hi ( STIPE, IGORE )!
I think I've sent my patch for newest cvs in my second mail (check that
out ) . For those who have older cvs ( we checked our patch with the older
version), I'll attach our patch here with.
And Igore, our implementation of SAR is done in wtp layer(In the wtp
state machine. ). Is there any advantage to implement SAR in a layer below
wtp ??urs, denzel. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stipe Tolj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "kannel-mailing-list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 1:50 AM Subject: Re: SAR > Hi Denzel, > > > Here's a SAR patch we made ( diffrent to Igore's). We tested this > > with an earlier CVS ( may be in sync with gateway1.2.0 ). Nack's are > > implemented. And we had a problem with igore's patch, cause > > sometimes the nacks failed . > > could you point out at which conditions the NACKs failed?! > > BTW, please repost your patch in unified diff format and attach it as > plain text file to the mail, no .rar archive please. > > Stipe > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Wapme Systems AG > > Vogelsanger Weg 80 > 40470 Düsseldorf > > Tel: +49-211-74845-0 > Fax: +49-211-74845-299 > > E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > wapme.net - wherever you are >
my-patch.diff
Description: Binary data
