Hi, I work on patch that uses dict mapping incoming smpp client box id to msg id- When DLR is retuned, original box id is restored using this dict.
MOs could be routed by smsc id, as presently, but by smppbox. Aarno On 27.10.2011, at 09:31, Alexander Malysh wrote: > Hi, > > I also don't like separate bearerbox connections but how should multiple > smppbox setup handled if ESME can connect > to each of them? Static routing in bearerbox doesn't work here. > > Alex > > Am 27.10.2011 um 09:06 schrieb Aarno Syvänen: > >> Hi, >> >> patch as I posted it is indeed not needed. But do we need separate >> bearerbox connection for every smppbox client ? IMHO, this should >> be changed, too. >> >> Aarno >> >> On 26.10.2011, at 01:06, Alexander Malysh wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> seems reasonable for me. Why we need the patch from Aarno then? >>> >>> Alex >>> >>> Am 21.10.2011 um 22:41 schrieb Rene Kluwen: >>> >>>> Yes, opensmppbox opens a separate box connection per connected client. >>>> >>>> I've heard before that using system-id is indeed more useful. So if you >>>> want, go for that by using use-systemid-as-smsboxid or simply set the >>>> system-type equal to system-id in clients.txt. >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Alexander Malysh [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >>>> Alexander Malysh >>>> Sent: Thursday, 20 October, 2011 10:05 >>>> To: Rene Kluwen >>>> Cc: 'Aarno Syvänen'; [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: Using smppbox id >>>> >>>> But the box-id is for the whole box connection or does smppbox open extra >>>> box connection to bearerbox for >>>> each ESME? >>>> >>>> Alex >>>> >>>> >>>> Am 19.10.2011 um 23:22 schrieb Rene Kluwen: >>>> >>>>> Because the return messsges should be routed to the original client that >>>> sent the first message to begin with... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht ----- >>>>> Van: Alexander Malysh <[email protected]> >>>>> Verzonden: woensdag 19 oktober 2011 21:28 >>>>> Aan: Rene Kluwen <[email protected]> >>>>> CC: 'Aarno Syvänen' <[email protected]>; [email protected] >>>>> Onderwerp: Re: Using smppbox id >>>>> >>>>> why box-id per client? I meant box-id per smppbox. Why do you want box-id >>>> per client? >>>>> >>>>> Alex >>>>> >>>>> Am 19.10.2011 um 21:17 schrieb Rene Kluwen: >>>>> >>>>>> So you want a config option for boxc-id per client? >>>>>> This is the same as configuring a system-type, isn't it? >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree, it's a hack. But better than cluttering the config files. >>>>>> >>>>>> == Rene >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >>>> Behalf >>>>>> Of Alexander Malysh >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, 19 October, 2011 19:41 >>>>>> To: Aarno Syvänen >>>>>> Cc: [email protected] Devel >>>>>> Subject: Re: Using smppbox id >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> just looked through the source code and I can only agree with Andreas: >>>>>> system-type has nothing todo with box-id. >>>>>> I don't know who uses it and why but it's totally wrong. I would just >>>> remake >>>>>> this part and make it straight forward >>>>>> from design and understanding perspective: kill existing box-id hack and >>>>>> implement clean config options for box-id >>>>>> and use _only_ these. >>>>>> >>>>>> @Aarno: you changed the code for data_sm only, how about submit_sm? >>>>>> >>>>>> Alex >>>>>> >>>>>> Am 19.10.2011 um 15:26 schrieb Aarno Syvänen: >>>>>> >>>>>>> This relies on assumption that no two smppbox share a client. I cannot >>>>>> accept this. >>>>>>> Besides, I can have two smppboxes connected to my application >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Aarno >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 19.10.2011, at 15:19, Rene Kluwen wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Like I said before: In clients.txt, you can put system-type to the >>>>>>>> opensmppbox-id and you are all set. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> == Rene >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >>>>>> Behalf >>>>>>>> Of Aarno Syvänen >>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, 19 October, 2011 09:35 >>>>>>>> To: [email protected] Devel >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Using smppbox id >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In my case, there is an application between bearerbox and smppbox. >>>>>>>> Thus application must route to smppbox and not to its clients. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Aarno >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 18.10.201 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> [Het originele bericht is niet volledig opgenomen] >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > >
