Hi all,

any objections or should I commit this patch?

Alex

Am 27.01.2014 um 16:22 schrieb Alexander Malysh <[email protected]>:

> Hi,
> 
> attached is the announced patch for this functionality.
> 
> Alex
> <smpp_resp_meta.patch>
> 
> Am 24.01.2014 um 09:54 schrieb Alexander Malysh <[email protected]>:
> 
>> Hi Stipe,
>> 
>> as usual I'm writing some critic for this patch. I do like this 
>> functionality BUT I don't like how this
>> patch implemented, I don't like this _real don't _real functions because we 
>> have already to much of them
>> and have to start to cleanup it. The second issue is with va_args where it's 
>> not needed and at this place it's
>> not needed.
>> 
>> We have such patch at GTX and I will try to extract this from our sources 
>> this weekend but in a nutshell it works as follows:
>> 
>> * sent sms with dlr_mask SMSC_CONN_SUCCESS
>> * submit_sm
>> * submit_sm_resp -> pack TLVs into meta to the sent sms
>> * bb_smscconn_(sent|failed) -> generate DLR  SMSC_SUCCESS and put meta_data 
>> from sent sms into resulting DLR
>> * smsbox forward it to application
>> 
>> -> no complex va_args , no _real functions needed. This is then really clean.
>> 
>> Btw. The same technic we use for the HTTP , e.g. to pack all CGI params into 
>> meta_data for the later processing in the application.
>> 
>> Alex
>> 
>> 
>> Am 21.01.2014 um 19:52 schrieb Stipe Tolj <[email protected]>:
>> 
>>> Hi list,
>>> 
>>> this is a patchset in reference to a request that Paulo Correia made in the 
>>> users@ mailing list, [Msg-Id: <[email protected]>].
>>> 
>>> The basic idea is: in SMPP (and other protocols too), we may have meta-data 
>>> parts (optional TLVs in SMPP) that we get on the "Sent SMS" event, hence in 
>>> the submit_sm_resp PDU for SMPP. At the moment we don't have a construct to 
>>> pass this meta-data in the corresponding intermediate DLR SMSC SUCCESS 
>>> event that we pass to smsbox.
>>> 
>>> The attached patchset allows this at least for optional TLVs coming inside 
>>> submit_sm_resp. I don't see a clean way to do this for the bind resp PDUs 
>>> though.
>>> 
>>> The patchset SHOULD be not intrusive, adding only the feature and not 
>>> changing any standard behavior. Please review and vote for commit.
>>> 
>>> Stipe
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Kölner Landstrasse 419
>>> 40589 Düsseldorf, 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
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> <smpp-resp-pdu-optional-tvls.diff>
>> 
> 


Reply via email to