[RFC] WSP Encoding-Version patch reviewed?!

2003-08-19 Thread Stipe Tolj
Hi list,

did someone have the chance to review the patch I send in:

  Subject: [PATCH] WSP Encoding-Version support
  Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 22:17:33 +0200

???

As there haven't been any vetos, I will commit this to cvs to have it
included into 1.3.2 development release.

Any issues that have to be solved before releasing?

(Ok, I know, I asked this several times and most of you will say: Now,
come on, release it now and don't ask stupid questions ;)

After we have 1.3.2 devel we will branch of the devel tree and only
commit fixed for 1.4.0 stable which then (hopefully) will get WAP
certification.

Stipe

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Wapme Systems AG

Vogelsanger Weg 80
40470 Düsseldorf

Tel: +49-211-74845-0
Fax: +49-211-74845-299

E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de
---
wapme.net - wherever you are



UCP 52 behaviour

2003-08-19 Thread Mat
Hi list,
I was wondering why kannel does not have a callback mechanism so that 
when an MT
fails and an NACK is returned after the UCP 52, we can directly update 
our DB.
As some operators does not allow notifications (UCP 53), we have to 
grep/perl/sed
our logfiles, which can be heavy and intrinsecly inconsitent. The 
current DLR mechanism
does that very well, so I'm pretty sure the current code base allow to 
add this easily.
We would just have to provide an mtID during the call to 
/cgi-bin/sendsms ,
which would be reforwarded to an url defined in the config file, or 
given  as
an urlencoded parameter to sendsms.
Did I miss something? Are there any people who implemented such feature?
Does that feature interrest someone ? If we provide a patch, will it be 
integrated ?

Thank you in advance!

Mat.







Re: UCP 52 behaviour

2003-08-19 Thread Andreas Fink

On Dienstag, August 19, 2003, at 05:01  Uhr, Mat wrote:

Hi list,
I was wondering why kannel does not have a callback mechanism so that when an MT
fails and an NACK is returned after the UCP 52, we can directly update our DB.
As some operators does not allow notifications (UCP 53), we have to grep/perl/sed
our logfiles, which can be heavy and intrinsecly inconsitent. The current DLR mechanism
does that very well, so I'm pretty sure the current code base allow to add this easily.
We would just have to provide an mtID during the call to /cgi-bin/sendsms ,
which would be reforwarded to an url defined in the config file, or given  as
an urlencoded parameter to sendsms.
Did I miss something? Are there any people who implemented such feature?
Does that feature interrest someone ? If we provide a patch, will it be integrated ?


I dont know what your problem is...
if the message is NACK'ed at submission, you get SMSC delivery failed report...

Andreas Fink
Global Networks Switzerland AG

--
Tel: +41-61-333  Fax: +41-61-334   Mobile: +41-79-2457333
Global Networks, Inc. Clarastrasse 3, 4058 Basel, Switzerland
Web: http://www.global-networks.ch/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--




Re: UCP 52 behaviour

2003-08-19 Thread Mat
As I said it, some operators does not allow notifications.
That means that if you try to ask a DLR, your are notified
of failure everytime, and you can't send...
Maybe it's not the normal way of running an SMSC,
but the what I'm sure of is that I can't be notified using the
standard DLR mechanism...
Mat.

Andreas Fink wrote:



On Dienstag, August 19, 2003, at 05:01 Uhr, Mat wrote:

Hi list,
I was wondering why kannel does not have a callback mechanism so
that when an MT
fails and an NACK is returned after the UCP 52, we can directly
update our DB.
As some operators does not allow notifications (UCP 53), we have
to grep/perl/sed
our logfiles, which can be heavy and intrinsecly inconsitent. The
current DLR mechanism
does that very well, so I'm pretty sure the current code base
allow to add this easily.
We would just have to provide an mtID during the call to
/cgi-bin/sendsms ,
which would be reforwarded to an url defined in the config file,
or given as
an urlencoded parameter to sendsms.
Did I miss something? Are there any people who implemented such
feature?
Does that feature interrest someone ? If we provide a patch, will
it be integrated ?
I dont know what your problem is...
if the message is NACK'ed at submission, you get SMSC delivery failed 
report...

Andreas Fink
Global Networks Switzerland AG
--
Tel: +41-61-333 Fax: +41-61-334 Mobile: +41-79-2457333
Global Networks, Inc. Clarastrasse 3, 4058 Basel, Switzerland
Web: http://www.global-networks.ch/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--





Re: UCP 52 behaviour

2003-08-19 Thread Andreas Fink

On Dienstag, August 19, 2003, at 07:12  Uhr, Mat wrote:

As I said it, some operators does not allow notifications.
That means that if you try to ask a DLR, your are notified
of failure everytime, and you can't send...
Maybe it's not the normal way of running an SMSC,
but the what I'm sure of is that I can't be notified using the
standard DLR mechanism...

Mat.


if you ask for dlrmask=8,16 or 24 you only get SMSC submission reports.
in this case the ACK or NACK from the SMSC is your delivery report and it shouldnt ask for a delivery report to be issued from the SMSC.
if it still does, then its to be considered a bug but I don't think it does.

Andreas Fink
Global Networks Switzerland AG

--
Tel: +41-61-333  Fax: +41-61-334   Mobile: +41-79-2457333
Global Networks, Inc. Clarastrasse 3, 4058 Basel, Switzerland
Web: http://www.global-networks.ch/  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--




Re: ucp53 from smsc

2003-08-19 Thread Christopher Kho
Thanks for your reply. Weird, I didn't send any sms to
that number. My ip address is not 180.80.31.22 as
well. 

Hmmi think it is my smsc problem...hopefully it is
nothing to do to my kannel setting...


--- Bruno Rodrigues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Christopher Kho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  hi,
  
  I am using kannel v1.2.1. Recently I keep receive
  ucp53 string from my smsc. Below is the sample
 string
  that i received in my bearerbox.
 
 UCP53 are elivery reports (DLR) packets. Have you
 sent any message using
 dlr-mask parameter ?
 is your ip 180.80.31.22 ?
 your sms delivered to you :
 Message for 0193697016, with identification
 030818122843 has been
 delivered on 2003-08-18 at 12:28:52.
 
 you can do
 perl -e 'print pack(H*, hex string);'
 to read it, althouth it should be in text in your
 bearerbox_access.log
 
 


__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com