion starts around sunsetting the 2G/3G networks, when you’d need to move calling to VoLTE, and SMS over NAS is a bit of a mess when it comes to roaming.

Greenfield operators generally opt for SMS over IP from the start, but this has its own limitations; SMS over IP is has awful efficiency which makes it unsuitable for use with NB-IoT applications which are bandwidth constrained, support for SMS over IP is generally limited to more expensive chipsets, so the bargain basement chips used for IoT often don’t support SMS over IP either, and integration of VoLTE comes with its own set of challenges regarding VoLTE enablement.

5G enters the scene (Nsmsf_SMService)

5G rolled onto the scene with the opportunity to remove the SMS over NAS option, and rely purely on SMS over IP (IMS); forcing the industry to standardise on an option alas this did not happen.

Instead 5GC introduces another delivery mechanism for SMS, just for 5GC without VoNR, the SMSf which can still send messages over the 5G NAS messaging.

This added another option for SMS delivery dependent on the access network used, and the Nsmsf_SMService interface does not support roaming.

Of course if you are using Voice over NR (VoNR) then like VoLTE, SMS is carried in a SIP message to the IMS, so this negates the need for the Nsmsf_SMService.

2G/3G Shutdown – Diameter to replace SGs-AP (SGd)

With the 2G/3G shutdown in the US operators who had up until this point been relying on SMS-over-NAS using the SGs-AP interface back to their MSCs were forced to make a decision on how to route SMS traffic, after the MSCs were shut down.

This landed with SMS-over-Diameter, where the 4G core (MME) communicates over Diameter with the SMSc.

The advantage of this approach is the Diameter protocol stack is the backbone of 4G roaming, and it’s not a stretch to get existing Diameter Routing Agents to start flicking SMS over Diameter messages between operators.

This has adoption by all the US operators, but we’re not seeing it so widely deployed in the rest of the world.

State of Play

OptionConditionsNotes
MAP2G/3G OnlyRelies on SS7 signaling and is very old
Supports roaming
SGs-AP (SMS-over-NAS)4G only relies on 2G/3GNeeds an MSC to be present in the network (generally because you have a 2G/3G network and have not deployed VoLTE)
Supports limited roaming
SMS over IP (IMS)4G / 5GNot supported on 2G/3G networks
Relies on a IMS enabled handset and network
Supports roaming in all S8 Home Routed scenarios
Device support limited, especially for IoT devices
Diameter SGd4G only / 5G NSAOnly works on 4G or 5G NSA
Better device support than 4G/5G
Supports roaming in some scenarios
Nsmsf_SMService5G standalone onlyOnly works on 5GC
Doesn’t support roaming
The convoluted world of SMS delivery options

A Way Forward:

While the SMS payload hasn’t changed in the past 31 years, how it is transported has opened up a lot of potential options for operators to use, with no clear winner, while SMS revenues and traffic volumes have continued to fall.

For better or worse, the industry needs to accept that SMS over NAS is an option to use when there is no IMS, and that in order to decommission 2G/3G networks, IMS needs to be embraced, and so SMS over IP (IMS) supported in all future networks, seems like the simple logical answer to move forward.

And with that clear path forward, we add in another wildcard…

Direct to device Satellite messes everything up…

Remember way back in this post when I said SMS over IP using IMS is a really really inefficient way of getting data? Well that hasn’t been a problem as we progressed up the generations of cellular tech as with each “G” we had more and more bandwidth than the last.

To throw a spanner in the works, let’s introduce NB-IoT and Non-Terrestrial Networks which rely on Non-IP-Data-Delivery.

These offer the ability to cover the globe with a low bandwidth / high latency service, that would ensure a subscriber is always just a message away, we’re seeing real world examples of these networks getting deployed for messaging applications already.

But, when you’ve only got a finite resource of bandwidth, and massive latencies to contend with, the all-IP architecture of IMS (VoLTE / VoNR) and it’s woeful inefficiency starts to really sting.

Of course there are potential workarounds here, Robust Header Correction (ROHC) can shrink this down, but it’s still going to rely on the 3 way handshake of TCP, TCP keepalive timers and IMS registrations, which in turn can starve the radio resources of the satellite link.

For NTN (Satelite) networks the case is being heavily made to rely on Non-IP-Data-Delivery, so the logical answer for these applications is to move the traffic back to SMS over NAS.

End Note

Even with SMS over 30 years old, we can still expect it to be a part of networks for years to come, even as WhatsApp / iMessage, etc, offer enhanced services. As to how it’s transported and the myriad of options here, I’m expecting that we’ll keep seeing a multi-transport mix long into the future.

For simple, cut-and-dried 4G/5G only network, IMS and SMS over IP makes the most sense, but for anything outside of that, you’ve got a toolbox of options for use to make a solution that best meets your needs.

Cisco ITP STP – Network Appearance

GSM, Mobile Networks, RFCs & Standards, SDM, ,

Short one,
The other day I needed to add a Network Appearance on an SS7/SS7 M3UA linkset.

Network Appearances on M3UA links are kinda like a port number, in that they allow you to distinguish traffic to the same point code, but handled by different logical entities.

When I added the NA parameter on the Linkset nothing happened.

If you’re facing the same you’ll need to set:

cs7 multi-instance

In the global config (this is the part I missed).

Then select the M3UA linkset you want to change and add the network-appearance parameter:

network-appearance 10

And bingo, you’ll start seeing it in your M3UA traffic:

SMS with Alphanumeric Source

Sending SMS with an alphanumeric String as the Source

GSM, IMS / VoLTE, Mobile Networks, VoIP, , , , , , ,

If you’ve ever received an SMS from your operator, and the sender was the Operator name for example, you may be left wondering how it’s done.

In IMS you’d think this could be quite simple – You’d set the From header to be the name rather than the MSISDN, but for most SMSoIP deployments, the From header is ignored and instead the c header inside the SMS body is used.

So how do we get it to show text?

Well the TP-Originating address has the “Type of Number” (ToN) field which is typically set to International/National, but value 5 allows for the Digits to instead be alphanumeric characters.

GSM 7 bit encoding on the text in the TP-Originating Address digits and presto, you can send SMS to subscribers where the message shows as From an alphanumeric source.

On Android SMSs received from alphanumeric sources cannot be responded to (“no more “DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE” at the end of each text), but on iOS devices you can respond, but if I send an SMS from “Nick” the reply from the subscriber using the iPhone will be sent to MSISDN 6425 (Nick on the telephone keypad).

USSD Gateway with Osmocom

GSM, Mobile Networks, SDM, Software, ,

Unstructured Supplementary Service Data or “USSD” is the stack used in Cellular Networks to offer interactive text based menus and systems to Subscribers.

If you remember topping up your mobile phone credit via a text menu on your flip phone, there’s a good chance that was USSD*.

For a period, USSD Services provided Sporting Scores, Stock Prices and horoscopes on phones and networks that were not enabled for packet data.

Unlike plain SMS-PP, USSD services are transaction stateful, which means that there is a session / dialog between the subscriber and the USSD gateway that keeps track of the session and what has happened in the session thus far.

T-Mobile website from 2003 covering the features of their USSD based product at the time

Today USSD is primarily used in the network at times when a subscriber may not have balance to access packet data (Internet) services, so primarily is used for recharging with vouchers.

Osmocom’s HLR (osmo-hlr) has an External USSD interface to allow you to define the USSD logic in another entity, for example you could interface the USSD service with a chat bot, or interface with a billing system to manage credit.

Osmocom Osmo-HLR with External USSD Gateway interfaces and MSC Interface

Using the example code provided I made a little demo of how the service could be used:

Communication between the USSD Gateway and the HLR is MAP but carried GSUP (Rather than the full MTP3/SCCP/TCAP layers that traditionally MAP stits on top of), and inside the HLR you define the prefixes and which USSD Gateway to route them to (This would allow you to have multiple USSD gateways and route the requests to them based on the code the subscriber sends).

Here’s my Osmo-HLR config:

ctrl
 bind 127.0.0.1
hlr
 database /var/lib/osmocom/hlr.db
 subscriber-create-on-demand 15 cs+ps
 gsup
  bind ip 10.0.1.201
  ipa-name unnamed-HLR
 euse nicktest-00-00-00-00-00-00
 ussd route prefix *#100# internal own-msisdn
 ussd route prefix *#101# internal own-imsi
 ussd route prefix *#102# external nicktest-00-00-00-00-00-00
 ussd default-route external nicktest-00-00-00-00-00-00

Then I’m just running a slightly modified version of the example code that ships with Osmo-HLR.

(I had hoped to make a Python example and actually interface it with some external systems, but another day!)

The signaling is fairly straight forward, when the subscriber kicks off the USSD request, the HLR calls a MAP Invoke operation for “processUnstructuredSS-Request”

Here’s the PCAP of the dialog: GSUP_MAP_USSD_Osmocom.pcapDownload

Unfortunately is seems the stock Android does not support interactive USSD.
This is exposed in the Android SDK so applications can access USSD interfaces (including interactive USSD) but the stock dialer on the few phones I played with did not, which threw a bit of a spanner in the works. There are a few apps that can help with this however I didn’t go into any of them.

(or maybe they used SIM Toolkit which had a similar interface)

Demystifying SS7 & Sigtran – Part 4 – Routing with Point Codes

GSM, Mobile Networks, RFCs & Standards, Software, VoIP, , , , ,

This is part of a series of posts looking into SS7 and Sigtran networks. We cover some basic theory and then get into the weeds with GNS3 based labs where we will build real SS7/Sigtran based networks and use them to carry traffic.

Having a direct Linkset from every Point Code to every other Point Code in an SS7 network isn’t practical, we need to rely on routing, so in this post we’ll cover routing between Point Codes on our STPs.

Let’s start in the IP world, imagine a router with a routing table that looks something like this:

Simple IP Routing Table
192.168.0.0/24 out 192.168.0.1 (Directly Attached)
172.16.8.0/22 via 192.168.0.3 - Static Route - (Priority 100)
172.16.0.0/16 via 192.168.0.2 - Static Route - (Priority 50)
10.98.22.1/32 via 192.168.0.3 - Static Route - (Priority 50)

We have an implicit route for the network we’re directly attached to (192.168.0.0/24), and then a series of static routes we configure.
We’ve also got two routes to the 172.16.8.0/22 subnet, one is more specific with a higher priority (172.16.8.0/22 – Priority 100), while the other is less specific with a lower priority (172.16.0.0/16 – Priority 50). The higher priority route will take precedence.

This should look pretty familiar to you, but now we’re going to take a look at routing in SS7, and for that we’re going to be talking Variable Length Subnet Masking in detail you haven’t needed to think about since doing your CCNA years ago…

Why Masking is Important

A route to a single Point Code is called a “/14”, this is akin to a single IPv4 address being called a “/32”.

We could setup all our routing tables with static routes to each point code (/14), but with about 4,000 international point codes, this might be a challenge.

Instead, by using Masks, we can group together ranges of Point Codes and route those ranges through a particular STP.

This opens up the ability to achieve things like “Route all traffic to Point Codes to this Default Gateway STP”, or to say “Route all traffic to this region through this STP”.

Individually routing to a point code works well for small scale networking, but there’s power, flexibility and simplification that comes from grouping together ranges of point codes.

Information Overload about Point Codes

So far we’ve talked about point codes in the X.YYY.Z format, in our lab we setup point codes like 1.2.3.

This is not the only option however…

Variants of SS7 Point Codes

IPv4 addresses look the same regardless of where you are. From Algeria to Zimbabwe, IPv4 addresses look the same and route the same.

Standards
XKCD 927: Standards

In SS7 networks that’s not the case – There are a lot of variants that define how a point code is structured, how long it is, etc. Common variants are ANSI, ITU-T (International & National variants), ETSI, Japan NTT, TTC & China.

The SS7 variant used must match on both ends of a link; this means an SS7 node speaking ETSI flavoured Point Codes can’t exchange messages with an ANSI flavoured Point Code.

Well, you can kinda translate from one variant to another, but requires some rewriting not unlike how NAT does it.

ITU International Variant

For the start of this series, we’ll be working with the ITU International variant / flavour of Point Code.

ITU International point codes are 14 bits long, and format is described as 3-8-3.
The 3-8-3 form of Point code just means the 14 bit long point code is broken up into three sections, the first section is made up of the first 3 bits, the second section is made up of the next 8 bits then the remaining 3 bits in the last section, for a total of 14 bits.

So our 14 bit 3-8-3 Point Code looks like this in binary form:

000-00000000-000 (Binary) == 0-0-0 (Point Code)

So a point code of 1-2-3 would look like:

001-00000010-011 (Binary) == 1-2-3 (Point Code) [001 = 1, 00000010 = 2, 011 = 3]

This gives us the following maximum values for each part:

111-11111111-111 (Binary) == 7-255-7 (Point Code)

This is not the only way to represent point codes, if we were to take our binary string for 1-2-3 and remove the hyphens, we get 00100000010011. If you convert this binary string into an Integer/Decimal value, you’ll get 2067.

If you’re dealing with multiple vendors or products,you’ll see some SS7 Point Codes represented as decimal (2067), some showing as 1-2-3 codes and sometimes just raw binary.
Fun hey?

Handy point code formatting tool

Why we need to know about Binary and Point Codes

So why does the binary part matter? Well the answer is for masks.

To loop back to the start of this post, we talked about IP routing using a network address and netmask, to represent a range of IP addresses. We can do the same for SS7 Point Codes, but that requires a teeny bit of working out.

As an example let’s imagine we need to setup a route to all point codes from 3-4-0 through to 3-6-7, without specifying all the individual point codes between them.

Firstly let’s look at our start and end point codes in binary:

100-00000100-000 = 3-004-0 (Start Point Code)
100-00000110-111 = 3-006-7 (End Point Code)

Looking at the above example let’s look at how many bits are common between the two,

100-00000100-000 = 3-004-0 (Start Point Code)
100-00000110-111 = 3-006-7 (End Point Code)

The first 9 bits are common, it’s only the last 5 bits that change, so we can group all these together by saying we have a /9 mask.

When it comes time to add a route, we can add a route to 3-4-0/9 and that tells our STP to match everything from point code 3-4-0 through to point code 3-6-7.

The STP doing the routing it only needs to match on the first 9 bits in the point code, to match this route.

SS7 Routing Tables

Now we have covered Masking for roues, we can start putting some routes into our network.

In order to get a message from one point code to another point code, where there isn’t a direct linkset between the two, we need to rely on routing, which is performed by our STPs.

This is where all that point code mask stuff we just covered comes in.

Let’s look at a diagram below,

Let’s look at the routing to get a message from Exchange A (SSP) on the bottom left of the picture to Exchange E (SSP) with Point Code 4.5.3 in the bottom right of the picture.

Exchange A (SSP) on the bottom left of the picture has point code 1.2.3 assigned to it and a Linkset to STP-A.
It has the implicit route to STP-A as it’s got that linkset, but it’s also got a route configured on it to reach any other point code via the Linkset to STP-A via the 0.0.0/0 route which is the SS7 equivalent of a default route. This means any traffic to any point code will go to STP-A.

From STP-A we have a linkset to STP-B. In order to route to the point codes behind STP-B, STP-A has a route to match any Point Code starting with 4.5.X, which is 4.5.0/11.
This means that STP-A will route any Point Code between 4.5.1 and 4.5.7 down the Linkset to STP-B.

STP-B has got a direct connection to Exchange B and Exchange E, so has implicit routes to reach each of them.

So with that routing table, Exchange A should be able to route a message to Exchange E.

But…

Return Routing

Just like in IP routing, we need return routing. while Exchange A (SSP) at 1.2.3 has a route to everywhere in the network, the other parts of the network don’t have a route to get to it. This means a request from 1.2.3 can get anywhere in the network, but it can’t get a response back to 1.2.3.

So to get traffic back to Exchange A (SSP) at 1.2.3, our two Exchanges on the right (Exchange B & C with point codes 4.5.6 and 4.5.3) will need routes added to them. We’ll also need to add routes to STP-B, and once we’ve done that, we should be able to get from Exchange A to any point code in this network.

There is a route missing here, see if you can pick up what it is!

So we’ve added a default route via STP-B on Exchange B & Exchange E, and added a route on STP-B to send anything to 1.2.3/14 via STP-A, and with that we should be able to route from any exchange to any other exchange.

One last point on terminology – when we specify a route we don’t talk in terms of the next hop Point Code, but the Linkset to route it down. For example the default route on Exchange A is 0.0.0/0 via STP-A linkset (The linkset from Exchange A to STP-A), we don’t specify the point code of STP-A, but just the name of the Linkset between them.

Back into the Lab

So back to the lab, where we left it was with linksets between each point code, so each Country could talk to it’s neighbor.

Let’s confirm this is the case before we go setting up routes, then together, we’ll get a route from Country A to Country C (and back).

So let’s check the status of the link from Country B to its two neighbors – Country A and Country C. All going well it should look like this, and if it doesn’t, then stop by my last post and check you’ve got everything setup.

CountryB#show cs7 linkset 
lsn=ToCountryA          apc=1.2.3         state=avail     avail/links=1/1
  SLC  Interface                    Service   PeerState         Inhib
  00   10.0.5.1 1024 1024           avail     InService         -----

lsn=ToCountryC          apc=7.7.1         state=avail     avail/links=1/1
  SLC  Interface                    Service   PeerState         Inhib
  00   10.0.6.2 1025 1025           avail     InService         -----

So let’s add some routing so Country A can reach Country C via Country B. On Country A STP we’ll need to add a static route. For this example we’ll add a route to 7.7.1/14 (Just Country C).

That means Country A knows how to get to Country C. But with no return routing, Country C doesn’t know how to get to Country A. So let’s fix that.

We’ll add a static route to Country C to send everything via Country B.

CountryC#conf t
Enter configuration commands, one per line.  End with CNTL/Z.
CountryC(config)#cs7 route-table system
CountryC(config)#update route 0.0.0/0 linkset ToCountryB
*Jan 01 05:37:28.879: %CS7MTP3-5-DESTSTATUS: Destination 0.0.0 is accessible

So now from Country C, let’s see if we can ping Country A (Ok, it’s not a “real” ICMP ping, it’s a link state check message, but the result is essentially the same).

By running:

CountryC# ping cs7 1.2.3
*Jan 01 06:28:53.699: %CS7PING-6-RTT: Test Q.755 1.2.3: MTP Traffic test rtt 48/48/48
*Jan 01 06:28:53.699: %CS7PING-6-STAT: Test Q.755 1.2.3: MTP Traffic test 100% successful packets(1/1)
*Jan 01 06:28:53.699: %CS7PING-6-RATES: Test Q.755 1.2.3: Receive rate(pps:kbps) 1:0 Sent rate(pps:kbps) 1:0
*Jan 01 06:28:53.699: %CS7PING-6-TERM: Test Q.755 1.2.3: MTP Traffic test terminated.

We can confirm now that Country C can reach Country A, we can do the same from Country A to confirm we can reach Country B.

But what about Country D? The route we added on Country A won’t cover Country D, and to get to Country D, again we go through Country B.

This means we could group Country C and Country D into one route entry on Country A that matches anything starting with 7-X-X,

For this we’d add a route on Country A, and then remove the original route;

CountryA(config)# cs7 route-table system
CountryA(config-cs7-rt)#update route 7.0.0/3 linkset ToCountryB
CountryA(config-cs7-rt)#no update route 7.7.1/14 linkset ToCountryB

Of course, you may have already picked up, we’ll need to add a return route to Country D, so that it has a default route pointing all traffic to STP-B. Once we’ve done that from Country A we should be able to reach all the other countries:

CountryA#show cs7 route 
Dynamic Routes 0 of 1000

Routing table = system Destinations = 3 Routes = 3

Destination            Prio Linkset Name        Route
---------------------- ---- ------------------- -------        
4.5.6/14         acces   1  ToCountryB          avail          
7.0.0/3          acces   5  ToCountryB          avail          


CountryA#ping cs7 7.8.1
*Jan 01 07:28:19.503: %CS7PING-6-RTT: Test Q.755 7.8.1: MTP Traffic test rtt 84/84/84
*Jan 01 07:28:19.503: %CS7PING-6-STAT: Test Q.755 7.8.1: MTP Traffic test 100% successful packets(1/1)
*Jan 01 07:28:19.503: %CS7PING-6-RATES: Test Q.755 7.8.1: Receive rate(pps:kbps) 1:0  Sent rate(pps:kbps) 1:0 
*Jan 01 07:28:19.507: %CS7PING-6-TERM: Test Q.755 7.8.1: MTP Traffic test terminated.
CountryA#ping cs7 7.7.1
*Jan 01 07:28:26.839: %CS7PING-6-RTT: Test Q.755 7.7.1: MTP Traffic test rtt 60/60/60
*Jan 01 07:28:26.839: %CS7PING-6-STAT: Test Q.755 7.7.1: MTP Traffic test 100% successful packets(1/1)
*Jan 01 07:28:26.839: %CS7PING-6-RATES: Test Q.755 7.7.1: Receive rate(pps:kbps) 1:0  Sent rate(pps:kbps) 1:0 
*Jan 01 07:28:26.843: %CS7PING-6-TERM: Test Q.755 7.7.1: MTP Traffic test terminated.

So where to from here?

Well, we now have a a functional SS7 network made up of STPs, with routing between them, but if we go back to our SS7 network overview diagram from before, you’ll notice there’s something missing from our lab network…

So far our network is made up only of STPs, that’s like building a network only out of routers!

In our next lab, we’ll start adding some SSPs to actually generate some SS7 traffic on the network, rather than just OAM traffic.

The Surprisingly Complicated World of SMS: Special Characters

GSM, IMS / VoLTE, Mobile Networks, ,

SMS by default uses the GSM-7 bit alphabet, thanks to the fact each letter is only 7 bits long, this means you can cram 160 characters into a 140 byte message body.

However, this 7-bit alphabet is, well, limited, because it’s 7 bits long it means we can only have 128 different combinations of these bits, or to put it another way, with only 128 different unique combinations of these bits, we can only define 128 characters.

You have the standard 26 latin alphabet characters that Sesame Street drilled into you, some characters with accents, digits, and a limited set of symbols.

The GSM 7 bit alphabet does not include is character sets and symbols common for non-English written languages.

Shift Tables

To deal with this 3GPP introduced “National Language Shift Tables”, which are enable a sort of find-and-replace approach to the 7-bit alphabet, where certain characters that are unused in one alphabet, take the value of characters from the local alphabet.

So if you want to send the character Ğ (Found in the Turkish and Azerbaijani alphabets) you’d select the Turkish language Shift table, that replaces the capital G (71) with Ğ.

Of course you need to have two things to do this, you need the Language Shift Table to tell you what local-language letters replace what default letters, and a mechanism to state that you’re using a language shift table.

3GPP define the National Language Shift tables in TS 23.038, where you can lookup the character you want to encode, so you know what 7 bit value it uses, for example our character Ğ is 1000111 in the 7-bit alphabet.

Next we need to indicate that we don’t want 1000111 in the 7-bit alphabet to be rendered as “G”, we want to use the “Turkish National Language Single Shift Table” which will render it as “Ğ”. We do this in the User Data Header of the SMS Body, the same way we’d indicate that an SMS is a concatenated SMS.

But by adding a header in the User Data Header of the SMS Body, we eat into the space we can use to send the message body, with a single User Data Header indicating that the Turkish National Language Single Shift Table is being used, we go from a maximum of 160 characters without the User Data Header, to 134 characters.

I’ve shared a lot more information on the User Data Header in this post on Concatenated SMS, should you be interested.

UCS2 Encoding

So that’s all well and good for other languages that have some overlap in letters, where we can substitute “G” for “Ğ”, but Unicode have 3304 emojis defined at the time of writing.

No matter how many shift tables you define, you’re not going to cover all of these in a 7-bit alphabet.

So all this encoding falls to 💩 when someone adds an Emoji.

The “😀” Emoji, represented as U+1F600 in Unicode, can be encoded as 0xF09F9880 in UTF-8 or 0xD83DDE00 in UTF-16.

So in 3GPP Networks, when you need more than 128 characters to work with, and when shift tables won’t cut the mustard, you can change the encoding used to use the International Standards Organisations’ “Universal coded character set 2” (UCS-2).

Unfortunately UCS-2 never really took off, but luckily it overlaps with UTF-16 character set, which is a lot more common.

So if you’ve got a “😀” Emoji in your SMS body the encoding of the message will be changed from GSM-7 to use a different encoding -UTF-16 / UCS2.

SMS Body showing TP-DCS character set is UCS2 / UTF-16 as Emojis are present

There’s a catch here, if you’re moving from a 7-bit alphabet to a 16 bit alphabet, you’re going to have a lot less space to work with.

A single SMS contains 1120 bits for the user data (The actual message).

With GSM-7 bit encoding, each letter takes up 7 bits, so 1120÷7 gives us 160 characters.

With UTF-16/UCS2 encoding, each letter takes up 16 bits so 1120÷16 only give us 70 characters.

So what happens next?

Often when Emojis are used, as our message is now limited to 70 characters concatenated messages are used, which takes a further 8 bytes of our message body if concatenated messages are used, further limiting the message length.

The Surprisingly Complicated World of SMS: Concatenated / Multipart SMS

GSM, IMS / VoLTE, Mobile Networks,

Most people think of 160 characters as the length of an SMS. But the payload is actually 140 bytes, but with better encoding 1 character doesn’t require 1 byte.

The above paragraph is exactly 160 characters. It would fit into a standard SMS.

By using the GSM 7 bit alphabet, you can cram 16 characters into 140 bytes (octets) of space, which is kind of cool.

140 bytes of data containing 160 characters of text

But people often need to convey more text than just 160 characters, or if you’re using characters that don’t exist in the GSM 7-bit alphabet, that limit becomes even less than 160 characters (different encodings other than GSM-7 need more data to transfer the same number of characters) so we get into multipart SMS, another feature in the surprisingly complicated world of SMS.

You’d think if you took a 160 character SMS, and concatenated it onto another 160 character SMS, you’d get a total of 320 characters, right (160+160=320)?
Alas it’s not that simple.

In order to achieve the concatenation of messages in a way that’s transparent to the users (rather than a series of SMSes coming through one-after-the-ther) a User-Data Header (TP-User-Data-Header-Indicator aka TP-UHDI) is added to the TP-User Data of the TPDU (the part that actually contains the user message).

This User-Data Header takes up 7 bytes, which with GSM encoding robs us of 6 characters from the message length. (Not a typo, GSM7 encoding does not mean 1 character = 1 byte, hence we can get 160 characters into 140 bytes of space)
So a two SMS concatenated message would only allow 268 characters to be sent (134 characters + 134 characters).

Let’s take a look at this header that’s robbing us of message length, but enabling us to concatenate messages.

For starters, the information about how many parts in the concatenated message, and what part number this one is, is located in the message body, hence robbing us of characters.

But we only know about the presence of this header being in the message body because the SMS-SUBMIT TPDU has the TP-UDHI flag (TP-User-Data-Header-Indicator) set, so we know the User Data is prefixed with the User-Data-Header.

Now if we have a look in the TP-User-Data we can see the User-Data Header, this can actually carry a few different payloads, but in our case, it’s carrying the Concatenated Short Messages IE, which tells us the message identifier (unique per single-but-multi-part message, the number of parts in the message (in this case 2) and the part number this is (part 1 of 2).

First part of a two part SMS

Now the phone has indicated this is a multipart message, the length of the data is still 160, but the length of the actual message is now limited to 134 characters with GSM7 encoding.

The encoding isn’t as bad as you might expect:
1st byte indicates the total length of the User Data Headers (After this the actual user data begins),
2nd byte is the IE identifier, for Concatenated Short Messages, this is 00,
3rd byte is the length of the Concatenated Short Messages IE,
4th byte is the message identifier in hex,
5th byte is the number of message parts in hex (So up to 255 message parts)
6th byte is the message part number, to aid in putting it back together in order.

3GPP TS 23.040 – 9.2.3.24 TP-User Data (TP-UD) – Encoding of User Data Header and generic IE
Concatenated short message IE encoding

So what we end up with is a header inside our user payload, advising that this is a concatenated SMS, the message identifier, the number of parts in the message, and the part number of this particular message.

Last part of two part SMS

The SMSc on receipt of these has to spool them back out to the destination with the same message part number, and same headers in place.

The phone receiving the SMS has to wait for all the parts to come through and then reassemble before rendering to the user.

So that’s how concatenated SMS works. While this may seem convoluted and silly in a world where transfering more than 140 bytes of data is trivial, SMS was introduced in the early 1990s, and in theory at least, a user with a phone that supported SMS purchased when SMS was introduced, should still be able to interwork with phones today.

Looking inside the MMS Exchange (With call flow and PCAP)

GSM, LTE, Mobile Networks, RFCs & Standards, , ,

So you want to send an MMS?

We’ve covered SMS in the past, but MMS is a different kettle of fish.

Let’s look at how the call flow goes, when Bob wants to send a picture to Alice.

Before Bob sends the MMS, his phone will have to be setup with the correct settings to send MMS.
Sometimes this is done manually, for others it’s done through the Carrier provisioning SMS that preloads the settings, and for others it’s baked in based on the Android Carrier settings XML,

APN settings for Telstra in Australia for MMS

It’s made up of the APN to send MMS traffic over, the MMSC address (Multimedia Message Switching Center) and often an MMS proxy and port combination for where the traffic will actually go.

Message Flow – Bob to MMSC (Mobile Originated MMS)

Bob opens his phone, creates a new message to Alice, selects the picture (or other multimedia filetype) to send to her and hits the send button.

For starters, MMS has a file size limit, like MTU it’s not advertised, so you don’t know if you’ve hit it, so rather like MTU is a “lowest has the highest success of getting through” rule. So Bob’s phone will most likely scale the image down to fit inside 300K.

Next Bob’s phone knows it has an MMS to send, for this is opens up a new bearer on the MMS APN, typically called MMS, but configured in the phone by Bob.

Why use a separate APN for sending 300K of MMS traffic?
Once upon a time mobile data was expensive.
By having a separate APN just for MMS traffic (An APN that could do nothing except send / receive MMS) allowed easier billing / tariffing of data, as MMS traffic was sent over a APN which was unmetered.

After the bearer is setup on the MMS APN, Bob’s phone begins crafting a HTTP 1.1 Post to be sent to the MMSC.
The content type of this request will be application/vnd.wap.mms-message and the body of the HTTP post will be made up of MMS Message Encapsulation, with the body containing the picture he wants to send to Alice.

Note: Historically Wireless Session Protocol (WSP) was used in lieu of HTTP. These clients would now need a WAP gateway to translate into HTTP.

This HTTP Post is then sent to the MMSC Address, or, if present, the MMSC Proxy address.
This traffic is sent over the MMS APN that we just brought up.

HTTP POST Headers for the MO MMS Message

MMS Message Encapsulation from MO MMS Message

The MMSC receives this information, and then, if all was successful, responds with a 200 OK,

200 OK response to MO MMS Message

So now the MMSC has the information from Bob, let’s flip over to Alice.

Message Flow – MMSC to Alice (Mobile Terminated MMS)

For the purposes of simplicity, we’re going to rule out the MMSC from doing clever things like converting the media, accepting email (SMPP) as MMS, etc, etc. Instead we’re going to assume Alice and Bob are on the same Network, and our MMSC is just doing store-and-forward.

The MMSC will look at the To address in the MMS Message Encapsulation of the request Bob sent, to determine that this message is destined for Alice.

The MMSC will load the media content (photo) sent by Bob destined for Alice and serve it via HTTP. The MMSC generates a random URL to serve it this particular file on, with each MMS the MMSC handles being assigned a random URL containing the media content.

Next the MMSC will need to tell Alice’s phone, that she has an MMS waiting for her. This is done by generating an SMS to send to Alice’s phone,

The user-data of this SMS is the Wireless Session Protocol with the method PUSH – Aka WAP Push.

SMS alerting the user of an MMS waiting for delivery

This specially encoded SMS is parsed by the Alice’s phone, which tells the her there is an MMS message waiting for her.

On some operating systems this is pulled automatically, on others, users need to select “Download” to actually get the file.

The UE then just runs an HTTP get to the address in the X-Mms-Content-Location: Header to pull the multimedia content that Bob sent.

HTTP GET from Alice’s Phone / UE to retrieve MMS sent by Bob (MT-MMS)

All going well the URL is valid and Alice’s phone retrieves the message, getting a 200 OK back from the server with the message content.

HTTP Response (200 OK) for MT-MMS, sent by the MMSC to Alice’s phone with the MMS Body

So now Alice’s phone has the MMS content and renders it on the screen, Alice can see the Photo Bob sent her.

Lastly Alice’s phone sends a HTTP POST again to the MMSC, this time indicating the message status is “Retrieved”,

And to close everything off the MMSC confirms receipt of the Retrieved status with a 200 OK, and we are done.

What didn’t we cover?

So that’s a basic MMS message flow, but there’s a few parts we didn’t cover.

The overall architecture beyond just the store-and forward behaviour, charging and authentication we didn’t cover. So let’s look at each of these points.

Overall Architecture

What we just covered what what’s defined as the MM1 interface.

There’s obviously a stack of other interfaces, such as for charging, messaging between MMSC/Carriers, subscriber locating / user database, etc.

Charging

MMSCs would typically have a connection to trigger charging events / credit-control events prior to processing the message.

For online charging the Ro interface can be used, as you would for IMS charging events.

3GPP 3GPP TS 32.270 covers the charging architecture for online/offline charging for MMS.

Authentication

Unfortunately authentication was a bit of an afterthought for the MMS standard, and can be done several different ways.

The most common is to correlate the IP Address on the MMS APN against a subscriber.

Pre-5G Network Slicing

5G SA, EPC, EUTRAN, GSM, LTE, Mobile Networks, RFCs & Standards, , , , ,

Network Slicing, is a new 5G Technology. Or is it?

Pre 3GPP Release 16 the capability to “Slice” a network already existed, in fact the functionality was introduced way back at the advent of GPRS, so what is so new about 5G’s Network Slicing?

Network Slice: A logical network that provides specific network capabilities and network characteristics

3GPP TS 123 501 / 3 Definitions and Abbreviations

Let’s look at the old and the new ways, of slicing up networks, pre release 16, on LTE, UMTS and GSM.

Old Ways: APN Separation

The APN or “Access Point Name” is used so the SGSN / MME knows which gateway to that subscriber’s traffic should be terminated on when setting up the session.

APN separation is used heavily by MVNOs where the MVNO operates their own P-GW / GGSN.
This allows the MNVO can handle their own rating / billing / subscriber management when it comes to data.
A network operator just needs to setup their SGSN / MME to point all requests to setup a bearer on the MVNO’s APN to the MNVO’s gateways, and presoto, it’s no longer their problem.

Later as customers wanted MPLS solutions extended over mobile (Typically LTE), MNOs were able to offer “private APNs”.
An enterprise could be allocated an APN by the MNO that would ensure traffic on that APN would be routed into the enterprise’s MPLS VRF.
The MNO handles the P-GW / GGSN side of things, adding the APN configuration onto it and ensuring the traffic on that APN is routed into the enterprise’s VRF.

Different QCI values can be assigned to each APN, to allow some to have higher priority than others, but by slicing at an APN level you lock all traffic to those QoS characteristics (Typically mobile devices only support one primary APN used for routing all traffic), and don’t have the flexibility to steer which networks which traffic from a subscriber goes to.

It’s not really practical for everyone to have their own APNs, due in part to the namespace limitations, the architecture of how this is usually done limits this, and the simple fact of everyone having to populate an APN unique to them would be a real headache.

5G replaces APNs with “DNNs” – Data Network Names, but the functionality is otherwise the same.

In Summary:
APN separation slices all traffic from a subscriber using a special APN and provide a bearer with QoS/QCI values set for that APN, but does not allow granular slicing of individual traffic flows, it’s an all-or-nothing approach and all traffic in the APN is treated equally.

The old Ways: Dedicated Bearers

Dedicated bearers allow traffic matching a set rule to be provided a lower QCI value than the default bearer. This allows certain traffic to/from a UE to use GBR or Non-GBR bearers for traffic matching the rule.

The rule itself is known as a “TFT” (Traffic Flow Template) and is made up of a 5 value Tuple consisting of IP Source, IP Destination, Source Port, Destination Port & Protocol Number. Both the UE and core network need to be aware of these TFTs, so the traffic matching the TFT can get the QCI allocated to it.

This can be done a variety of different ways, in LTE this ranges from rules defined in a PCRF or an external interface like those of an IMS network using the Rx interface to request a dedicated bearers matching the specified TFTs via the PCRF.

Unlike with 5G network slicing, dedicated bearers still traverse the same network elements, the same MME, S-GW & P-GW is used for this traffic. This means you can’t “locally break out” certain traffic.

In Summary:
Dedicated bearers allow you to treat certain traffic to/from subscribers with different precedence & priority, but the traffic still takes the same path to it’s ultimate destination.

Old Ways: MOCN

Multi-Operator Core Network (MOCN) allows multiple MNOs to share the same active (tower) infrastructure.

This means one eNodeB can broadcast more than one PLMN and server more than one mobile network.

This slicing is very coarse – it allows two operators to share the same eNodeBs, but going beyond a handful of PLMNs on one eNB isn’t practical, and the PLMN space is quite limited (1000 PLMNs per country code max).

In Summary:
MOCN allows slicing of the RAN on a very coarse level, to slice traffic from different operators/PLMNs sharing the same RAN.

Its use is focused on sharing RAN rather than slicing traffic for users.

The Surprisingly Complicated world of MO SMS in IMS/VoLTE

EPC, GSM, IMS / VoLTE, LTE, Mobile Networks, RFCs & Standards, , , ,

Since the beginning of time, SIP has used the 2xx responses to confirm all went OK.

If you thought sending an SMS in a VoLTE/IMS network would see a 2xx OK response and then that’s the end of it, you’d be wrong.

So let’s take a look into sending SMS over VoLTE/IMS networks!

So our story starts with the Subscriber sending an SMS, which generate a SIP MESSAGE.

The Content-Type of this SIP MESSAGE is set to application/vnd.3gpp.sms rather than Text, and that’s because SMS over IMS uses the Short Message Transfer Protocol (SM-TP) inherited from GSM.

The Short Message Transfer Protocol (SM-TP) (Not related to Simple Message Transfer Protocol used in Email clients) is made up of Transfer Protocol Data Units (TPDU) that contain our message information, even though we have the Destination in our SIP headers, it’s again defined in the SM-TP body.

At first this may seem like a bit of duplication, but this allows older SMS Switching Centers (SMSc) to add support for IMS networks without any major changes, just what the SM-TP payload is wrapped up in changes.

SIP MESSAGE Request Body encoded in SM-TP

So back to our SIP MESSAGE request, typed out by the Subscriber, the UE sends this a SIP MESSAGE onto our IMS Network.

The IMS network follows it’s IFCs and routing rules, and makes it to the termination points for SMS traffic – the SMSc.

The SMSc sends back either a 200 OK or a 202 Accepted, and you’d think that’s the end of it, but no.

Our Subscriber still sees “Sending” on the screen, and the SMS is not shown as sent yet.

Instead, when the SMS has been delivered or buffered, relayed, etc, the SMSc generates a new SIP request, (as in new Call-ID / Dialog) with the request type MESSAGE, addressed to the Subscriber.

The payload of this request is another application/vnd.3gpp.sms encoded request body, again, containing SM-TP encoded data.

When the UE receives this, it will then consider the message delivered.

SM-TP encoded Delivery Report

Of course things change slightly when delivery reports are enabled, but that’s another story!

And the call was coming from… INSIDE THE HOUSE. A look at finding UE Locations in LTE

5G SA, EPC, EUTRAN, GSM, LTE, Mobile Networks, RFCs & Standards, Security, , , , ,

Opening Tirade

Ok, admittedly I haven’t actually seen “When a Stranger Calls”, or the less popular sequel “When a stranger Redials” (Ok may have made the last one up).

But the premise (as I read Wikipedia) is that the babysitter gets the call on the landline, and the police trace the call as originating from the landline.

But you can’t phone yourself, that’s not how local loops work – When the murderer goes off hook it loops the circuit, which busys it. You could apply ring current to the line I guess externally but unless our murder has a Ring generator or has setup a PBX inside the house, the call probably isn’t coming from inside the house.

On Topic – The GMLC

The GMLC (Gateway Mobile Location Centre) is a central server that’s used to locate subscribers within the network on different RATs (GSM/UMTS/LTE/NR).

The GMLC typically has interfaces to each of the radio access technologies, there is a link between the GMLC and the CS network elements (used for GSM/UMTS) such as the HLR, MSC & SGSN via Lh & Lg interfaces, and a link to the PS network elements (LTE/NR) via Diameter based SLh and SLg interfaces with the MME and HSS.

The GMLC’s tentacles run out to each of these network elements so it can query them as to a subscriber’s location,

LTE Call Flow

To find a subscriber’s location in LTE Diameter based signaling is used, to query the MME which in turn queries, the eNodeB to find the location.

But which MME to query?

The SLh Diameter interface is used to query the HSS to find out which MME is serving a particular Subscriber (identified by IMSI or MSISDN).

The LCS-Routing-Info-Request is sent by the GMLC to the HSS with the subscriber identifier, and the LCS-Routing-Info-Response is returned by the HSS to the GMLC with the details of the MME serving the subscriber.

Now we’ve got the serving MME, we can use the SLg Diameter interface to query the MME to the location of that particular subscriber.

The MME can report locations to the GMLC periodically, or the GMLC can request the MME provide a location at that point.
For the GMLC to request a subscriber’s current location a Provide-Location-Request is set by the GMLC to the MME with the subscriber’s IMSI, and the MME responds after querying the eNodeB and optionally the UE, with the location info in the Provide-Location-Response.

(I’m in the process of adding support for these interfaces to PyHSS and all going well will release some software shortly to act at a GMLC so people can use this.)

Finding the actual Location

There are a few different ways the actual location of the UE is determined,

At the most basic level, Cell Global Identity (CGI) gives the identity of the eNodeB serving a user.
If you’ve got a 3 sector site each sector typically has its own Cell Global Identity, so you can determine to a certain extent, with the known radiation pattern, bearing and location of the sector, in which direction a subscriber is. This happens on the network side and doesn’t require any input from the UE.
But if we query the UE’s signal strength, this can then be combined with existing RF models and the signal strength reported by the UE to further pinpoint the user with a bit more accuracy. (Uplink and downlink cell coverage based positioning methods)
Barometric pressure and humidity can also be reported by the base station as these factors will impact resulting signal strengths.

Timing Advance (TA) and Time of Arrival (TOA) both rely on timing signals to/from a UE to determine it’s distance from the eNodeB. If the UE is only served by a single cell this gives you a distance from the cell and potentially an angle inside which the subscriber is. This becomes far more useful with 3 or more eNodeBs in working range of the UE, where you can “triangulate” the UE’s location. This part happens on the network side with no interaction with the UE.
If the UE supports it, EUTRAN can uses Enhanced Observed Time Difference (E-OTD) positioning method, which does TOD calcuation does this in conjunction with the UE.

GPS Assisted (A-GPS) positioning gives good accuracy but requires the devices to get it’s current location using the GPS, which isn’t part of the baseband typically, so isn’t commonly implimented.

Uplink Time Difference of Arrival (UTDOA) can also be used, which is done by the network.

So why do we need to get Subscriber Locations?

The first (and most noble) use case that springs to mind is finding the location of a subscriber making a call to emergency services. Often upon calling an emergency services number the GMLC is triggered to get the subscriber’s location in case the call is cut off, battery dies, etc.

But GMLCs can also be used for lots of other purposes, marketing purposes (track a user’s location and send targeted ads), surveillance (track movements of people) and network analytics (look at subscriber movement / behavior in a specific area for capacity planning).

Different countries have different laws regulating access to the subscriber location functions.

Hack to disable Location Reporting on Mobile Networks

If you’re wondering how you can disable this functionality, you can try the below hack to ensure that your phone does not report your location.

  1. Press the power button on your phone
  2. Turn it off

In reality, no magic super stealth SIM cards, special phones or fancy firmware will prevent the GMLC from finding your location.
So far none of the “privacy” products I’ve looked at have actually done anything special at the Baseband level. Most are just snakeoil.

For as long as your device is connected to the network, the passive ways of determining location, such as Uplink Time Difference of Arrival (UTDOA) and the CGI are going to report your location.