Please unsubscribe me from this list-the automated unsubscribe option appears not to be working.
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Paul Bagyenda <bagye...@dsmagic.com>wrote: > The SMS actually contains the DLR as an MMS. Size will vary depending on > the content of the DLR. > On Jul 21, 2011, at 06:16, Deborah Pisani wrote: > > Hi Paul,**** > ** ** > Thank you for your response. However, what is still not clear to us (as > also described in our earlier query) is that while normally only one SMS is > generated corresponding to the retrieval report, in the case of MMS > exchanged between users in different domains, two SMSs are instead being > generated corresponding to a single retrieval report.**** > ** ** > We appreciate your feedback also on this aspect.**** > ** ** > Thank you.**** > ** ** > Best Regards,**** > **** > **** > Deborah and Andrew**** > ** ** > ** ** > *From:* bagye...@infocom.co.ug [mailto:bagye...@infocom.co.ug] *On Behalf > Of *Paul Bagyenda > *Sent:* 21 July 2011 11:58 > *To:* Deborah Pisani > *Cc:* email@example.com > *Subject:* Re: [Users] Retrieval Report for MMS sent over MM4**** > ** ** > The report might be different for all kinds of reasons. The report contains > information about the recipient, the message ID, etc. If any of those fields > changes, then the report will be different. What matters is that the sender > is able to match the report to what was sent.**** > On Jul 21, 2011, at 04:47, Deborah Pisani wrote:**** > > > **** > Dear all,**** > **** > We are currently testing MM4 between two Mbuni MMSCs by sending MMS from > the originator in one domain to the recipient in another domain.**** > **** > We are using the fakesmsc simulator and are observing the following trace > corresponding to the Push Notification from the terminating Mbuni MMSC > towards the recipient:**** > **** > *2011-07-18 16:03:35   DEBUG: Got message 27: <654321 > +35699123456 udh %06%05%04%0B%84%23%F0 > %01%06%03%BE%AF%84%8C%82%98mmsc-qf7597.1.x378.83%00%8D%90%89%18%80%2B35679637963%2FTYPE%3DPLMN%00%8A%80%8E%02%01%87%88%04%81%02%01%82%83http%3A%2F%2Fmmsc%2Fqf7597.1.x378.83%402%2Fy%00> > ***** > **** > After the recipient retrieves the MMS, the following SMS traces > corresponding to the retrieval report are generated from the originating > Mbuni MMSC towards the MMS originator:**** > **** > *2011-07-18 16:05:38   DEBUG: Got message 111: <54321 > +35679637963 udh %0B%05%04%0B%84%23%F0%00%03%3E%02%01 > %01%06%03%BE%AF%84%8C%86%98%2B35679637963%2FTYPE%3DPLMN-mmsc-qf7838.2.x378.5%22%00%8D%90Return-Path%00%3C%2B35699123456%2FTYPE%3DPLMN% > 40mmsc.sp1.com.mt%3E%00X-Mbuni-User-Agent%00>***** > *2011-07-18 16:05:38   DEBUG: Got message 112: <54321 > +35679637963 udh %0B%05%04%0B%84%23%F0%00%03%3E%02%02 > OPWV-SDK+UP.Browser%2F220.127.116.11.119+(GUI)+MMP%2F2.0+Push%2FPO%00X-Mbuni-Profile-Url%00http%3A%2F% > 2Fdevgate2.openwave.com%2Fuaprof%2FOPWVSDK70.xml%00X-Mb>***** > **** > We noted that this retrieval report is different when compared to the > retrieval report generated when the MMS originator and recipient belong to > the same domain. In the latter case, the retrieval report consists of a > single rather than two SMS and the content is also different. Kindly let us > know whether:**** > (a) The retrieval report is expected to be different when an MMS is > exchanged between two domains **** > (b) We are interpreting the SMS traces correctly in saying that they > correspond to the retrieval report as otherwise the traces would indicate > that the originating Mbuni MMSC is not generating a retrieval report**** > **** > Best Regards,**** > **** > **** > Deborah and Andrew**** > **** > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@mbuni.org > http://lists.mbuni.org/mailman/listinfo/users**** > ** ** > > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@mbuni.org > http://lists.mbuni.org/mailman/listinfo/users > >
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@mbuni.org http://lists.mbuni.org/mailman/listinfo/users