From 410446cbe9132474343cf943ae655b75cbb188bb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Cedric Roux Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 16:15:04 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] e1: no need to pass security information since it does not change In Bearer Context Modification Request, the security information field is needed only if we change the PDCP algorithms/keys. Since we don't, no need to pass it. Let's keep the old code, maybe the current understanding of the specifications is wrong. --- openair2/RRC/NR/rrc_gNB.c | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/openair2/RRC/NR/rrc_gNB.c b/openair2/RRC/NR/rrc_gNB.c index 6cfb0047af..d9e83bb4c2 100644 --- a/openair2/RRC/NR/rrc_gNB.c +++ b/openair2/RRC/NR/rrc_gNB.c @@ -816,9 +816,17 @@ static void cuup_notify_reestablishment(gNB_RRC_INST *rrc, gNB_RRC_UE_t *ue_p) /* increase DRB to modify counter */ pdu_e1->numDRB2Modify += 1; } + +#if 0 + /* According to current understanding of E1 specifications, it is not needed + * to send security information because this does not change. + * But let's keep the code here in case it's needed. + */ // Always send security information req.secInfo = malloc_or_fail(sizeof(*req.secInfo)); fill_security_info(rrc, ue_p, req.secInfo); +#endif + /* Send E1 Bearer Context Modification Request (3GPP TS 38.463) */ sctp_assoc_t assoc_id = get_existing_cuup_for_ue(rrc, ue_p); rrc->cucp_cuup.bearer_context_mod(assoc_id, &req);