From: Alex J Lennon <ajlennon@dynamicdevices.co.uk>
To: ofono@ofono.org
Subject: Re: Problems provisioning APN from SIMs
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 15:09:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <557ADA0F.9000702@dynamicdevices.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55715DDB.7090204@dynamicdevices.co.uk>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2165 bytes --]
On 05/06/2015 10:29, Alex J Lennon wrote:
>
> On 05/06/2015 01:48, Denis Kenzior wrote:
>> Hi Marcel,
>>
>>> The actual MCC and MNC assignments are ITU T E.212 and the (U)SIM
>>> Header of the ICCID is ITU T E.118 document.
>>>
>>> And as a side note, the (U)SIM Header is between 6 and 7 digits. The
>>> MNC is between 2 and 3 digits.
>> So in theory E212 should be enough. Each operator (MVNO or otherwise)
>> should have its own MCC/MNC identifier. However, this practice came
>> in too late to the game, so this is not true in reality.
>>
>> Many operators assigned MVNO SIMs out of their pool, resulting in
>> chaos. Hence why DBs resort to playing tricks with EFspn, EFgid1, etc.
>>
>> I suspect newly issues SIMs do not have this problem, but it might
>> still be relevant for SIMs issued in the past.
> Thanks Denis, Marcel. I appreciate the responses.
>
> So, in essence there seems no good way to do this in the general case.
> The core problem is that multiple operators have the same MCC/MNC, and
> this is a result of virtual operators piggy-backing on top of
> established operators and being given the same MCC/MNC.
>
> The mobile-broadband-providers XML document accurately expresses this,
> but as a result provides multiple providers with the same MCC/MNC code
> and there needs to be a good way to distinguish between them.
>
> Using the display name may work but strikes me as a potential can of
> worms as this does not seem particularly controlled.
>
> For now I may just have to remove the virtual operators from the copy of
> mobile-broadband-providers I use.
>
> Thanks/Regards, Alex
>
> _______________________________________________
> ofono mailing list
> ofono(a)ofono.org
> https://lists.ofono.org/mailman/listinfo/ofono
>
fwiw mobile-broadband-provider-info has now been updated to give O2 and
Vodafone preference over the ASDA Mobile and Giff Gaff virtual operators.
ref: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=750330
So with a patch for Ofono to support multiple APNs and this latest
database O2/Vodafone SIMS should work out of the box in the UK.
Regards, Alex
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-12 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-03 12:07 Problems provisioning APN from SIMs Alex J Lennon
2015-06-04 19:52 ` Denis Kenzior
2015-06-04 20:23 ` Alex J Lennon
2015-06-04 21:03 ` Denis Kenzior
2015-06-04 21:59 ` Alex J Lennon
2015-06-04 22:05 ` Alex J Lennon
2015-06-04 22:16 ` Denis Kenzior
2015-06-04 22:30 ` Marcel Holtmann
2015-06-04 22:50 ` Marcel Holtmann
2015-06-04 23:48 ` Denis Kenzior
2015-06-05 8:29 ` Alex J Lennon
2015-06-12 13:09 ` Alex J Lennon [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=557ADA0F.9000702@dynamicdevices.co.uk \
--to=ajlennon@dynamicdevices.co.uk \
--cc=ofono@ofono.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox