One of the guys at work asked a seemingly simple question, is the PLMN with MCC 505 and MNC 57 the same as MCC 505 MNC 057 – It’s on 6 octets after all.
So is Mobile Network Code 57 the same as Mobile Network Code 057 in the PLMN code?
The answer is no, and it’s a massive pain in the butt.
All countries use 3 digit Mobile Country Codes, so Australia, is 505. That part is easy.
The tricky part is that some countries (Like Australia) use 2 digit Mobile Network Codes, while others (Like the US) use 3 digit mobile network codes.
Why would you do this? Why would a regulator opt to have 1/10th the addressable size of network codes – I don’t know, and I haven’t been able to find an answer – If you know please drop a comment, I’d love to know.
That’s all well and good from a SIM perspective, but less useful for scenarios where you might be the Visited PLMN for example, and only see the IMSI of a Subscriber.
We worked on a project in a country that mixed both 2 digit and 3 digit Mobile Network Codes, under the same Mobile Country Code. Certain Qualcomm phones would do very very strange things, and it took us a long time and a lot of SIM OTA to resolve the issue, but that’s a story for another 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.
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.
In the past I had my iFCs setup to look for the P-Access-Network-Info header to know if the call was coming from the IMS, but it wasn’t foolproof – Fixed line IMS subs didn’t have this header.
Recently I’ve been working on open source Diameter Routing Agent implementations (See my posts on FreeDiameter).
With the hurdles to getting a DRA working with open source software covered, the next step was to get all my Diameter traffic routed via the DRAs, however I soon rediscovered a Kamailio limitation regarding support for Diameter Routing Agents.
You see, when Kamailio’s C Diameter Peer module makes a decision as to where to route a request, it looks for the active Diameter peers, and finds a peer with the suitable Vendor and Application IDs in the supported Applications for the Application needed.
Unfortunately, a DRA typically only advertises support for one application – Relay.
This means if you have everything connected via a DRA, Kamailio’s CDP module doesn’t see the Application / Vendor ID for the Diameter application on the DRA, and doesn’t route the traffic to the DRA.
The fix for this was twofold, the first step was to add some logic into Kamailio to determine if the Relay application was advertised in the Capabilities Exchange Request / Answer of the Diameter Peer.
I added the logic to do this and exposed this so you can see if the peer supports Diameter relay when you run “cdp.list_peers”.
With that out of the way, next step was to update the routing logic to not just reject the candidate peer if the Application / Vendor ID for the required application was missing, but to evaluate if the peer supports Diameter Relay, and if it does, keep it in the game.
I added this functionality, and now I’m able to use CDP Peers in Kamailio to allow my P-CSCF, S-CSCF and I-CSCF to route their traffic via a Diameter Routing Agent.
The Network Repository Function plays matchmaker to all the elements in our 5G Core.
For our 5G Service-Based-Architecture (SBA) we use Service Based Interfaces (SBIs) to communicate between Network Functions. Sometimes a Network Function acts as a server for these interfaces (aka “Service Producer”) and sometimes it acts as a client on these interfaces (aka “Service Consumer”).
For service consumers to be able to find service producers (Clients to be able to find servers), we need a directory mechanism for clients to be able to find the servers to serve their needs, this is the role of the NRF.
With every Service Producer registering to the NRF, the NRF has knowledge of all the available Service Producers in the network, so when a Service Consumer NF comes along (Like an AMF looking for UDM), it just queries the NRF to get the details of who can serve it.
Basic Process – NRF Registration
In order to be found, a service producer NF has to register with the NRF, so the NRF has enough info on the service-producer to be able to recommend it to service-consumers.
This is all the basic info, the Service Based Interfaces (SBIs) that this NF serves, the PLMN, and the type of NF.
The NRF then stores this information in a database, ready to be found by SBI Service Consumers.
This is achieved by the Service Producing NF sending a HTTP2 PUT to the NRF, with the message body containing all the particulars about the services it offers.
Simplified example of an SMSc registering with the NRF in a 5G Core
Basic Process – NRF Discovery
With an NRF that has a few SBI Service Producers registered in it, we can now start querying it from SBI Service Consumers, to find SBI Service Producers.
The SBI Service Consumer looking for a SBI Service Producer, queries the NRF with a little information about itself, and the SBI Service Producer it’s looking for.
For example a SMF looking for a UDM, sends a request like:
There’s no such thing as a free lunch, and 5G is the same – services running through a 5G Standalone core need to be billed.
In 5G Core Networks, the SMF (Session Management Function) reaches out to the CHF (Charging Function) to perform online charging, via the Nchf_ConvergedCharging Service Based Interface (aka reference point).
Like in other generations of core mobile networks, Credit Control in 5G networks is based on 3 functions: Requesting a quota for a subscriber from an online charging service, which if granted permits the subscriber to use a certain number of units (in this case data transferred in/out). Just before those units are exhausted sending an update to request more units from the online charging service to allow the service to continue. When the session has ended or or subscriber has disconnected, a termination to inform the online charging service to stop billing and refund any unused credit / units (data).
Initial Service Creation (ConvergedCharging_Create)
When the SMF needs to setup a session, (For example when the AMF sends the SMF a Nsmf_PDU_SessionCreate request), the CTF (Charging Trigger Function) built into the SMF sends a Nchf_ ConvergedCharging_Create (Initial, Quota Requested) to the Charging Function (CHF).
Because the Nchf_ConvergedCharging interface is a Service Based Interface this is carried over HTTP, in practice, this means the SMF sends a HTTP post to http://yourchargingfunction/Nchf_ConvergedCharging/v1/chargingdata/
Obviously there’s some additional information to be shared rather than just a HTTP post, so the HTTP post includes the ChargingDataRequest as the Request Body. If you’ve dealt with Diameter Credit Control you may be expecting the ChargingDataRequest information to be a huge jumble of nested AVPs, but it’s actually a fairly short list:
The subscriberIdentifier (SUPI) is included to identify the subscriber so the CHF knows which subscriber to charge
The nfConsumerIdentification identifies the SMF generating the request (The SBI Consumer)
The invocationTimeStamp and invocationSequenceNumber are both pretty self explanatory; the time the request is sent and the sequence number from the SBI consumer
The notifyUri identifies which URI should receive subsequent notifications from the CHF (For example if the CHF wants to terminate the session, the SMF to send that to)
The multipleUnitUsage defines the service-specific parameters for the quota being requested.
The triggers identifies the events that trigger the request
Of those each of the fields should be pretty self explanatory as to their purpose. The multipleUnitUsage data is used like the Service Information AVP in Diameter based Credit Control, in that it defines the specifics of the service we’re requesting a quota for. Inside it contains a mandatory ratingGroup specifying which rating group the CHF should use, and optionally requestedUnit which can define either the amount of service units being requested (For us this is data in/out), or to tell the CHF units are needed. Typically this is used to define the amount of units to be requested.
On the amount of units requested we have a bit of a chicken-and-egg scenario; we don’t know how many units (In our case the units is transferred data in/out) to request, if we request too much we’ll take up all the customer’s credit, potentially prohibiting them from accessing other services, and not enough requested and we’ll constantly slam the CHF with requests for more credit. In practice this value is somewhere between the two, and will vary quite a bit.
Based on the service details the SMF has put in the Nchf_ ConvergedCharging_Create request, the Charging Function (CHF) takes into account the subscriber’s current balance, credit control policies, etc, and uses this to determine if the Subscriber has the required balances to be granted a service, and if so, sends back a 201 CREATED response back to the Nchf_ConvergedCharging_Create request sent by the CTF inside the SMF.
This 201 CREATED response is again fairly clean and simple, the key information is in the multipleQuotaInformation which is nested within the ChargingDataResponse, which contains the finalUnitIndication defining the maximum units to be granted for the session, and the triggers to define when to check in with CHF again, for time, volume and quota thresholds.
And with that, the service is granted, the SMF can instruct the UPF to start allowing traffic through.
Update (ConvergedCharging_Update)
Once the granted units / quota has been exhausted, the Update (ConvergedCharging_Update) request is used for requesting subsequent usage / quota units. For example our Subscriber has used up all the data initially allocated but is still consuming data, so the SMF sends a Nchf_ConvergedCharging_Update request to request more units, via another HTTP post, to the CHF, with the requested service unit in the request body in the form of ChargingDataRequest as we saw in the initial ConvergedCharging_Create.
If the subscriber still has credit and the CHF is OK to allow their service to continue, the CHF returns a 200 OK with the ChargingDataResponse, again, detailing the units to be granted.
This procedure repeats over and over as the subscriber uses their allocated units.
Release (ConvergedCharging_Release)
Eventually when our subscriber disconnects, the SMF will generate a Nchf_ConvergedCharging_Release request, detailing the data the subscriber used in the ChargingDataRequest in the body, to the CHF, so it can refund any unused credits.
The CHF sends back a 204 No Content response, and the procedure is completed.
More Info
If you’ve had experience in Diameter credit control, this simple procedure will be a breath of fresh air, it’s clean and easy to comprehend, If you’d like to learn more the 3GPP specification docs on the topic are clear and comprehensible, I’d suggest:
TS 132 290 – Short overview of charging mechanisms
TS 132 291 – Specifics of the Nchf_ConvergedCharging interface
The common 3GPP charging architecture is specified in TS 32.240
TS 132 291 – Overview of components and SBIs inc Operations
While reading through the 3GPP docs regarding Online Charging, there’s a concept that can be a tad confusing, and that’s the difference between Centralized and Non-Centralized Charging architectures.
The overall purpose of online charging is to answer that deceptively simple question of “does the user have enough credit for this action?”.
In order to answer that question, we need to perform rating and unit determination.
Rating
Rating is just converting connectivity credit units into monetary units.
If you go to the supermarket and they have boxes of Jaffa Cakes at $2.50 each, they have rated a box of Jaffa Cakes at $2.50.
1 Box of Jaffa Cakes rated at $2.50 per box
In a non-snack-cake context, such as 3GPP Online Charging, then we might be talking about data services, for example $1 per GB is a rate for data. Or for a voice calls a cost per minute to call a destination, such as is $0.20 per minute for a local call.
Rating is just working out the cost per connectivity unit (Data or Minutes) into a monetary cost, based on the tariff to be applied to that subscriber.
Unit Determination
The other key piece of information we need is the unit determination which is the calculation of the number of non-monetary units the OCS will offer prior to starting a service, or during a service.
This is done after rating so we can take the amount of credit available to the subscriber and calculate the number of non-monetary units to be offered.
Converting Hard-Currency into Soft-Snacks
In our rating example we rated a box of Jaffa Cakes at $2.50 per box. If I have $10 I can go to the shops and buy 4x boxes of Jaffa cakes at $2.50 per box. The cashier will perform unit determination and determine that at $2.50 per box and my $10, I can have 4 boxes of Jaffa cakes.
Again, steering away from the metaphor of the hungry author, Unit Determination in a 3GPP context could be determining how many minutes of talk time to be granted. Question: At $0.20 per minute to a destination, for a subscriber with a current credit of $20, how many minutes of talk time should they be granted? Answer: 100 minutes ($20 divided by $0.20 per minute is 100 minutes).
Or to put this in a data perspective, Question: Subscriber has $10 in Credit and data is rated at $1 per GB. How many GB of data should the subscriber be allowed to use? Answer: 10GB.
Putting this Together
So now we understand rating (working out the conversion of connectivity units into monetary units) and unit determination (determining the number of non-monetary units to be granted for a given resource), let’s look at the the Centralized and Decentralized Online Charging.
Centralized Rating
In Centralized Rating the CTF (Our P-GW or S-CSCF) only talk about non-monetary units. There’s no talk of money, just of the connectivity units used.
The CTFs don’t know the rating information, they have no idea how much 1GB of data costs to transfer in terms of $$$.
For the CTF in the P-GW/PCEF this means it talks to the OCS in terms of data units (data In/out), not money.
For the CTF in the S-CSCF this means it only ever talks to the OCS in voice units (minutes of talk time), not money.
This means our rates only need to exist in the OCS, not in the CTF in the other network elements. They just talk about units they need.
De-Centralized Rating
In De-Centralized Rating the CTF performs the unit conversion from money into connectivity units. This means the OCS and CTF talk about Money, with the CTF determining from that amount of money granted, what the subscriber can do with that money.
This means the CTF in the S-CSCF needs to have a rating table for all the destinations to determine the cost per minute for a call to a destination.
And the CTF in the P-GW/PCEF has to know the cost per octet transferred across the network for the subscriber.
In previous generations of mobile networks it may have been desirable to perform decentralized rating, as you can spread the load of calculating our the pricing, however today Centralized is the most common way to approach this, as ensuring the correct rates are in each network element is a headache.
Centralized Unit Determination
In Centralized Unit Determination the CTF tells the OCS the type of service in the Credit Control Request (Requested Service Units), and the OCS determines the number of non-monetary units of a certain service the subscriber can consume.
The CTF doesn’t request a value, just tells the OCS the service being requested and subscriber, and the OCS works out the values.
For example, the S-CSCF specifies in the Credit Control Request the destination the caller wishes to reach, and the OCS replies with the amount of talk time it will grant.
Or for a subscriber wishing to use data, the P-GW/PCEF sends a Credit Control Request specifying the service is data, and the OCS responds with how much data the subscriber is entitled to use.
De-Centralized Unit Determination
In De-Centralized Unit Determination, the CTF determines how many units are required to start the service, and requests these units from the OCS in the Credit Control Request.
For a data service,the CTF in the P-GW would determine how many data units it is requesting for a subscriber, and then request that many units from the OCS.
For a voice call a S-CSCF may request an initial call duration, of say 5 minutes, from the OCS. So it provides the information about the destination and the request for 300 seconds of talk time.
Session Charging with Unit Reservation (SCUR)
Arguably the most common online charging scenario is Session Charging with Unit Reservation (SCUR).
SCUR relies on reserving an amount of funds from the subscriber’s balance, so no other services can those funds and translating that into connectivity units (minutes of talk time or data in/out based on the Requested Session Unit) at the start of the session, and then subsequent requests to debit the reserved amount and reserve a new amount, until all the credit is used.
This uses centralized Unit Determination and centralized Rating.
Let’s take a look at how this would look for the CTF in a P-GW/PCEF performing online charging for a subscriber wishing to use data:
Session Request: The subscriber has attached to the network and is requesting service.
The CTF built into the P-GW/PCEF sends a Credit Control Request: Initial Request (As this subscriber has just attached) to the OCS, with Requested Service Units (RSU) of data in/out to the OCS.
The OCS performs rating and unit determination, and according to it’s credit risk policies, and a whole lot of other factors, comes back with an amount of data the subscriber can use, and reserves the amount from the account. (It’s worth noting at this point that this is not necessarily all of the subscriber’s credit in the form of data, just an amount the OCS is willing to allocate. More data can be requested once this allocated data is used up.)
The OCS sends a Credit Control Answer back to our P-GW/PCEF. This contains the Granted Service Unit (GSU), in our case the GSU is data so defines much data up/down the user can transfer. It also may include a Validity Time (VT), which is the number of seconds the Credit Control Answer is valid for, after it’s expired another Credit Control Request must be sent by the CTF.
Our P-GW/PCEF processes this, starts measuring the data used by the subscriber for reporting later, and sets a timer for the Validity Time to send another CCR at that point. At this stage, our subscriber is able to start using data.
Some time later, either when all the data allocated in the Granted Service Units has been consumed, or when the Validity Time has expired, the CTF in the P-GW/PCEF sends another Credit Control Request:Update, and again includes the RSU (Requested Service Units) as data in/out, and also a USU (Used Service Units) specifying how much data the subscriber has used since the first Credit Control Answer.
The OCS receives this information. It compares the Used Session Units to the Granted Session Units from earlier, and with this is able to determine how much data the subscriber has actually used, and therefore how much credit that equates to, and debit that amount from the account. With this information the OCS can reserve more funds and allocate another GSU (Granted Session Unit) if the subscriber has the required balance. If the subscriber only has a small amount of credit left the FUI (Final Unit Indication AVP) is set to determine this is all the subscriber has left in credit, and if this is exhausted to end the session, rather than sending another Credit Control Request.
The Credit Control Answer with new GSU and the FUI is sent back to the P-GW/PCEF
The P-GW/PCEF allows the session to continue, again monitoring used traffic against the GSU (Granted Session Units).
Once the subscriber has used all the data in the Granted Session Units, and as the last CCA included the Final Unit Indicator, the CTF in the P-GW/PCEF knows it can’t just request more credit in the form of a CCR Update, so cuts of the subscribers’s session.
The P-GW/PCEF then sends a Credit Control Request: Termination Request with the final Used Service Units to the OCS.
The OCS debits the used service units from the subscriber’s balance, and refunds any unused credit reservation.
The OCS sends back a Credit Control Answer which may include the CI value for Credit Information, to denote the cost information which may be passed to the subscriber if required.
Today, we’re going to look at one of the simplest Service Based Interfaces in the 5G Core, the Equipment Identity Register (EIR).
The purpose of the EIR is very simple – When a subscriber connects to the network it’s Permanent Equipment Identifier (PEI) can be queried against an EIR to determine if that device should be allowed onto the network or not.
The PEI is the IMEI of a phone / device, with the idea being that stolen phones IMEIs are added to a forbidden list on the EIR, and prohibited from connecting to the network, making them useless, in turn making stolen phones harder to resell, deterring mobile phone theft.
In reality these forbidden-lists are typically either country specific or carrier specific, meaning if the phone is used in a different country, or in some cases a different carrier, the phone’s IMEI is not in the forbidden-list of the overseas operator and can be freely used.
The dialog goes something like this:
AMF: Hey EIR, can PEI 49-015420-323751-8 connect to the network?
EIR: (checks if 49-015420-323751-8 in forbidden list - It's not) Yes.
or
AMF: Hey EIR, can PEI 58-241992-991142-3 connect to the network?
EIR: (checks if 58-241992-991142-3 is in forbidden list - It is) No.
(Optionally the SUPI can be included in the query as well, to lock an IMSI to an IMEI, which is a requirement in some jurisdictions)
As we saw in the above script, the AMF queries the EIR using the N5g-eir_EquipmentIdentityCheck service.
The N5g-eir_EquipmentIdentityCheck service only offers one operation – CheckEquipmentIdentity.
It’s called by sending an HTTP GET to:
http://{apiRoot}/n5g-eir-eic/v1/equipment-status
Obviously we’ll need to include the PEI (IMEI) in the HTTP GET, which means if you remember back to basic HTTP GET, you may remember means you have to add ?attribute=value&attribute=value… for each attribute / value you want to share.
For the CheckEquipmentIdentity operation, the PEI is a mandatory parameter, and optionally the SUPI can be included, this means to query our PEI (The IMSI of the phone) against our EIR we’d simply send an HTTP GET to:
AMF: HTTP GET http://{apiRoot}/n5g-eir-eic/v1/equipment-status?pei=490154203237518
EIR: 200 (Body EirResponseData: status "WHITELISTED")
And how it would look for a blacklisted IMEI:
AMF: HTTP GET http://{apiRoot}/n5g-eir-eic/v1/equipment-status?pei=490154203237518
EIR: 404 (Body EirResponseData: status "BLACKLISTED")
Because it’s so simple, the N5g-eir_EquipmentIdentityCheck service is a great starting point for learning about 5G’s Service Based Interfaces.
