Re: Using HTTP requests in C
On Mar 30, 2006, at 9:32 AM, Julius David Bacolod wrote: Now that I have successfully utilized the HTTP interface to use sendsms, Im trying to automate sendsms using C but the problem is I do not know how to make use of HTTP requests (POST, GET, etc.) in C. I know how to do that in Java (instantiating socket objects, open the Data I/O streams and then writeBytes method, quite easy), but in C I'm not familiar with. Im searching the Web for socket programming in C that mentions HTTP requests but I hardly see any. Is there some way in C (just like in Java) that you would pass the the URL string to some C function and then it will sendsms? Just like this URL string: The standard C library does not implement the HTTP protocol. You may want to look into libcurl: http://curl.haxx.se/. Cheers, Pim van Riezen
Re: Problems installing kannel on Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES release 4 (Nahant)
On Feb 15, 2006, at 8:23 PM, Franz Granlund wrote: Hi! I'm having trouble installing the latest kannel on Red Hat Enterprise Linux ES release 4 (Nahant). I've tried with the following: kannel-1.4.0-3.1.fc3.fr.i386.rpm (From kannels website) kannel-1.4.0-3.2.el4.rf.i386.rpm (From http://rpmfind.net//linux/ RPM/dag/redhat/el4/i386/kannel-1.4.0-3.2.el4.rf.i386.html) That EL4 rpm looks fishy (sqlite 3.3 is standard for RHEL4). Just get the SRPM and use rpmbuild to create the RPM from the SRPM. I presume you'll be able to find plenty of sources on the web explaining how to do that better than I can. Cheers, Pi
Setting sender for wapbox?
For the love of $DEITY, I can't find out anywhere how to set the sender address for a WAP PUSH to wapbox through PAP. Am I stupid as well as ugly or is the possibility just not there? Cheers, Pim van Riezen
Re: Out of Memory
On Jul 26, 2005, at 7:55 PM, Alejandro J. Ramirez wrote: Jul 24 04:54:38 movil kernel: Out of Memory: Killed process 6186 (bearerbox). I would suggest you look at your process list with ps to determine exactly which program it is that gobbles up your memory. With more specifics (like the kind of configuration you are using for that particular program), it might be possible for someone to come up with an answer. Cheers, Pi
TON 0 and range checking
Good Day,
Around line 408 in gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c, a deliver_sm PDU is checked
for its destination_addr. In cases where the TON is not set to
GSM_ADDR_TON_ALPHANUMERIC, non-digit characters are treated as
invalid. This seems up to spec, but I'm running into a real world
implementation here that is sending messages with a destination-
address of {shortcode} + "#" + {trackingcode} and the TON set to 0
(GSM_ADDR_TON_UNKNOWN). I'm not quite sure what the standards say
about dealing with that TON, but it would make sense to disable the
check for that TON as well.
Alternatively, it might be desirable to allow this check to be
bypassed completely from the configuration file.
Cheers,
Pim van Riezen
smpp bind_transmitter/bind_receiver and addr_ton/addr_npi
Hurro, While checking out a problem I have with one telco getting a working SMPP link up (the telco disconnects immediately after the bind_transmitter/bind_receiver packet from either thread) I noticed in the packet dump that the open_transmitter() and open_receiver() functions don't fill in the u.bind_[transmitter|receiver].addr_[ton| npi] fields. Just to satisfy the telco that this wasn't the problem I patched these to take the proper fields from the configuration, although probably in a dumb way because I'm not too familiar with the code yet. Should I do anything with this or leave it be? I'm assuming this omission (the fields default to 0) has so far had no effect on running implementations. Cheers, Pim van Riezen
