Hi,
You are correct, if you don't handle MOs and don't need a sendsms url, you
can do away with it.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: Toby Phipps
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 1:46 PM
Subject: Is smsbox needed in my config?
Looking for some advice…
Kannel is running very happily for me with sqlbox being used for all message
handling. I queue MTs by inserting into the sql-insert-table and DLRs and MO
handled by a process monitoring the sql-log-table, pulling and processing
message rows as they arrive. I have no need for HTTP message submission,
Kannel initiated reply SMS or DLR handling via URL calls.
In this situation, is there any reason that I still need to run smsbox, or
should I be ok with just bearerbox and sqlbox running? From what I have
understand from the architecture documentation, smsbox handles HTTP calls
for message submission, and processes message arrivals by either replying or
calling a URL. I’m thinking I can do away with it.
On a side note, the main reason I’m looking at shutting smsbox down is that
I’m using the dlr_url field to store my internal message ID – this works
well as I can specify it during message submission and it makes its way into
the sql-log-table, giving me a reliable correlation between the DLR and the
original message without having to do any other matching. The only side
effect I’ve noticed about this setup is smsbox logging an error when each
DLR is received complaining that the dlr_url is malformed as it doesn’t
start with http:// or https://. Rather than patching smsbox to ignore this
condition, I am thinking that shutting it down altogether might be a better
approach.
Any comments?
Thanks,
Toby.
