What exactly do the done() and callback() functions in the plugin structure?

Are they required?


== Rene


Van: devel [mailto:devel-boun...@kannel.org] Namens Donald Jackson
Verzonden: vrijdag 7 oktober 2016 11:50
Aan: kannel_dev_mailinglist <devel@kannel.org>
Onderwerp: Re: [RFC] New 'box' Kannel Pluginbox


Hi everyone (again),


Thank you for the great feedback yesterday (publicly and privately).


I have updated the repository here: 


And have included the HTTP plugin as promised with an example of how to modify 
and reject traffic. If you have any issues please make use of the issue tracker 
on Github.


I'd also like to correct my mistake of only crediting Alejandro in my original 
mail - thanks too to Rene actually started SQLBox ;)





On 6 October 2016 at 09:25, Donald Jackson <djack...@kannel.org 
<mailto:djack...@kannel.org> > wrote:

Hi everyone,


I have started laying the foundations for a new 'box' for Kannel which intends 
to allow users more flexibility in terms of the platform.


At the moment there are many ways to get messages into the bearerbox, namely: 
smsbox, wapbox, opensmppbox, smppbox, ksmppd, sqlbox. Some rely on routing in 
their own process and others allow bearerbox to do the routing. What they all 
have in common is they don't allow external or third party applications help 
make decisions at processing time (with the exception of ksmppd/smppbox). 


My new planned box is called pluginbox which will basically be like SQLBox - 
but instead of using database callbacks, it will allow linking of dynamic 
libraries (.so|.dylib) which will allow custom 
interception/filtering/modification of message packages to and from various 


So a hypothetical scenario for this box could be something like


SMSBox, SMPPBox/KSMPPD, WapBox <--> PluginBox <--> Bearerbox


Or even


SMSBox, SMPPBox/KSMPPD, WapBox <--> SQLBox <--> PluginBox <--> Bearerbox


For those who want to still make use of SQLBox.


My initial design is to use an asynchronous callback chain to allow slow 
plugins to not hold up the processing of faster messages. This would be 
especially useful in the context of people using HTTP and other external 
services to process routing decisions. The plugin would also be able to return 
a status to 'reject' a message packet which would in turn not submit to the 
target receiver.


My plan is also to implement at least one example plugin (probably an HTTP 
plugin?) which can show the submission and manipulation of a message packet in 
both directions.


So here I am looking for comments.


1) Is this something worthwhile doing, does anyone else have a need for this?

2) Are there any considerations you wish to add at this time?

3) Are there any features you would like to see added?

4) Would there be any problem including this in the Kannel repository?


Here is the initial version : https://github.com/donald-jackson/kannel-pluginbox


Thanks Alejandro for SQLBox, its largely based on your code.




Donald Jackson
 <http://www.ddj.co.za/> http://www.ddj.co.za



Donald Jackson
 <http://www.ddj.co.za/> http://www.ddj.co.za

Reply via email to