In the region region (NEWFIP 2014, NATO Electronic Warfare Force Integration Period.
June 9th to June 20th)
- Part of the training operating SSR MILMODE/IFF equipment, attacking
same equipment etc

proof from a german document [link to adam.curry.com]

SA-11 uses SSR interogation and SSR interception (passively listening
to interogations by other grounds) for target reconaisance - as do most
widely sold airdefense targeting systems. If MH-17 read without
problem, it would have returned the flight-control issued identifyer,
the operators would have ignored it and that's it. However... Imagine
that the reponses on Mode A/C were suppressed (cheap standard jamming
as happens all the time by accident when two planes fly in a line of
sight from the ground antenna and are less then 4km apart). And that
instead a transponder being on the same line of sight from the ground
would have answered to NATO MILMOD (Mode 4/5) requests from a third
party. The SU-11 controllers would have immediately identified it as a
NATO military plane, or if Mode 2 for a Ukrainian plane... In that case
the ATR of the control unit would have pre-selected the plane wrongly,
making MH-17 a "confirmed target". This would be far-fetched if not for
the NATO electronic warfare training doing exactly these scenarios just
a month ago, and if that separatist women were not claiming the
beginning of the use of shadowing tactics in the same timeframe.