Re: registered_delivery - clarification

registered_delivery gets set to nonzero when dlr-mask and dlr-url are present. Assuming that you're in fact setting those parameters, I see your point. I'm not sure what the regular behaviour should be, when a message is being split by kannel? Let's analyze the facts further: I assume the

Re: registered_delivery - clarification

Yes, That is correct behaviour and is SMSc depended. BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Iain Dooley i...@workingsoftware.com.au To: us...@vm1.kannel.org Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 8:28 AM Subject: registered_delivery - clarification hi all, i received some clarification back from

smsc bombardment without smsbox running

Hi All, I have a strange situation. I set up kannel. It was a functional setup but it was on a computer whose IP didn't have access to my SMSC's port. Later I made the real setup on another computer and more or less abandoned the other. Bearerbox remained set to start at boot on the

Re: registered_delivery - clarification

Hi, I don't think it makes much sense to have individual verification for each part. The SMSc should respond with OK if message succesfully assembled and delivered as a whole; else if any part fails, failure. After all, if any part fails, correct behaviour would be to resend the whole SMS.

Re: registered_delivery - clarification

Hi Alejandro, present. Assuming that you're in fact setting those parameters, I see your point. I'm not sure what the regular behaviour should be, when a message is being split by kannel? Let's analyze the facts further: I assume the behaviour now is only to set registered_delivery = 1 on the

Re: registered_delivery - clarification

I should add to my last email that I think that all messages (even single part messages) should have entries in both message and message_part; ie. the system treats a single part message as a special kind of multipart message rather than the other way around. cheers iain On Fri, 12 Jun 2009,

Re: smsc bombardment without smsbox running

Hi, The only thing that I can think of, is that an *smsbox* (or SQLbox) got active somehow. I mean, you were sure that no network access was to the SMSc, and yet there was. How difficult would be to start smsbox? Propably someone needed to use it and enabled the network and smsbox. The only

Re: smsc bombardment without smsbox running

Are you using sqlbox? On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 8:16 AM, jessica.vongunten-hi...@swisscom.comwrote: Hi All, I have a strange situation. I set up kannel. It was a functional setup but it was on a computer whose IP didn't have access to my SMSC's port. Later I made the real setup on

RE: smsc bombardment without smsbox running

The computer was on the network. It is just that the SMSC blocks the port in question to users who aren't of pre-approved IPs. As for smsbox being somehow started, I am the only one using that computer, and I haven't started it (smsbox) in at least two weeks. Also, I never definately never

RE: smsc bombardment without smsbox running

Nope. It isn't on the computer. Thanks J From: Benaiad [mailto:bena...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 9:00 AM To: von Gunten-Hinke Jessica, SCS-NIT-NIO-SE-ISC Cc: us...@vm1.kannel.org Subject: Re: smsc bombardment without smsbox running Are you using sqlbox? On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at

Re: smsc bombardment without smsbox running

Maybe you've set bearerbox-host in the sms-group and it was pointing to the old machine. On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 9:09 AM, jessica.vongunten-hi...@swisscom.comwrote: The computer was on the network. It is just that the SMSC blocks the port in question to users who aren't of pre-approved IPs.

Re: registered_delivery - clarification

Question is: 1. Are you 100% certain that all SMSC's behave like that? I mean: they send the dlr's deliver_sm only after receiving all parts? 2. Even then, what difference would it make if the registered_delivery on subsequent parts is set to 1 instead of 0? I'm not sure what the proper behavior

Re: smsc bombardment without smsbox running

Nice! Smart guess. However, if J's bearerbox shows no SMS sent, that bbox didn't send them. @jessika: I would contact my SMSc. Seems it was their mistake leaving the ports open to the old box. Maybe they are mistaken again about the IP address and it is the new box. Even more could be the 2

Re: smsc bombardment without smsbox running

Have you checked the logs? 2009/6/12 Nikos Balkanas nbalka...@gmail.com Nice! Smart guess. However, if J's bearerbox shows no SMS sent, that bbox didn't send them. @jessika: I would contact my SMSc. Seems it was their mistake leaving the ports open to the old box. Maybe they are mistaken

RE: smsc bombardment without smsbox running

There isn't a single thing in the logs that looks like an SMS in over two weeks. From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 10:15 AM To: Nikos Balkanas Cc: Benaiad; von Gunten-Hinke Jessica, SCS-NIT-NIO-SE-ISC; us...@vm1.kannel.org Subject: Re:

RE: smsc bombardment without smsbox running

Thanks I will contact the SMSC. I don't know if this makes any difference, but The test setup is on the same computer I use to ssh into the real setup, which has a different IP but is on the same subnet. I was sending SMSs from the real setup, but about two a day, and that is evident in

OMA-Settings using sendota

Hi, I am sending SyncML settings using sendota cgi, But on my handset I receive message format no supported. My Sending URL: == http://127.0.0.1/cgi-bin/sendota?username=mepassword=itismeagainto=$msisdntext=$omadoctype=settingspin=1234sec=userpin My OMA Prov Doc: ==

Re: OMA-Settings using sendota

Hi, if you check the previous posts, you will notice that 1.4.3 unfortunately had something broken in order to sendota. You will need to use cvs or older 1.4.1 for it. Julien 2009/6/12 Benaiad bena...@gmail.com: Hi, I am sending SyncML settings using sendota cgi, But on my handset I receive

Re: OMA-Settings using sendota

Thank you, I'll try it. On 6/12/09, Julien Buratto julien.bura...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, if you check the previous posts, you will notice that 1.4.3 unfortunately had something broken in order to sendota. You will need to use cvs or older 1.4.1 for it. Julien 2009/6/12 Benaiad

Re: registered_delivery - clarification

Well, let's see: 1) 100% certain? You are much more experienced to answer this. I don't even have an SMSc connection. But I rely on how many tickets there are about SMS DLRed, but not delivered. The principle behind it is if it ain't broke, don't fix it. How about waiting for a relevant

Re: smsc bombardment without smsbox running

Well, It looks like any other billing reconciliation. I mean you are charged for each SMS your SMSc is billing. You are charging your clients, according to your own logs. Ask for the SMSc logs, pull your own logs and follow the money trail... One thing for certain, it is not a configuration or

Re: I need help with Kannel

Hi Elvis I'm not a kannel developper and will not answer personal questions. Please post your questions on kannel list. And READ those lists and manual. You need to create your own app. You didn't tell much about what you need. If I would say just help me buy a car how can you help me if I have

Re: smsc bombardment without smsbox running

Hi If there were messages stuck in kannel queue, kannel will try to send them upon restart if you have configured any of the permanent queue store options. No need of smsbox for that... However, you should see somenthing in bearerbox log... if log level is enough (0). I don't think message send

Re: I need help with Kannel

Don't worry Alvaro, I got the same personal mail, too. I guess he wrote to each person in the list individually. Talk about working the list the hard way :-) BR, Nikos - Original Message - From: Alvaro Cornejo cornejo.alv...@gmail.com To: Elvis Jorge Nunez elvisj...@hotmail.com;