Please, address the group. We are trying to offer you options. You don't like them it's your prerogative. But that is the nature of flow control. You start with something completely asynchronous and end up with something partly synchronous. By adjusting the wait-ack, you can determine the ratio of synchronous/asynchronous.
Sorry, I don't have any time for philosophical discussions. BR, Nikos ----- Original Message ----- From: jyotiranjan panda To: Nikos Balkanas Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 2:19 PM Subject: Re: Real Windoing in kannel for smpp ? Hi, By configuring wait-ack-expire = 2 for flow control, you are making the msg flow synchronous. Means we are not using the merits of asnchronous msg flow provided by smpp. Regards Jyoti Ranjan Panda On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> wrote: Hi, Yes, this is the right list for configuration issues. Not to worry all developers frequent here, along with many more users with on the field experience. Sliding windows is not a flow control issue, but a bandwidth optimizing one. Kannel doesn't provide for a sliding, dynamic window at application level, this is already provided by the TCP layer. How can you use ack for flow-control? 1) set wait-ack, or leave default (60") 2) set wait-ack-expire to 2 (don't send anything - wait for the ack) You can achieve similar results with max-pending-messages as already suggested. You don't need to worry about integrity, this is handled transparently by the TCP layer. BR, Nikos On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 12:47 PM, jyoti <[email protected]> wrote: Hi Nikons, I dont thing I will get my answer in user forum if I am not getting here. for your referance I am attaching my mail once again. My concern is that does there is any provision in kannel so that the ESME can avail of the optimum performance available at a particular time instead of predetermining some window limit and using this consistently ?. This recognises that a SMSC or ESME may be under varying levels of stress and that predetermined performance is not always guaranteed. Regards Jyoti Ranjan Panda -----Original Message----- From: Nikos Balkanas [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 3:59 PM To: jyoti Cc: Werner Coetzee; [email protected] Subject: Re: Real Windoing in kannel for smpp ? Please, move to users list for such discussions. Not devel. Nikos On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:34 AM, jyoti <[email protected]> wrote: Is this the solution for achiving flow control ?. i.e re-queue of message after geting a error code. Regards Jyoti Ranjan Panda -----Original Message----- From: Werner Coetzee [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 2:36 PM To: jyoti; [email protected] Subject: RE: Real Windoing in kannel for smpp ? Well, in that case, your 'receiver' should send you the appropriate error code in the command status of the response PDU. For instance ESME_RMSGQFUL and ESME_RTHROTTLED will cause the message to be re-queued in Kannel. Regards Werner -----Original Message----- From: jyoti [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 02 February 2009 11:02 To: Nikos Balkanas; [email protected] Subject: RE: Real Windoing in kannel for smpp ? Hi, What you are telling is not flow control or windowing. Real flow control is the concept of a receiver informing the sender that it can't accept any more data. Not that configuring statically before the process begins. Regards Jyoti Ranjan Panda -----Original Message----- From: Nikos Balkanas [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 2:08 PM To: jyoti; [email protected] Subject: Re: Real Windoing in kannel for smpp ? You could use throughput. BR, Nikos ----- Original Message ----- From: "jyoti" <[email protected]> To: "Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 10:37 AM Subject: RE: Real Windoing in kannel for smpp ? > Hi, > I want to know the solution for > : suppose if an ESME submits messages at a rate that exceeds the > capabilities of its peer, congestion may occur. > The ESME will continue to top up its window of unacknowledged requests, > keeping the SMSC under load to process these requests. > > By configuring Wait-ack I think we are making the process static, By using > congestion_state TLV we can control windowing at run time. > > If I am wrong please suggest. > > Thanks & Regards > Jyoti Ranjan Panda > > -----Original Message----- > From: Nikos Balkanas [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 1:35 PM > To: jyoti; [email protected] > Subject: Re: Real Windoing in kannel for smpp ? > > > Hi, > > Please check parameters wait-ack and wait-ack-expire in User's Guide. > > BR, > Nikos > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "jyoti" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 8:31 AM > Subject: Real Windoing in kannel for smpp ? > > >> Hi All, >> >> Does there any configurable parameter for windowing in smpp(i.e if I have >> connected to smsc through smpp)? >> >> Does congestion_state TLV is used in kannel for smpp? which could be sent >> in >> response as parameter to provide real windowing >> like TCP. >> >> Waiting for reply >> >> Thanks & Regards >> Jyoti Ranjan Panda >> >> > > -- PLEASE CONSIDER THE ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING THIS E-MAIL. This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the addressee(s). If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, distribution, copying, or other use of this message or its attachment(s) is strictly prohibited.
