Cisco Cisco Packet Data Gateway (PDG)
GGSN Changes in Release 16
▀ GGSN Enhancements for 16.0
▄ Release Change Reference, StarOS Release 16
154
qci8-dwlinkpkt-drop-mbrexcd
qci8-uplinkbyte-drop-mbrexcd
qci8-dwlinkbyte-drop-mbrexcd
qci8-rejbearer
qci9-uplinkpkt-drop-mbrexcd
qci9-dwlinkpkt-drop-mbrexcd
qci9-uplinkbyte-drop-mbrexcd
qci9-dwlinkbyte-drop-mbrexcd
qci9-rejbearer
invalidqci-rejbearer
CSCuh35139 - PGW SM sync up with driver [Phase 1]
Feature Changes
Change in message generation towards access side
Previous Behavior:
1. In case of GTP-U error indication, P-GW was sending out Delete Bearer Request and was waiting for response
before doing the clean up.
2. If there was a collision between GTP messages and the older transaction got aborted, until now any PCRF rules
coming in the response for that transaction were getting aborted.
New Behavior:
1. In case of GTP-U error indication, P-GW will align with GGSN and not send any Delete Bearer Request out. It
will do the required clean up locally.
2. If there is a collision between GTP messages and the older transaction gets aborted, the old behavior will be
retained if the transaction was pending at Gy/Rf when it got aborted. If, however, it was pending at PCRF,
these rules will now be processed.
these rules will now be processed.
Customer Impact:
1. In case of GTP-U error indication, the message was not needed since the peer does not have that particular
bearer.
2. Customer will start seeing some rules processed, in case of collision, which were not processed before.
CSCul59203 - GGSN Rf Record populated with SGSN MCC-MNC AVP as ????
Feature Changes
Support for Invalid MCC-MNC Received in GTPC ULI
Previous Behavior: Earlier GGSN decoded invalid MCC-MNC in GTPC parameter User Location Information (ULI)
into ASCII special characters like “?”, etc. This invalid value was sent over Rf and Gx in AVP: 3GPP-SGSN-MCC-
MNC.
into ASCII special characters like “?”, etc. This invalid value was sent over Rf and Gx in AVP: 3GPP-SGSN-MCC-
MNC.