On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 02:06:10PM +0200, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > np :) however, notice that these are not figures with real SMSC > connections, but with the "fake" SMSC, which will certainly have > a lower response time and a lighter protocol.
Noted. Thanks! :) I sort of supposed as much but didn't know exactly what was tested of course. It's quite good at least to have an idea of such figures. > > Can anyone do better than that? :) > > His figures are obtained using a GSM phone, not an SMSC, so these > are not very interesting either for your aim IMHO. > Mnnn. Yes. But they're the best I've found so far. If our customer ever starts to use kannel I would be in a position to collect some useful statistics but will just have to wait .... Thanks again! James.
