Alok, Was there a previous resentment?
Anyway, i advise we change the focus to the issue at hand; the question raised on " access log format"! -- Kenny w: www.nuObjects.com Bulk SMS Solutions | Managed Hosting | Enterprise Application Development On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Nii Ako Ampa-Sowa <[email protected]>wrote: > Alok, > > Nikos' comment was far from sarcastic. Earlier in the thread, Guillaume > Cottenceau suggested that you make use of Kannel's DLR mechanism for your > needs instead of parsing DLR logs. > > I think Nikos response was more in reference to that suggestion; he simply > explained why it might be necessary for someone to parse log files instead > of relying on Kannel's DLR mechanism. I happen to agree with his opinion > that parsing the log files is superior for some scenarios. I actually parse > bearerbox access logs myself on a daily basis for reporting. Others may not > need this, but I find it more appropriate for my requirements. > > His final statement finally just states that if someone has committed an > update which somehow changed the format, it must not have been deliberate. > > There's no taunting going on here. He was really just trying to help :) > > Nii. > > > On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 9:04 AM, Alok Vaidya <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Donald, >> >> I respect your opinion here and the explanation that you offer. As someone >> who follows the mailing list I do know Nikos as being someone who replies >> frequently to the list, but can you explain me the comment he offered there. >> Did you think that was helpful ? Even remotely ? That was sarcastic wasn't >> it ? Now I am game for some light jokes as I am also for any opinion or >> discussion one has to offer once I put my query in the public domain by >> mailing it to a list, and yes I am certainly not here to prove my knowledge >> or to prove any else for that matter. When anyone asks on a mailing list >> that is because he is looking for some information beyond his knowledge and >> for that I am open to any back and forth discussions with anyone on the list >> which as you might have observed I was doing till (and even after) Nikos >> intervened. But if someone hurls unnecessary, unrequired and uncalled for >> taunts, then I am certainly not going to take that. And I beg to differ and >> I am sorry for my strong language here but I didn't at all think that >> through his comments Nikos was offering any help worth even a dime. Even >> after that I tried my best explaining my situation without insulting him >> anywhere. Also contrary to what you think I never disrespected Nikos or even >> intended to rather it was quite the opposite. But in the mail after that he >> came up with something that to me was a blatant lie, mentioning he never >> ever mentioned me, which if you go through his remarks, you can very well >> see for yourself. >> >> I would just want to close this topic down here as I do not want to blast >> the mailing list with off topic posts, but my original question still >> remains unanswered. >> >> Donald Jackson wrote: >> >> Hi Alok, >> I think there has been a miscommunication or misunderstanding in the >> dialog here. Alok, I don't think Nikos was trying to insult you. >> >> Nikos is one of the most active and helpful members of the Kannel >> mailing lists and should be treated with some respect, as he was after all >> trying to help you. >> >> If you want to continue this debate, please do so off the mailing list >> (mail Nikos directly) as it has no relevance here. >> >> Thanks, >> Donald >> >> 2009/9/19 Alok Vaidya <[email protected]> >> >>> Hi Nikos, >>> >>> I guess whom you are addressing then when you say "Alok's way is >>> superoir....". I always get the facts straight and never comment on anything >>> before making sure, unlike you. >>> >>> Nikos Balkanas wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> You are mistaken. I am not taunting you, not even addressing you. Please >>> get your facts straight before you mail insults. >>> >>> Nikos >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> *From:* Alok Vaidya <[email protected]> >>> *To:* Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> >>> *Cc:* Guillaume Cottenceau <[email protected]> ; [email protected] >>> *Sent:* Friday, September 18, 2009 3:47 PM >>> *Subject:* Re: access log format >>> >>> Hi Nikos, >>> >>> I ain't sure where you are taking this, but I guess I know, so if you are >>> hurling taunts about anything I suggest you find someone else, as you have >>> completely misunderstood my requirement and my question here in the first >>> place. >>> I ain't interfering with Kannel's DLR handling at all we have been using >>> kannel for 3 years now and I guess that much time is enough to know about >>> any software what it does good or bad. I never said we were talking about >>> DLR's god knows from where you got that notion. >>> We do not use the smsbox but a proprietary smppbox (licensed from Stipe >>> Tolj) and we parse the log records whether MT or MO to get the information >>> about messages and their delivery reports from log files to db. >>> >>> Yes I am aware about the dlr-url feature of smsbox to get dlr HTTP Posted >>> back to me, but as mentioned above we do it other way. >>> >>> >>> Nikos Balkanas wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Alok's way is superior to kannel's DLR handling. It inserts to the DB >>> much more information about the original message than can be obtained >>> through the DLRs alone and passed on to the dlr-url. >>> >>> If anyone has reduced the resolution of the logs, I am sure it was >>> unintentional. >>> >>> BR, >>> Nikos >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Guillaume Cottenceau" >>> <[email protected]><[email protected]> >>> To: "Alok Vaidya" <[email protected]> <[email protected]> >>> Cc: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 2:59 PM >>> Subject: Re: access log format >>> >>> >>> Alok Vaidya <alok 'at' routesms.com> writes: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Sorry I didn't get you. >>> >>> >>> Are you programmatically looking for sent/failed SMS by looking >>> at Kannel logs? >>> >>> Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: >>> >>> Alok Vaidya <alok 'at' routesms.com> writes: >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Thanks for replying. Yes I checked the documentation we can >>> certainly have a >>> custom format, but it is about the events that I talking here >>> like "Sent SMS"/ >>> "FAILED SMS"/"Discarded SMS" etc., I see some changes there. >>> Mostly I have >>> figured them out but, I fail to understand some other entries >>> which I have >>> mentioned below as also I want to know more such changes. >>> >>> Let me elaborate why this causes problems. Our parser uses >>> patterns such as >>> "Failed SMS" to search for current (14.2 box) entries, now this >>> event logging >>> has changed to "FAILED SEND SMS" naturally this will not be >>> picked up and hence >>> we loose on such entries. That's my point here. >>> >>> >>> I might be a little off topic, but why not using the mechanism >>> made for that kind of things, e.g. receiving delivery reports >>> from Kannel? It is supported, lets you ask what information you >>> need, and is of course "supported" accross versions. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Guillaume Cottenceau >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Donald Jackson >> http://www.thearchitech.com >> donald(a)thearchitech.com >> >> >
