Accessing the UTD [WARNING: Potentially harmful to dumb iBurst modems]

[slimothy]

and its open source btw (iConnect) so like i will be doing, you can code adaptions or read the source to find out what its doing

 

[Ravilj]

IMHO problem with any kind of info - it can be bad for somebody. Try to avoid this. For the most ppl i PM it only after small conversation, to be sure that person know what he is doing. Some of theese persons wanted to be "important man" and published this info even nobody asked them to do so. Simply to open new theme at web-board.

Other peoples obtain this info and can't use it. For these my suggestion is to be patient and wait for the iConnect from Crash.

Why is it such a big problem? Knowledge is meant to be shared as long as the relevant parties are creditted. Blah blah yes it could be bad or dangerous but the user has a choice as to what they do with the information. I am sorry but other people will find such information useful.

 

[GRES]

OK!
The pls also publish recepi of drugs e.t.c.
This is also knowledge . . .

 

[GRES]

And BTW - you obtain this info from somebody, who had reason not to publish it openly. And then YOU desided to disclosure this info. WHY?
Now pls go to Gatecrasher and sort out his problems. Becouse now YOU are responsible for spreading this info amongst peoples.

 

[Gatecrasher]

I just repowered my UTD and now it is working fine. This is great information. The unformatted output really sucks, though. So I now look forward to Iconnect...

 

[Ravilj]

*sigh* Did I force him into using it? Nope. If you get something off the net and try it and something goes wrong...who's fault is it for trying it out or using it? EXACTLY!, yours and yours alone... why!? Cause you had a choice as to whether to use the information or not, nobody forced you to use it.

I dont recall you saying DONT GO TELL ANYONE else. FFS mate, I got the port details and the basestation info from you. I got the other info from someone else.

GRES you have pm.

 

[Gatecrasher]

For what it is worth. This is what I'm picking up in Hyde Park.

Bscc 13 Cost -73 Distance 21 Load 2 (Randburg)
Bscc 4 Cost -84 Distance 30 Load 2 (Brynaston)
Bscc 2 Cost -92 Distance 27 Load 2 (Northcliff)
Bscc 3 Cost -104 Distance 10 Load 2 (Sandton)
Bscc 42 Cost -105 Distance 10 Load 0 (???)
Bscc 26 Cost -105 Distance 33 Load 0 (???)
Bscc 8 Cost -107 Distance 19 Load 1 (Rosebank)
Bscc 18 Cost -107 Distance 24 Load 0 (Olivedale)
Bscc 19 Cost -108 Distance 25 Load 0 (Killarney)

I'm surprised that Sandton is so weak since it is closest to me and almost LOS. Randburg is a little further but clear LOS. So I'm wondering if Sandton is 4 and Bryanston is 3. That would make more sense. What could 26 and 42 be?

 

[GRES]

Don't worry!
You are connected ONLY to Randburg and your signal is very good.

 

[Ravilj]

GRES you have pm.

Gatecrasher I have a similar situation to you. I dont know how effective the Sandton tower is. I am meant to be in its coverage area. Odd :/

 

[regardtv]

In order to see your current Bscc (other than when it "tells you" ... use

rfScan alignedBscc ....

Sandton supposedly consists of 2 towers back to back .. would love to know if they share a single tower code .. doubt it ...

 

[Gatecrasher]

Sandton supposedly consists of 2 towers back to back .. would love to know if they share a single tower code .. doubt it ...

That might explain Bscc 42 since it has the same distance as Bscc 3, and very similar strength.

Far from being unimportant, the distance does seem to equate to relative distances from the respective base stations.

 

[regardtv]

The tower distance,strength & load all impact the selection of the tower by the modem ... Even if the modem has decided on a tower a tower2tower handoff may be forced by the iburst network itself ...

Highly elective process .. and not TOO democratic ;-)

 

[jmn]

I saw in the help that the distance is the one directional flight from the tower to you in usec, which I assume to be microseconds, and which equates to 1200 m in my case for the closest tower and about 8 km on the Sunnyside tower, which are both approximately correct (assuming 3E8 m/s) for the values provided by rfScan. rfScanDsp however shows much greater distances, 16 - 18 x larger.

 

[Gatecrasher]

I saw in the help that the distance is the one directional flight from the tower to you in usec, which I assume to be microseconds, and which equates to 1200 m in my case for the closest tower and about 8 km on the Sunnyside tower, which are both approximately correct (assuming 3E8 m/s) for the values provided by rfScan. rfScanDsp however shows much greater distances, 16 - 18 x larger.

So basically, if you take 30% of the "distance" on rfScan you get the approximate number of kilometers. So in my case Sandton is 3km and Randburg 6.3m. Which seems about right.

It also shows how important line-of-sight is - given that Bryanston which is 9km away, and to which I have direct LOS, gives a much stronger signal than Sandton where I don't have direct LOS.

 

[GRES]

2 Gatecrasher:

Bscc 42 - GHOST!
such Bscc doesn't exist.

 

[TheRoDent]

Wow, the ridiculousness of people worrying about nincompoops bricking their iBurst UT's is insane.

I will take this one step further so that the secrecy in this entire UTD accessing thing can get slammed once and for all. I don't easily agree with Gatecrasher but I think that keeping this stuff "sekret" to protect "idiots" is silly, and counter-productive.

http://rodent.za.net/iBurstUTDHacking

There. It's out there, in the open. Now everyone can play.

 

[Roman4604]

http://rodent.za.net/iBurstUTDHacking

There. It's out there, in the open. Now everyone can play.

Page empty ... or am I missing something?

 

[TheRoDent]

It's there....

 

[Roman4604]

It's there....

OK is now.

 

[Unchained]

Also on http://www.unchained.co.za/iBurst/ with a bit of additional info.