@Stipe? Am 29.07.2010 um 13:40 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
> Seems that a lot of people do (overlooked the loopback smsc). Propably, > because it was never documented and followed the path to oblivion, like many > other undocumented tools. Normal procedure is to submit a userguide patch for > any submissions. What happened? Can we still ask for a userguide update? > > BR, > Nikos > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Malysh" <[email protected]> > To: "Rene Kluwen" <[email protected]> > Cc: <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 10:23 AM > Subject: Re: [PATCH] SMS Box routing > > > Hi, > > oops, seems I overlooked this fact :) but issues remain... > > Thanks, > Alexkander Malysh > > Am 29.07.2010 um 01:52 schrieb Rene Kluwen: > >> The smsc=loopback has already been part of Kannel since 2009/09/17. I didn't >> know. >> It obsoletes my patch. >> If any more work has to be done on it, I will have a look at it. >> >> == Rene >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Alexander Malysh [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >> Alexander Malysh >> Sent: Wednesday, 28 July, 2010 23:08 >> To: Rene Kluwen >> Cc: 'Stipe Tolj'; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] SMS Box routing >> >> Hi, >> >> it's a clean approach that costs performance. But it should be tested first, >> how much performance it costs. >> >> Now to this patch: >> >> + /* store temporary DLR data for SMSC ACK */ >> + if (DLR_IS_ENABLED_DEVICE(msg->sms.dlr_mask) && >> !uuid_is_null(sms->sms.id)) { >> + Octstr *mid; >> + char id[UUID_STR_LEN + 1]; >> + >> + uuid_unparse(sms->sms.id, id); >> + mid = octstr_create(id); >> + >> + dlr_add(conn->id, mid, sms); >> >> dlr_add without dlr_find is not good. It will just grow DB... >> >> + if (conn->reroute_to_smsc) { >> + sms->sms.smsc_id = octstr_duplicate(conn->reroute_to_smsc); >> + } else { >> + sms->sms.smsc_id = octstr_duplicate(conn->id); >> + } >> >> reroute belongs to abstraction layer... >> >> Thanks, >> Alexander Malysh >> >> >> Am 28.07.2010 um 20:59 schrieb Rene Kluwen: >> >>> No, you are right. I saw your solution only after I made the >>> smsbox-route-between patch. >>> I think your solution is cleaner. It depends of the routing options that >> are >>> already available. >>> I attached your (Stipe's) patch another time, as I see that it is still >> not >>> committed to svn trunk. >>> >>> So the 2 questions here: >>> >>> 1. What do the other developers thing about this patch, >>> >>> and: >>> >>> 2. Can this patch (either one) submitted to Kannel svn, so people can >>> benefit from smsbox (open smppbox) to smsbox routing? >>> >>> Previously, there hasn't been a lot of requests for it, other than be able >>> to use sms-service from an smsbox request. >>> Currently, I have been getting a lot of requests for this functionality >>> because open smppbox depends on it. >>> >>> == Rene >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf >>> Of Stipe Tolj >>> Sent: Wednesday, 28 July, 2010 17:44 >>> Cc: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] SMS Box routing >>> >>>> As per popular request, I made a patch for bearerbox that enable the >>>> following configuration: >>>> >>>> # multi-group: >>>> group = smsbox-route-between >>>> smsbox-id1 = localbox1 >>>> smsbox-id2 = remotebox1 >>>> # shortcode is optional >>>> shortcode = +1234567;+7654321 >>>> >>>> >>>> This is the opposite of "reroute" for smsc's. It routes messages from >>>> smsbox/sqlbox/open smppbox to another box that is connected. >>>> >>>> This allows for: >>>> >>>> 1. client-to-client routing, concerning open smppbox. >>>> 2. Call sms services from one of the boxes. Right now you can only call >>> them >>>> via an smsc. >>>> 3. Many more interesting things >>> >>> thanks a lot Rene for the patch. >>> >>> I'm at the moment -0 for this, due to the fact that it logically >> duplicates >>> the >>> behavior that we already have via the 'smsc = loopback' type. >>> >>> In your approach you do the re-routing here in the bearebox abstractive >>> layer, >>> where the loopback smsc module does it in the smsc module layer. The >>> benefits >>> here are we get the MT and MO entry logged to access-log while running, >> and >>> there are no further config groups needed, as you can define the same >>> routing >>> you intend between smsbox instances bound to the same bearerbox by using >> the >>> loopback smsc, and the smsbox-route group already. >>> >>> Do I miss some advantages here from this approach? >>> >>> 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 >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> >>> <smsc_loopback.diff> >> >> >> > >
