On Fri, 2009-10-23 at 12:04, Alexander Malysh wrote: > This is true that SMPP spec don't define DLR format but give only > recommendation but this recommendation was adapted > by 99% SMSC maker and is quasi standard. If someone think that he > can ignore such fact we will ignore this SMSC maker > and user who connecting such SMSC have to ask SMSC operator/maker > why they ignore quasi standard. > The more people ask the more SMSC operator/maker will think about to > fix this issue.
I don't know how there are commercial SMPP gateways in use nowadays (I don't know for anyone) but if there are some/many then the users are on the mercy of SMSC makers and their software implementation. I also think that the operators are on the mercy of the SMSC software makers (SMSC software is closed source, I think) and because of that I don't expect they will implement SMPP spec recommendation. P.S. Current implementation is not problem for me personally because I work with one operator which adds null on the end of the string/text but I've found simple workaround in my applications. > Am 23.10.2009 um 11:43 schrieb Nikos Balkanas: > > >Unfortunately mail archives list only first few mails. Many > >experienced contributors, like Alejandro, Milan and Seikath, hold > >the opinnion that this recommendation is an example, not an SMPP > >spec, and therefore more flexible. I myself consider it more > >strictly, as a spec. > > > >However, no matter how you look at it, it is an ommision in the > >code, if the old parser considers only spaces and neglects string > >endings. I am not talking about free text parsing here. I still > >consider formal tags mandatory. Besides the change in code is > >trivial and minimal. > > > >From the discussion, both Stanic and Seikath have branched off > >with their own versions. This is unfortunate. > > > >I am attaching the last mail, which includes most previous ones. > >Please take the time to read some of it. > > > >BR, > >Nikos > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: Alexander Malysh > >To: Nikos Balkanas > >Cc: devel@kannel.org Devel > >Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 12:03 PM > >Subject: Re: Patch: smsc_smpp.c > > > >Hi Nikos, > > > >ok got it... > > > >We have such discussions many times already and we always got to > >decision that kannel can't and should't > >support things that are not standard except it easy to integrate > >and has no impact on the code readability, > >security etc. > > > >I don't think we have to patch DLR parsing in SMPP due to this > >clear SMSC bug. This is some homegrown SMSC > >just don't accept quasi standard. This SMSC should be fixed and > >not kannel... > > > >Thanks, > >Alexander Malysh > > > >PS: I think we should have this configurable and regex group > >matching should do it... > > > >Am 22.10.2009 um 19:24 schrieb Nikos Balkanas: > > > >>Sure. > >> > >>http://www.mail-archive.com/us...@kannel.org/msg17659.html > >>----- Original Message ----- > >>From: Alexander Malysh > >>To: Nikos Balkanas > >>Cc: devel@kannel.org Devel > >>Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 5:58 PM > >>Subject: Re: Patch: smsc_smpp.c > >> > >>can you please give me link to this discussion? > >> > >>Thanks, > >>Alexander Malysh > >> > >>Am 22.10.2009 um 13:17 schrieb Nikos Balkanas: > >> > >>>Hi, > >>> > >>>Oh boy. You missed all the fun :-) > >>> > >>>Original email by Latitude Test on 13/10/2009, where DELIVERD > >>>DLRs are misreported by kannel as failures (type 2). There was > >>>quite a discussion about whether it was a kannel bug, or an > >>>out of spec DLR. In the end it was a consensus that kannel > >>>needed a patch. > >>> > >>>Bottom of the line: Spec is very loose at this point about DLR > >>>fields. Kannel expects either an exact format (sscanf) or it > >>>reverts to a more flexible old style search. Problem is that > >>>in the search it assumes that the value of each field is > >>>followed by space, and that is not necessarily true (if field > >>>is last in DLR). > >>> > >>>Seikath also said that he has a couple of cases like that. > >>> > >>>BTW, I have asked Latitude to test it, because I cannot, but > >>>he seems to get disappeared after creating all this stir :-( > >>> > >>>BR > >>>Nikos > >>>----- Original Message ----- > >>>From: Alexander Malysh > >>>To: Nikos Balkanas > >>>Cc: devel@kannel.org Devel > >>>Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 11:08 AM > >>>Subject: Re: Patch: smsc_smpp.c > >>> > >>>Hi Nikos, > >>> > >>>could you please explain why we need this patch? > >>> > >>>Thanks, > >>>Alexander Malysh > >>> > >>>Am 19.10.2009 um 18:30 schrieb Nikos Balkanas: > >>> > >>>>Hi, > >>>> > >>>>A trivial patch, that should be able to handle all DLRs as > >>>>long as they keep formal tags. > >>>> > >>>>Please test. > >>>> > >>>>BR, > >>>>Nikos<smsc_smpp.diff> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > ><Re_ getting delivery report_ delivery failure.txt> > -- Kind regards, Milan -------------------------------------------------- Arvanta, IT Security http://www.arvanta.net Please do not send me e-mail containing HTML code.
