----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Davy Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Matthew Hixson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "devel" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 7:04 PM
Subject: Re: messageid DLR parameter -#- MailID:PAAA


>
> 1) Not everyone needs a DLR for every SMS sent.
> 2) This solutions would force the SMS Msg struct passed back and forth
>    between the bearerbox and the smsbox to increase in size with
>    data that might not be relevant.

well there is already dlr_url, which if you use for each message can add
quite a lot to the mesg size,
so complaining about adding more for this is invalid i think

> 3) This solution cannot be abstracted and used for all SMSC interfaces
>    (unless all you want is the 'ts' field reported for every SMSC).

we are talking about abstraction are we not ? so if an interface does not
inherently support a messageid,
or some means of referencing a mesg from the SMSC point of view, then then
its valid to be a void action
if the interface doesn't support it

actually it might help if we list which  ones DO NOT  have a message id like
thing in the interface ?

i just looked at  SMASI for example, the Sequence, MsgReference, its kind of
the same thing,  however instead
of being given the message ref by the other side (SMSC) the i/f tells the
SMSC what the ref is.
I still see it as the same concept? no ? yes ?

we also have a HTTP interface - not using kannel tho - to a telco, it also
has a messageid thing - basically the
transaction no of the http get process.....so there...



> 4) Kannel is not ONLY an HTTP<->SMPP gateway...It is also HTTP<->CIMD,
>    HTTP<->EMI/UCP, HTTP<->SEMA, SMPP<->CIMD, SMPP<->EMI/UCP, SMPP<->SEMA,
>    CIMD<->EMI/UCP, CIMD<->SEMA. Therefore, adding SMSC protcol specific
>    things to the smsbox can hinder compatibility.
>
> Yes, it's easy to make a quick hack to add the message-id to the
> SMS Msg struct for people ONLY connected via SMPP. But, what about
> the others?
>
> Would it not be a better idea to implement some mapping system
> between the UUID and the DLR's? After all, you get the UUID
> upon submission of the SMS via the sendsms function. I was planning
> on implementing this but it appears Alex trumped me on it and is
> trying to move his implementation from his private source tree to Kannel.
>
> Matthew (and others)...it's great to extend Kannel to fit
> your's (and possibly other's) needs. But, don't think that
> extension with limited scope MUST be added into Kannel. Instead,
> try to abstract your solution to the point where it can be
> implemented in a generic way that can benefit all users of
> Kannel (not just the SMPP group).
>
> I have many private hacks to Kannel that work only for certain
> situations (GSM modem hacks that requeue based on signal quality,
> hacked-SMPP TLA parsing, optimization for ARM7 processors, ROM-based
> bearerbox, etc). None of them are generic enough that I can
> submit it for review and voting. Instead, I keep my eyes glued
> to the mailing lists to see if anyone else might benefit from
> my hacks and I mail them privately.  When I can make my
> hacks generic enough, I will try and submit them for a vote.
> If no one excepts it, then fine. But, I know that if my
> hacks are not general enough then they will be rejected.
>
> See ya...
>
> d.c.
>
> **>In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> **>From: Matthew Hixson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> **>Subject: Re: messageid DLR parameter
> **>Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 14:25:59 -0800
> **>To: devel <[email protected]>
> **>
> **>Is there a good reason for not adding this functionality?  Sounds like
> **>a lot of us could make use of this.
> **>  -M@
> **>
> **>On Feb 8, 2005, at 1:09 PM, fred wrote:
> **>
> **>>
> **>>
> **>>
> **>>>you will probably have to do a hack yourself, for some reason these
> **>>>guys
> **>>>have resisted doing this for
> **>>>ages...us in our real world need to match up dlr receipts, in the
> **>>>first
> **>>case
> **>>>we use a transactionid along with the sendsms,
> **>>>but sometimes that doesn't work when you have multiple smpp
> **>>>connections to
> **>>>the same telco, and for some reason
> **>>>they send a dlr sometimes on a different connection from where it was
> **>>sent!
> **>>>So then the messageid comes useful.
> **>>>
> **>>>places to change..
> **>>>urltrans.c
> **>>>add another case, eg
> **>>> case 'Z':   /* message id */
> **>>>  if (octstr_len(request->sms.messageid)) {
> **>>>      enc = octstr_duplicate(request->sms.messageid);
> **>>>      octstr_url_encode(enc);
> **>>>      octstr_append(result, enc);
> **>>>      octstr_destroy(enc);
> **>>>  }
> **>>>
> **>>>
> **>>>msg-decl.h
> **>>>  OCTSTR(messageid);
> **>>>
> **>>>and of course you need to fill in messageid at the appropriate places
> **>>>in
> **>>>smsc_smpp etc...
> **>>>
> **>>>then you'll be able to add %Z in your dlr-url config
> **>>>
> **>>>cheers
> **>>>
> **>>>
> **>>>----- Original Message -----
> **>>>From: "Hillel Bilman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> **>>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> **>>>Cc: "Kannel Devel" <[email protected]>
> **>>>Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:33 PM
> **>>>Subject: messageid DLR parameter -#- MailID:PAAA
> **>>>
> **>>>
> **>>>>Dear Alex,
> **>>>>
> **>>>>Have you had a chance to add your code for receiving the messageid,
> **>>>received
> **>>>>back via the SubmitSMSResponse, via a DLR parameter to the CVS
> **>>repository?
> **>>>>This would be great if you have such code and you are prepared to
> **>>>>submit
> **>>>it.
> **>>>>
> **>>>>Thanks
> **>>>>
> **>>>>
> **>>>>
> **>>>
> **>>
> **>>
> **>
> **>
>


Reply via email to