Re: SMS PDU
Visit htp://www.dreamfabric.com/sms/ for info on SMS PDU Shridhar Raju - Original Message - From: "Stone Zhang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 9:00 PM Subject: SMS PDU > Hi, I am trying to us AT command send sms by GSM modem to mobile phone, but > I am not very clear how the sms PDU be formatted, I tried GSM 03.40, could > not find really useful information. What I want is telling me what should be > the first byte of PDU, then second and so on. Any suggest is appreciated! > > Stone Zhang > > > > > NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER: > This email (including attachments) is confidential. If you have received > this email in error please notify the sender immediately and delete this > email from your system without copying or disseminating it or placing any > reliance upon its contents. We cannot accept liability for any breaches of > confidence arising through use of email. Any opinions expressed in this > email (including attachments) are those of the author and do not necessarily > reflect our opinions. We will not accept responsibility for any commitments > made by our employees outside the scope of our business. We do not warrant > the accuracy or completeness of such information. >
RE: SMS PDU
Hi, We too are grappling with same query , as of now we are using the PDU binding specified in Wavecom Manual ( as we plan to use wavecom modem) . We too would like to know which standard specs ( GSM/3GPP) has information regarding PDU binding ( particularly for AT+CMGS command). Thank you -Saurabh Wipro, India -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Stone Zhang Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 9:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: SMS PDU Hi, I am trying to us AT command send sms by GSM modem to mobile phone, but I am not very clear how the sms PDU be formatted, I tried GSM 03.40, could not find really useful information. What I want is telling me what should be the first byte of PDU, then second and so on. Any suggest is appreciated! Stone Zhang NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER: This email (including attachments) is confidential. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender immediately and delete this email from your system without copying or disseminating it or placing any reliance upon its contents. We cannot accept liability for any breaches of confidence arising through use of email. Any opinions expressed in this email (including attachments) are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect our opinions. We will not accept responsibility for any commitments made by our employees outside the scope of our business. We do not warrant the accuracy or completeness of such information. **Disclaimer Information contained in this E-MAIL being proprietary to Wipro Limited is 'privileged' and 'confidential' and intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed. You are notified that any use, copying or dissemination of the information contained in the E-MAIL in any manner whatsoever is strictly prohibited.
new findings with split
i have looked on my access.log file and i see( the actual output) for all the messages including the last SMS 3/3 for example, so it's either my 6210 ( it happens on may 6210 & 3310) or the SMSC, is there any flag that i can set to make the SMSC deal with split messages better (if this is the problem? eg priority accept-x-kannel-headers = true text/plain ??? what can i try?
RE: Reporting the number of message parts sent for long messages.
It was my way to return the number of messages sent (splits), as I didn't want to change the semantics for send_message() return value. Angel Fradejas Mediafusión España, S.A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.mediafusion.es Tel. +34 91 252 32 00 Fax +34 91 572 27 08 -Mensaje original- De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]En nombre de Stipe Tolj Enviado el: miércoles 17 de abril de 2002 11:26 CC: Kannel-devel (E-mail) Asunto: Re: Reporting the number of message parts sent for long messages. why did you change the send_message() declaration? what's the argument int* nparts for? Stipe [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Wapme Systems AG Münsterstr. 248 40470 Düsseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de --- wapme.net - wherever you are
Re: running ppg by default?
Stipe Tolj wrote: > > Hi list, > > I'd like to discuss if we should allow a default PPG HTTP instance > running on port 8080 if no PPG group is defined, which is the way it > currently works. > > For security reasons I'd like to switch that off, if no PPG group is > defined. Votes? Yeah, it is better this way. For testing purposes, one can allways use trusted-pi option, for which userguide supplies configuration file. Aarno
running ppg by default?
Hi list, I'd like to discuss if we should allow a default PPG HTTP instance running on port 8080 if no PPG group is defined, which is the way it currently works. For security reasons I'd like to switch that off, if no PPG group is defined. Votes? Stipe [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Wapme Systems AG Münsterstr. 248 40470 Düsseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de --- wapme.net - wherever you are
Re: Reporting the number of message parts sent for long messages.
why did you change the send_message() declaration? what's the argument int* nparts for? Stipe [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Wapme Systems AG Münsterstr. 248 40470 Düsseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de --- wapme.net - wherever you are
Re: BUG: concatenation using SMPP
AFAIK, Bruno was assigned to that one. But I don't see any current events on that. Stipe [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Wapme Systems AG Münsterstr. 248 40470 Düsseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de --- wapme.net - wherever you are
[Fwd: concatenation problem with SMPP]
I'm not quite aware what's the point here, so I'll forward this the list. Stipe [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Wapme Systems AG Münsterstr. 248 40470 Düsseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de --- wapme.net - wherever you are --- Begin Message --- hi Stipe, what was the major bug in 1.1.5 CVS (four weeks old) with concatenation? i am using 1.1.5 now and at random times for the same text content i get a blank message as my last message. should 1.1.6 fix that problem? --- End Message ---
RE: Reporting the number of message parts sent for long messages.
Hi Oded, For what it's worth, this was my version of the patch. Nothing special, really. Anyway, now yours it's commited on cvs, so I'll stick to it. A couple of modifications on my calling applications and I'm done. This patch is against smsbox.c revision 1.183 Have fun. Angel Fradejas Mediafusión España, S.A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.mediafusion.es Tel. +34 91 252 32 00 Fax +34 91 572 27 08 -Mensaje original- De: Oded Arbel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Enviado el: martes 16 de abril de 2002 15:02 Para: Angel Fradejas CC: Kannel-devel (E-mail) Asunto: RE: Reporting the number of message parts sent for long messages. Can we see your patch too ? I'm not very good at formatting, so you'r patch may likely be better :-) -- Oded Arbel m-Wise Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] (972)-67-340014 (972)-9-9581711 (ext: 116) ::.. Get busy living or get busy dying. -- Andy Dufresne (Tim Robbins) in The Shawshank Redemption > -Original Message- > From: Angel Fradejas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 1:39 PM > To: Stipe Tolj > Cc: Kannel-devel (E-mail) > Subject: RE: Reporting the number of message parts sent for > long messages. > > > +1 from me > > I had written the same patch for my own use, with a slightly different > format. > > Angel Fradejas. > > -Mensaje original- > De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]En > nombre de Stipe Tolj > Enviado el: martes 16 de abril de 2002 13:35 > CC: Kannel-devel (E-mail) > Asunto: Re: Reporting the number of message parts sent for long > messages. > > > > For some purposes (for example - billing) the application > behind Kannel > > may need to know how messages Kannel actually sent for each > message that > > the application sent to Kannel (as Kannel will split long > messages into > > parts). > > for this prurpose I wrote this hack - it's very simple and not well > > written, but it allowes the application to analyze the response from > > smsbox in order to learn how many msg parts the message was > splitted to. > > > > I would like the opinion of the developers on the usefullnes of this > > behaviour, and how do you think it should be cleaned/standardized. > > I'm +1 for this as it does not change send_message() behaviour and > adds extra information at return. > > Any objections for commiting this? > > Stipe > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --- > Wapme Systems AG > > Münsterstr. 248 > 40470 Düsseldorf > > Tel: +49-211-74845-0 > Fax: +49-211-74845-299 > > E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de > --- > wapme.net - wherever you are > > > smsbox.patch Description: Binary data
