Sir, Are you using an internet lease line or a private lease line directly connected to the SMSC? Because when I traceroute from our server going to the SMSC, and we had about 9 hops. From the SMSC going to our server takes about 15 hops. Does this have to do with the latency problem? Are these values somewhat comparable to your connection with the SMSC? Please advice. Thanks in advance.
On Wednesday 11 August 2004 03:39, you wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 02:47:13PM +0000, Josephine Forte wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Anybody here who's a kannel user from the phillipines? We are using > > kannel cvs20040621 version on Red Hat Linux 7.3. I used CIMD2 protocol > > to connect to SMART Telecom. I just need some help because we already set > > up kannel, MO and MT are ok, so is sendsms(PUSH) but I'm having problems > > with kannel receiving and sending out messages too slow. about 3-5 > > sms/sec. I already turned off delivery report request, but still, message > > sending/receiving rate is too slow and queue is getting bigger and > > bigger. Any advice? > > We're also connected to Smart, and don't seem to experience the kind of > slowness you observe. Our service peaked at some 200 messages per > second once, without breaking a sweat. Our SMSC config looks something > like this: > > group = smsc > smsc = cimd2 > smsc-id = smart-outgoing > host = x.x.x.x > port = pppp > keepalive = 60e > smsc-username = xxxxxxxxx > smsc-password = ********* > sender-prefix = "" > > group = smsc > smsc = cimd2 > smsc-id = smart-incoming > host = x.x.x.x > port = pppp > keepalive = 60 > smsc-username = xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > smsc-password = ********* > sender-prefix = "" > > Don't see much difference between your config and mine. Perhaps your > bandwidth to Smart is not all it could be, or you have a firewall that's > rate limiting your connection? Apparently, a misconfigured Cisco > firewall once totally blocked the SMSC connection of one of our client's > servers, perhaps the same thing could be happening to you. 3-5 messages > per second translates to roughly 16 kbps of bandwidth given the overhead > involved with the CIMD2 protocol, so if you have dangerously close to > that amount you can't really expect better performance than that. Try > talking to the MVAS department; they should be able to tell you what > they see from their side of the connection. -- Josephine G. Forte Applications Developer Intermedia Solutions, Inc. 64 Washington St. GreenHills, San Juan, M.M. Tel. No. +632 7261443 Fax +632 7276134
