ASK: RRC CONN REQ FAIL

[yudil]

Dear experts,

I have a doubt about what causing rrc connection rejects
With the shallowness of my knowledge, within the rrc connection request from UE's. it contains important values like MCC, MNC, LAC, ecno, and SC.

If it possible the UE give wrong LAC, ecno, SC because in that area there serving by 2 vendors with different RNC?

if it possible it reject caused by ecno?

BR

[wolverine]

What is the reject cause in the RRC CONNECTION REJECT? That should point you in the right direction.

[yudil]

What is the reject cause in the RRC CONNECTION REJECT? That should point you in the right direction.

Thank you Wolverine for the attention,

The rrc just not yet entering for connection setup phase, it just entering the request and it fail. And I cannot find the counter which is describe what causing the rejection. The counter is M1006C20 and explained from NED the rejection because the data is corrupted.

May it corrupted because UE give wrong LAC, ecno, SC because in that area there serving by 2 vendors with different RNC?

[maverrickforever]

hi yudil,

It is never possible that the UE will reject the RRC based on Ec\No,, because there will be one SC giving better Ec/No than the other so the best would be selected. It might be possible that there is some wrong definition of MCC, MNC, LAC, ecno, and SC.Kindly check the database of the sites where you are facing issues. Maximum issues can simply be resolved by just auditing. Good luck and god speed.

[elche]

Which vendors are involved? what tool are you using to extract the data? I've seen errors that turned out to be bugs in the the way the counter was implemented, but users were not really being affected.

[yudil]

hi yudil,

It is never possible that the UE will reject the RRC based on Ec\No,, because there will be one SC giving better Ec/No than the other so the best would be selected. It might be possible that there is some wrong definition of MCC, MNC, LAC, ecno, and SC.Kindly check the database of the sites where you are facing issues. Maximum issues can simply be resolved by just auditing. Good luck and god speed.

many thanks to you

I agree with you, the UE can request rrc connection because it already exceeding the minimum ecno require for camping on that cell. so we discard caused by ecno. And the counter m1006c20 it have described in NED the rrc rejection caused by the cell can't interpreting data from the UE. Since the rrc connection request it just contain LAC, CI, ECNO, MCC, MNC. So it might be there something with the database inconsistency, I will check it. Is it coincidence happen in border between 2 vendors with different rnc without the iur is created between them?

Which vendors are involved? what tool are you using to extract the data? I've seen errors that turned out to be bugs in the the way the counter was implemented, but users were not really being affected.

Thanks elche,

It ZTE and NSN. I'm using netact because I'm work with NSN vendor. Is it bug? why is it can count as a counter? And I have doing the drivetest and i didn't found any problem. Except the interference because other cell from different vendors. Is it user not really being affected? But where it come from the values measurement for that counter.

[jan74]

many thanks to you

I agree with you, the UE can request rrc connection because it already exceeding the minimum ecno require for camping on that cell. so we discard caused by ecno. And the counter m1006c20 it have described in NED the rrc rejection caused by the cell can't interpreting data from the UE. Since the rrc connection request it just contain LAC, CI, ECNO, MCC, MNC. So it might be there something with the database inconsistency, I will check it. Is it coincidence happen in border between 2 vendors with different rnc without the iur is created between them?




Thanks elche,

It ZTE and NSN. I'm using netact because I'm work with NSN vendor. Is it bug? why is it can count as a counter? And I have doing the drivetest and i didn't found any problem. Except the interference because other cell from different vendors. Is it user not really being affected? But where it come from the values measurement for that counter.

I have also seen this in an NSN network and I was told that it is "under investigation". In other words, it is a known bug.