Dude! :)

Why didn't you say that in the first place?! And what would it take for you
to share the code with the rest of us? I can order a keg or something
delivered to your house.

Sanjay

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Alexander Malysh <[email protected]>wrote:

> nothing wrong in this idea, I already done this in my tree :)
>
> Thanks,
> Alexander Malysh
>
> Am 24.02.2011 um 20:53 schrieb Sanjay Bhandari:
>
> Less moving parts. And more efficient, right? There wouldn't be that loop
> through bearerbox.
>
> Based on you knowledge of the code, would it be a bad call to teach
> bearerbox to act like a SMSC over the SMPP protocol? What are the caveats?
>
> Sanjay
>
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Alexander Malysh <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> why do you want todo this if it's already implemented in opensmppbox?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alexander Malysh
>>
>> Am 24.02.2011 um 17:06 schrieb Sanjay Bhandari:
>>
>> > Oh great! Thanks for the info. That seems like will work for us.
>> >
>> > Just another question, while I have your attention. It's bearerbox that
>> > speaks the SMPP protocol, right? What is your opinion on modifying the
>> > code there to enable it to talk to ESMEEs (in addition to SMSCs, like it
>> > does now)? I am just trying to pick your brains (someone who has looked
>> > at the code extensively), to see if I am under-thinking this. Do you
>> > think there are any major blockers?
>> >
>> > Sanjay
>> >
>> > On 2/24/2011 10:50 AM, Alexander Malysh wrote:
>> >> yes, please read userguide for details...
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Alexander Malysh
>> >>
>> >> Am 24.02.2011 um 16:31 schrieb Sanjay Bhandari:
>> >>
>> >>> Does that allow me to do these two simultaneously?
>> >>>
>> >>> SMSC <==> bearerbox <==> smsbox <==> applications
>> >>> ESMEE <==> bearerbox <==> smsbox <==> applications
>> >>>
>> >>> Or is it that no traffic will be able to go out to the SMSC at all?
>> Like,
>> >>>
>> >>> ESMEE <==> smppbox <==> bearerbox <==> loop SMSC <==> bearerbox
>> >>> <==> smsbox <==> applications
>> >>>
>> >>> Is all traffic outboud to SMSC looped back?
>> >>>
>> >>> Sanjay
>> >>>
>> >>> On 2/24/2011 9:38 AM, Alexander Malysh wrote:
>> >>>> Hi,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> bearerbox has loop SMSC module. This allow you to loop traffic via
>> bearerbox to smsbox...
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thanks,
>> >>>> Alexander Malysh
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Am 24.02.2011 um 14:22 schrieb Sanjay Bhandari:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> A few others suggested this as well, so I looked into it.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Correct me if I am wrong, but opensmppbox and smppbox direct traffic
>> >>>>> from ESMEEs towards bearerbox, and eventually the SMSCs. Our use
>> case is
>> >>>>> such that we want to enable SMS flow between ESMEEs and smsbox (and
>> >>>>> eventually the applications talking to smsbox).
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Here is what we are after. Kannel does the following now:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> SMSC <==> bearerbox <==> smsbox <==> applications
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> We need to enable the following:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ESMEE <==> bearerbox <==> smsbox <==> applications
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> As you can see, this requires bearerbox to be the SMSC on the SMPP
>> >>>>> protocol bind. Hence my question. But, of course, any configuration
>> is
>> >>>>> fine as long as the SMS flow between ESMEEs and applications is
>> enabled.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ESMEE <==> whatever <==> smsbox <==> applications
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Do you have a suggestion for that?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Sanjay
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 2/24/2011 5:55 AM, Stipe Tolj wrote:
>> >>>>>> Am 23.02.2011 20:12, schrieb Sanjay Bhandari:
>> >>>>>>> We have a bind where the peer wants to act as the ESMEE. I can't
>> find a way to
>> >>>>>>> configure Kannel as an SMSC. Am I missing it somehow?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> More importantly, if we decided to modify the code to try and
>> support the SMSC
>> >>>>>>> role, are there any hidden gotchas that we should be aware of? I
>> guess, I am
>> >>>>>>> wondering why this capability is not implemented in Kannel
>> already. Are there
>> >>>>>>> any blocking reasons?
>> >>>>>> Kannel has 2 options to act as SMPP server:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> a) via the open source Kannel opensmppbox, which is located in the
>> SVN trunk
>> >>>>>> repository.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> b) via the commercial add-on Kannel SMPP v3.4 server (smppbox),
>> which has a much
>> >>>>>> wider complexity and feature scope, including a plugin API layer
>> for additional
>> >>>>>> logics and various accounting support methods.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> In case you're interested in b), please let me know.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Stipe
>> >>>>>>
>> >>
>>
>>
>
>

Reply via email to