Try setting dlr-mask, without dlr-url to see if anything improves.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: Elton Hoxha
To: Alejandro Guerrieri
Cc: Nikos Balkanas ; kannel users
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: Omitting the generation of delivery reports
Hi,
The SMSC provides the ID (at least tried with other SMPP gateways) even If I
dont request the delivery status. Its kind of acknowledment that sms has been
submitted to SMSC, not caring about the delivery. I confirm this because I
administer/operate the SMSC as well. LOG-LEVEL has been set to 0 since the
beginning.
This log shows when I dont set dlr-url;
2009-03-17 10:08:23 [32213] [8] DEBUG: SMPP PDU 0x96238f8 dump:
2009-03-17 10:08:23 [32213] [8] DEBUG: type_name: submit_sm_resp
2009-03-17 10:08:23 [32213] [8] DEBUG: command_id: 2147483652 = 0x80000004
2009-03-17 10:08:23 [32213] [8] DEBUG: command_status: 0 = 0x00000000
2009-03-17 10:08:23 [32213] [8] DEBUG: sequence_number: 60626 = 0x0000ecd2
2009-03-17 10:08:23 [32213] [8] DEBUG: message_id: "236982954961"
From access.log
2009-03-17 10:08:23 Sent SMS [SMSC:D] [SVC:bulk1] [ACT:] [BINF:] [FID:]
[from:1001] [to:355672509006] [flags:-1:0:-1:-1:-1] [msg:11:helloworld!]
[udh:0:]
THis below shows with dlr-url set:
2009-03-17 10:11:38 [32213] [8] DEBUG: SMPP PDU 0x96238f8 dump:
2009-03-17 10:11:38 [32213] [8] DEBUG: type_name: submit_sm_resp
2009-03-17 10:11:38 [32213] [8] DEBUG: command_id: 2147483652 = 0x80000004
2009-03-17 10:11:38 [32213] [8] DEBUG: command_status: 0 = 0x00000000
2009-03-17 10:11:38 [32213] [8] DEBUG: sequence_number: 60634 = 0x0000ecda
2009-03-17 10:11:38 [32213] [8] DEBUG: message_id: "236982955487"
2009-03-17 10:11:38 [32213] [8] DEBUG: SMPP PDU dump ends.
2009-03-17 10:11:38 [32213] [8] DEBUG: DLR[mysql]: Adding DLR smsc=D,
ts=236982955487, src=1001, dst=355672509006, mask=31, boxc=
2009-03-17 10:11:38 [32213] [8] DEBUG: sql: INSERT INTO dlr (smsc, ts,
source, destination, service, url, mask, boxc, delivery) VALUES ('D',
'236982955487', '1001', '355672509006', 'bulk1', '', '31', '', '0');
From access.log
2009-03-17 10:11:38 Sent SMS [SMSC:D] [SVC:bulk1] [ACT:] [BINF:]
[FID:236982955487] [from:1001] [to:355672509006] [flags:-1:0:-1:-1:31]
[msg:11:helloworld!] [udh:0:]
The message id is coming in the SMPP PDU, but it is not written in the
access.log in both cases.
Regards
Elton
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Alejandro Guerrieri
<[email protected]> wrote:
Are you sure that your SMSC provides the message_id when you don't ask for
the DLR's?
Set log-level = 0 and check your SMSC's PDU's and try with and without
dlr-mask/url. If the ID is there on both cases, then it's a Kannel bug,
otherwise you should talk with your SMSC's operator.
Regards,
Alejandro
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Elton Hoxha <[email protected]> wrote:
No I call it simply like this:
http://10.1.2.153:13014/cgi-bin/sendsms?username=bulk1&password=bulk1&from=1001&to=355672509006&text=helloworld!
2009/3/17 Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]>
Do you still set the dlr-mask?
----- Original Message -----
From: Elton Hoxha
To: Nikos Balkanas
Cc: Falko Ziemann ; kannel users
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: Omitting the generation of delivery reports
The access.log doesnt provide the smsc unique ID if i dont set the
dlr-url
2009-03-17 07:43:26 Sent SMS [SMSC:D] [SVC:bulk1] [ACT:] [BINF:]
[FID:] [from:1001] [to:355672509006] [flags:-1:0:-1:-1:-1] [msg:11:helloworld!]
[udh:0:]
FID is empty!
With dlr-url set it is like that
2009-03-11 09:33:30 Sent SMS [SMSC:internal1] [SVC:a] [ACT:] [BINF:]
[FID:236981864111] [from:elton] [to:355672509006] [flags:-1:0:-1:-1:31]
[msg:11:helloworld!] [udh:0:]
2009/3/17 Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]>
Actually not. You get it in access logs.
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: Elton Hoxha
To: Falko Ziemann
Cc: Nikos Balkanas ; kannel users
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 9:42 AM
Subject: Re: Omitting the generation of delivery reports
What about the message ID that comes from SMSC??? If DLR-URL is
not set I`m losing that value too.
Regards
Elton
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Falko Ziemann <[email protected]>
wrote:
Simply not set the DLR-MASK and DLR-URL then kannel will not
request any DLR. That's the only chance.
Regards
Falko
Am 17.03.2009 um 08:29 schrieb Elton Hoxha:
Hi,
My issue doesnt concern kannel to ask SMSC for DLR. It is to
tell SMSC not to generate status report in the database. With DLR-MASK whatever
its value is, the SMSC will generate it, but KANNEL will decide whether will
retrieve it or not.
I`m using BULK SMS sending hundreed of thousands SMS and IT
is exhausting for SMSC to generate this amount of reports.
Thanks
Elton
2009/3/17 Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]>
Hi,
Actually not. This is the part where kannel decides to ask
SMSc for DLRs or not. It is not the part where it decides which DLRs to forward
to the dlr_url, as suggested by Falco.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: Elton Hoxha
To: Falko Ziemann
Cc: kannel users
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: Omitting the generation of delivery reports
Hi,
Did you mean this?
if (DLR_IS_SUCCESS_OR_FAIL(msg->sms.dlr_mask))
00918 pdu->u.submit_sm.registered_delivery = 1;
Inside the SMPP_PDU *msg_to_pdu function
In we change this kannel should be recompiled
again.....is there any other way?
Regards
Elton
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Falko Ziemann
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
this is a protocol issue. SMPP for example has only the
switch "registered_delivery" where you can (de-)activate all DLRs. It is not
possible to activate on some kinds of DLR. Kannel has no control about this.
But kannel should not forward certain DLRs to the DLR-URL if you're not
interessted in them.
Regards
Falko
Am 15.03.2009 um 17:52 schrieb Elton Hoxha:
Hi all,
I know this subject has been asked a lot, but my
concern is something else. I have played with dlr-mask pretty much and it is
working very well. In some cases I dont want to exhaust the database of SMSC
creating useless delivery statuses for bulk SMS. Making my dlr-mask=10 didnt
change anything. It is supposed that this value concerns only to submit and
failure. This is what I need, only the acknowledment that sms has been
submitted. But the SMSC is creating the delivery status as well, pending in the
queue and making retries. Why the mask is behaving the same with different
values?
Thanks
Elton
