On Thursday 10 November 2005 10:20, Stipe Tolj wrote: > Enver ALTIN wrote: > > Hey, > > > > I've been stuggling to find out why some catenated messages submitted by > > Kannel were getting rejected by our EMI SMSC. Apparently the problem was > > the supersmart SMSC expecting catenated messages to arrive in proper > > order. It was getting rejected if we send the second part of the 3-piece > > splitted SMS before the first part, for example. > > > > I said easy :) After some hours(!) of overnight code reading to learn > > where exactly the big message gets splitted and where are the splitted > > parts stored; I noticed that smsc/smsc_emi.c is making full use of the > > new priority queue implementation and messages get ordered according to: > > > > 1. Msg->sms.priority (Apparently only EMI and AT uses this) > > 2. Msg->sms.time
> now, I'm +0 on this patch. > Others, please comment? Just something that bugged me - according to the two above mentioned criteria, I don't see why SAR (segmentation and reassembly) messages get to different places on the queue. Surely several parts of a SAR message will have the same priority and same time, so they should be sent in the order they were introduced into the queue. If this is not the case, then I suggest that this problem would be fixed instead of doing high level content analysis on outgoing messages. -- Oded
