So you think that type: 16 does it work fine? I cannot determine if it was
kannel issue or smsc issue. In both cases I get "REJECTED" and I have no
idea why it is rejected.

Am I missing something?

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Rene Kluwen <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think your smsc is "incorrect" rather than Kannel.
>
> Issue a support ticket with them, because Kannel does the right thing (tm).
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Van: Ivan Kurnosov <[email protected]>
> Verzonden: woensdag 25 mei 2011 2:53
> Aan: Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]>
> CC: [email protected]
> Onderwerp: Re: Stopping reconnecting after unbing
>
>
> Also the weird thing is that after SMSC has been disconnected - all
> messages that have been tried to sent through that broken kannel instance
> was marked as "16: smsc reject". In this case I'm not able to get in my
> program side whether it was rejected by my SMSC or by broken kannel. I think
> it is absolutely incorrect - I think that delivery report types should be
> expanded...
>
> 2011/5/25 Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]>
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The SMSc error you got was one of invalid username. I don't know why your
>> SMSc returned this error, since you can obviously connect fine, but since
>> this is a terminal error that cannot be corrected by itself, there is no
>> sense in reconnecting. Of course you don't need to restart kannel, you can
>> just restart the smsc from the web interface.
>>
>> BR,
>> Nikos
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: Ivan Kurnosov
>> To: [email protected]
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 2:55 AM
>> Subject: Stopping reconnecting after unbing
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi there.
>>
>>
>> Just some minutes ago something strange has happened that I cannot
>> explain:
>>
>>
>> 2011-05-25 10:17:51 [11434] [6] DEBUG: SMPP[sv]: Got PDU:
>> 2011-05-25 10:17:51 [11434] [6] DEBUG: SMPP PDU 24d080 dump:
>> 2011-05-25 10:17:51 [11434] [6] DEBUG:   type_name: unbind
>> 2011-05-25 10:17:51 [11434] [6] DEBUG:   command_id: 6 = 0x00000006
>> 2011-05-25 10:17:51 [11434] [6] DEBUG:   command_status: 0 = 0x00000000
>> 2011-05-25 10:17:51 [11434] [6] DEBUG:   sequence_number: 8244 = 0x000
>>
>
>
> [Het originele bericht is niet volledig opgenomen]
>



-- 
With best regards, Ivan Kurnosov

Reply via email to