Alexander Malysh wrote:
P.S. I find MNC's solution acceptable too but it need more user
configuration.
yep, I like the "idea" in it's base too, since it "assumes" that Kannel does has
it's own MSISDN format scheme, which we should have actually.
But I dislike the fact that user's may "forget" to use the unified-prefix within
the smsc groups and also that they are "not aware" of the fact they would need one.
So, I'd go first for Alex's way in stripping away everything that seems
logically to be country code or/and prefix, reducing the probability that the
same base MSISDN number is transported via the same smsc-id in the same
timestamp very drastically for various country/network code variations.
This is still no perfect solution IMO. Since it's still not fully fail safe.
We'd need a policy within Kannel internally what MSISDN scheme we apply. The
user should BE AWARE that he has to modify the unified-prefix (and regex) rules
that way, that everything that enters bearerbox abstracted layer is in Kannel
internal MSISDN scheme.
This will definetly more discussion and conceptual brain...
Stipe
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Kölner Landstrasse 419
40589 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
tolj.org system architecture Kannel Software Foundation (KSF)
http://www.tolj.org/ http://www.kannel.org/
mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------
