I agree with Nikos, in this case. drive_smpp.c is supposed to test Kannel internals... So it shouldn't use too many Kannel calls. Otherwise the test function will be void.
== Rene -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nikos Balkanas Sent: woensdag 30 juni 2010 20:59 To: Alexander Malysh Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Patch: test/drive_smpp.c The flow at that point doesn't need anywhere to use Msg *. It is an SMPP (FAKE) server with an added smsbox for testing the loop. smsbox just sends a hard-coded "Hello world" Msg that doesn't need splitting. Anyway, it is beyond the scope of this SMPP tester to test Msg * connections. These are 10 lines of code, and I just don't have the courage or the time to convert it to Msg. It came straight out my SMPPBox work and is served as is. If anyone is interested in it he is more than wellcome to use it. I don't expect it to make it to kannel. BR, Nikos ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Malysh" <[email protected]> To: "Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 9:33 PM Subject: Re: Patch: test/drive_smpp.c HI Nikos, I'm aware of the fact that you have only Octstr as input at this place but it would be better to use Msg IMO because using sms_split you can test both sms_split _and_ smpp pdu. Thanks, Alexander Malysh Am 30.06.2010 um 19:54 schrieb Nikos Balkanas: > Hi Alex, > > I don't use Msg * at that level, only SMPP pdus. My input is Octstr *. I > am aware of sms_split, but it depends on Msg * and udhdata. I have done > additional work on the smsbox_thread and will resubmit with fixed > identations. I understand completely if you reject it, this is primarily > addressed to interested people who find it useful to use it. > > BR, > Nikos > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Malysh" <[email protected]> > To: "Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 12:10 PM > Subject: Re: Patch: test/drive_smpp.c > > > Hi Nikos, > > why do you redefine and re-implement things that already exists? > please use sms_split and please fix indentation. > > Thanks, > Alexander Malysh > > Am 28.06.2010 um 16:36 schrieb Nikos Balkanas: > >> OOps! >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 5:33 PM >> Subject: Patch: test/drive_smpp.c >> >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> This is a patch to test/drive_smpp.c, which I found useful in SMPPbox >>> testing, since I do not have a real SMSc connection. It adds external >>> SMS submission along with concatenation, if SMS is too large. >>> >>> drive_smpp is a very nifty tool. It acts as a (FAKE) SMPP SMSc and >>> smsbox for MOs with a twist: >>> >>> drive_smpp->BB->drive_smpp >>> >>> This is a single instance of dive_smpp connected to bb both as an SMSc >>> and as an smsbox. It generates MOs over SMPP to bb, which are then >>> processed by BB to smsbox for an sms-service. Except that drive_smpp is >>> connected as an smsbox to receive it and provides a default sms-service >>> "Hello World". This in turn, is processed by bb back to >>> drive_smpp(SMSc). All these are logged and monitored and drive_smpp even >>> provides for TLV testing/support. >>> >>> If it is accepted I will do an effort to write some documentation about >>> it. >>> >>> BR, >>> Nikos >>> >>> >> <drive_smpp.diff> >
