Hi,
It seems to me like the request by Elton Hoxha. Being both SMSc and ESME
admin, he wanted to minimize both loads and avoid DLRs all together, in the
case of bulk SMS. He needed, though, the FID. The question was if he could
rely on logs for that.
He was rather surprised to find out that he couldn't.
I reckon the following. If a user doesn't request DLRs, he should still get
the FID from the ack. If he requests DLRs, he may end up with a bunch of
FIDs, and he can choose whichever he prefers. As a compromise, from within
kannel, if dlr-mask is 0, FID can be taken from the ACK. Else ditch that and
wait for the DLR.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stipe Tolj" <[email protected]>
Cc: "kannel_dev_mailinglist" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2009 12:53 PM
Subject: Re: {PATCH] final smsc-id passing in ack msg type
Alexander Malysh schrieb:
we have already callback infrastructure, it's called DLR :)
I don't see sense in this feature because all this could be done with
already implemented
and well known method DLR.
I object. This "can" be done with DLR, but "only" if DLRs are requested.
It's
still legitime to provide the assigned smsc-id in the ack msg back, even
if NO
DLR is requested.
Yes, you could make the dlr-mask that way that you get only the "SMSC
accepted
the msg" DLR atually. But this implies we have doubling the load on the
internal
message bus between bearerbox and smsbox. That's not really effective IMO,
as
the ack msg is anyway passed back to the smsbox for the MT push and we
simply
ditch in another value.
Stipe
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Kφlner Landstrasse 419
40589 Dόsseldorf, NRW, Germany
tolj.org system architecture Kannel Software Foundation (KSF)
http://www.tolj.org/ http://www.kannel.org/
mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------
