Hi
My name is Damir and I am a founder of a Croatian based company called
*Socket d.o.o. *
We are currently working on an *ETSI compliant Lawful
Interception*solution; It is a
work in progress but we already have couple of clients in need of this
solution.
The problem with *LI*is that govern
Hi
Like I sad, I don't have the complete documentation ready, but
this is the general format:
+-+
| Version |
| (1 Octet) |
| |
+-+
| PDU Type
On May 11, 2019, at 2:51 PM, Damir Franusic wrote:
> PDU types are extendable and there might be more of them in the future. I
> wanted to make it like this so adding new types would not present a big
> issue. I can define the two PDU types used at present moment but maybe it
> would be more p
On May 11, 2019, at 1:39 PM, Damir Franusic wrote:
> Like I sad, I don't have the complete documentation ready,
When you have the complete documentation ready, let us know.
> but this is the general format:
>
> +-+
> | Version |
> |
On May 11, 2019, at 7:26 AM, Damir Franusic wrote:
> *Example tshark output for IRI:*
...
> ELEE Protocol
>Protocol version: 1
>PDU type: Target PDU (1)
>Source node: elee.ppd.node_1
>Destination node: .
>Target PDU
>Lawful interception identifier: dhcp_li_id
PDU types are extendable and there might be more of them in the future. I
wanted to make it like this so adding new types would not present a big issue.
I can define the two PDU types used at present moment but maybe it would be
more practical to leave PDU payload part as generic octet stream i
No problem, I will do my best to describe the current version, you'll get it
tomorrow.
Thank You for being so prompt
On May 12, 2019 12:02:42 AM GMT+02:00, Guy Harris wrote:
>On May 11, 2019, at 2:51 PM, Damir Franusic
>wrote:
>
>> PDU types are extendable and there might be more of them in th
