Hey Alex, I think anything is 'possible' but this SMSC was written specifically to make it easier for users to implement such a scenario. Asking these types of users to now configure loop backs, a sqlbox and more doesn't make it an easy task for them.
The reason I like this solution is it makes it easy for users to implement and it doesn't impact the gateway negatively being a separate SMSC module (ie, use it if you want it). Thanks, Donald Jackson www.panaceamobile.com On 17 Mar 2011, at 11:40 AM, Alexander Malysh wrote: > Hi Donald, > > how about loop SMSC + sqlbox. I think it would be really easy to have such > setup without DB SMSC module? > > Thanks, > Alexander Malysh > > Am 14.03.2011 um 13:57 schrieb Donald Jackson: > >> Hi Rene, >> >> SQLBox is built to be an injection mechanism into the bearerbox (and also >> can be used as a proxy) it's not designed to be an endpoint. I spoke with >> Alejandro about the possibility of simply using SQLBox in this fashion >> without connecting it to a bearerbox and we agreed that this would not be >> the correct solution and more along the lines of a kludge/hack. So rather >> than this I implemented an SMSC DB driver to be used as an endpoint >> (generates ACK's etc on successful inserts) so the behaviour is more defined >> and appropriate. >> >> Hope this makes sense, >> Donald Jackson >> www.panaceamobile.com >> >> >> On 14 Mar 2011, at 2:46 PM, Rene Kluwen wrote: >> >>> What's the advantage of using this driver, over using sqlbox? >>> >>> == Rene >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: devel-boun...@kannel.org [mailto:devel-boun...@kannel.org] On Behalf >>> Of Donald Jackson >>> Sent: Monday, 14 March, 2011 13:39 >>> To: devel@kannel.org >>> Subject: [PATCH] Database SMSC driver >>> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> Here is a new SMSC driver which takes messages and inserts them into a >>> database table for processing. It also polls (configurable) database tables >>> for MO's and DLR's if necessary. >>> >>> This is useful if you have messages incoming over SMPP (or other scenarios I >>> haven't thought of :D) and want them in an easy to use format for bulk >>> processing. >>> >>> I intentionally didn't use the mysql-connection group because it would >>> require too many changes in layers above as the full Cfg* context isn't >>> provided to the driver. It currently only supports MySQL but could support >>> others in future. >>> >>> Enjoy! >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Donald Jackson >>> www.panaceamobile.com >>> >>> >> >> >
