I thought the patch was just installed for that bug :) kidding Thanks guys
2009/3/20 Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> > Hi, > > Not to repeating ourselves, I believe that Alej already replied that this > is a bug. > > BR, > Nikos > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Elton Hoxha <[email protected]> > *To:* Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Alejandro Guerrieri <[email protected]> ; kannel > users<[email protected]> > *Sent:* Friday, March 20, 2009 9:54 AM > *Subject:* Re: Omitting the generation of delivery reports > > Hi users, > > Any clue on this issue? > Isnt any way to retrieve this message id coming inside the PDU but not > written in the access.log? > > 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" > > Thanks > Elton > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Elton Hoxha <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The FID comes empty >> >> 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] >> >> Regards >> >> Elton >> >> 2009/3/17 Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> >> >>> Isn't that what you wanted? Get the FID, but ignore the DLR? Are you >>> getting the FID in the access logs? >>> >>> Nikos >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> *From:* Elton Hoxha <[email protected]> >>> *To:* Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> >>> *Cc:* Alejandro Guerrieri <[email protected]> ; kannel >>> users<[email protected]> >>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 17, 2009 2:05 PM >>> *Subject:* Re: Omitting the generation of delivery reports >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Only with DLR-mask: >>> >>> 2009-03-17 12:00:40 [32213] [8] DEBUG: DLR[mysql]: Looking for DLR >>> smsc=D, ts=235587100949, dst=355672509006, type=1 >>> 2009-03-17 12:00:40 [32213] [8] DEBUG: sql: SELECT mask, service, url, >>> source, destination, boxc FROM dlr WHERE smsc='D' AND ts='235587100949'; >>> 2009-03-17 12:00:40 [32213] [8] DEBUG: Found entry, row[0]=10, >>> row[1]=bulk1, row[2]=, row[3]=1001, row[4]=355672509006 row[5]= >>> 2009-03-17 12:00:40 [32213] [8] DEBUG: DLR[mysql]: Ignoring DLR message >>> because of mask type=1 dlr->mask=10 >>> 2009-03-17 12:00:40 [32213] [8] DEBUG: removing DLR from database >>> >>> It is just ignored by kannel, but it is still created in SMSC >>> >>> Elton >>> >>> 2009/3/17 Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> >>> >>>> Try setting dlr-mask, without dlr-url to see if anything improves. >>>> >>>> BR, >>>> Nikos >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> *From:* Elton Hoxha <[email protected]> >>>> *To:* Alejandro Guerrieri <[email protected]> >>>> *Cc:* Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> ; kannel users<[email protected]> >>>> *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 <[email protected]> >>>>>>> *To:* Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> >>>>>>> *Cc:* Falko Ziemann <[email protected]> ; kannel users<[email protected]> >>>>>>> *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 <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> *To:* Falko Ziemann <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> *Cc:* Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> ; kannel >>>>>>>> users<[email protected]> >>>>>>>> *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 <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> *To:* Falko Ziemann <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> *Cc:* kannel users <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> *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 >>>>>>>>>> <http://doxygen.kannel.org/d1/d5d/dlr_8h.html#a13>(msg->sms.dlr_mask)) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 00918 pdu >>>>>>>>>> <http://doxygen.kannel.org/df/de6/wsp__session_8c.html#a182a79>->u >>>>>>>>>> <http://doxygen.kannel.org/da/d81/structSMPP__PDU.html#o15>.submit_sm.registered_delivery >>>>>>>>>> = 1; >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Inside the >>>>>>>>>> SMPP_PDU<http://doxygen.kannel.org/da/d81/structSMPP__PDU.html>* >>>>>>>>>> msg_to_pdu<http://doxygen.kannel.org/de/dfe/smsc__smpp_8c.html#a23>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 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
