On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 02:40 -0800, Andi Taslim wrote: > Dear Mr. Tjatur, > > I'm still struggling to have the DLR working on my Kannel gateway. Basically > I could see the DLR entry on the database that I've specified. I set the > dlr-mask=31 but the url that I've specified only got called once, that is > when the sms got submitted to the SMSC (status=8). > > Other than that, the dlr-url never gets called again, even after the SMS is > delivered successfully to the recipient. The DLR entry on the database still > has status=0 and I've verified that the dlr-url never gets called again. > Dear Andi,
Personally I use internal memory instead of mysql for kannel internal dlr storage. Here what I do to handle dlr, each incomming SMS is processed and the reply is sent by sendsms http interface. When sending reply I define dlr-url that will handle the DLR SMS. We can insert it to database, update or whatever actions defined to process DLR SMS. As Beckman explains, if your configuration OK, you woul see DLR SMS. Here a sample SMS DLR with status = 1 2005-11-10 09:07:58 DLR SMS [SMSC:xxxx] [SVC:xxx] [ACT:] [from:xxxxx] [to:xxxx] [flags:0:0:0:0:1] [msg:122:id:0556700296 sub:001 dlvrd:001 submit date:0511100912 done date:0511100913 stat:DELIVRD err:000 text:Terima kasih, Anda b] [udh:0:] > If it's true that Kannel uses the timestamp as one of its variable to > identify a unique SMS to be updated, then I suspect that it might have > something to do with the timestamp field. I've followed your suggestion to > change the ts to be DATETIME. However, now I don't see the timestamp at all. > It becomes: "0000-00-00 00:00:00" while when I used VARCHAR(40) as per the > example from Kannel, I had numbers such as 39, 1347, 1432, etc. I might be > wrong though, timestamp might not have anything to do with my problem. > In your case, CMIIW, mysql has timestamp field. Try to use timestamp instead of DATETIME. > Could it also be that the SMSC on the operator side doesn't work correctly? > If I want to debug this from Kannel output, where should I start > backtracking this issue? > It would worth to start with analyze the bearbox log. Hope this can help you start. --tjatur > Any suggestion and help from anyone here will be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks much, > > -Andi > >
