Okay, what you say now is a method that didn't occur to me before: I could easily patch smppbox so that an incoming message is forwarded to another connected client, and vice versa.
>From an architectural point of view, regarding Kannel, this is the least interesting one. Also, logging (via sqlbox perhaps?) and a couple of other Kannel goodies (routing) won't be available. I would very much prefer the reroute-smsbox-id option. Even if it poses some implementation challenges that still need to be worked out. But after all else fails, I could come up with a patch for you (that won't go into svn trunk) that does the trick. == Rene From: sangprabv [mailto:sangpr...@gmail.com] Sent: zondag 20 juni 2010 4:08 To: Nikos Balkanas Cc: Rene Kluwen; users@kannel.org Subject: Re: For the ones using (open) smppbox... This scheme is known as relaying between Kannel and it is handled by kannel_*_sms() in the smsc_http.c where by default or we can redefine it by ourself. Using this scheme there will be too many inside hops. And I'm not sure this is the correct solution. I prefer ESME_A <-> SMPPBOX <->ESME_B (The best thing) or ESME_A<->SMPPBOX_A<->BEARERBOX<->SMPPBOX_B<->ESME_B where reroute will be directly handled by smppbox or bearerbox configuration. Well this is a subjective opinion from me. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com On Jun 20, 2010, at 1:24 AM, Nikos Balkanas wrote: There is another way to do this using the sendsms interface. smsbox1->bearerbox1->HTTP smsc->smsbox2->bearerbox2 BR, Nikos ----- Original Message ----- From: sangprabv <mailto:sangpr...@gmail.com> To: Rene Kluwen <mailto:rene.klu...@chimit.nl> Cc: users@kannel.org Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 8:36 PM Subject: Re: For the ones using (open) smppbox... This will be very exciting achievements for Kannel community. It will be an enterprise achievements. +1 for this project Rene. sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com On Jun 20, 2010, at 12:22 AM, Rene Kluwen wrote: Yes, that is the idea. From: sangprabv [mailto:sangpr...@gmail.com] Sent: zaterdag 19 juni 2010 19:12 To: Alejandro Guerrieri Cc: Rene Kluwen; users@kannel.org Subject: Re: For the ones using (open) smppbox... So the configuration would be like this: ESME_A<->SMPPBOX_A<->BEARERBOX<->SMPPBOX_B<->ESME_B is it? sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com On Jun 19, 2010, at 10:46 PM, Alejandro Guerrieri wrote: What about implementing "reroute-smsbox-id" on bearerbox? That would provide a consistent interface, similar to what "reroute-smsc-id" does already. Regards, Alex On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 5:26 PM, sangprabv <sangpr...@gmail.com> wrote: My goal is pass all traffics from ESME A to ESME B and vice versa (it's a about reroute I guess). So there should be and SMPPBOX rather than BEARERBOX in between, CMIIW :) sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com On Jun 19, 2010, at 10:16 PM, Rene Kluwen wrote: > Pass-thru seems to work the other way around. For this to work, your clients > need to run smppbox. > > The setup will be as follows: > > / SMPPBOX_CLIENT_1 > YOUR_BEARERBOX < > \ SMPPBOX_CLIENT_2 > > > With the bearerbox reroute-smsc-id messages can be passed in between the > client. > > Probably this setup is not what you wanted. But it is a possibility. > > == Rene > > > -----Original Message----- > From: sangprabv [mailto:sangpr...@gmail.com] > Sent: zaterdag 19 juni 2010 13:55 > To: Rene Kluwen > Cc: users@kannel.org > Subject: Re: For the ones using (open) smppbox... > > What about a pass-thru(forward) configuration between connections? Is it > possible, let's say we want to pass traffics SMPP_CLIENT_A > <->SMPPBOX<->SMPP_CLIENT_B. > > > > sangprabv > sangpr...@gmail.com > > > On Jun 19, 2010, at 3:31 AM, Rene Kluwen wrote: > >> Today, I committted a patch to smppbox svn trunk that allows for long >> (catenated) messages to be delivered via the same smsc, in case of load >> balancing. >> >> This version obsoletes that patch that is available for download on the >> chimit server. >> >> For the latest (stand-alone) version, use svn co >> https://svn.kannel.org/smppbox/trunk >> >> == Rene Kluwen >> >> >> > > >
