Interest: competition. Supporting message_payload would be a good reason for choosing one provider over another if the cost of sending large messages using payload is lower than the cost of sending multiple messages. I have no ideea how they bill.
-----Original Message----- From: fred [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14 September 2006 07:27 To: devel Subject: Re: Sending long text messages using SMPP message_payload don't know of any SMSC that allow message_payload in Australia at least. AFAIK,carriers bill on each message, ie mesg split to 3 x 160chars, thats 3 x charges, so, if you do it with one message_payload, billed only once ? Carrier makes less money, so like that is ever going to happen? So, just out of interest, what SMSC does it? and how do they bill it? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stipe Tolj" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Raul Igrisan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <devel@kannel.org> Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2006 10:14 PM Subject: Re: Sending long text messages using SMPP message_payload > Raul Igrisan wrote: > > > It would be nice to have this option (use message_payload or split) as a > > config parameter in smpp smsc group. > > By any chance, have anyone implement it already? > > nop, not AFAIK.... I'd even suggest this behaviour: > > If connection is a v3.4 version, then we could "auto-detect" if SMSC supports > the this feature, like issue a submit_sm with the message_payload field, and if > we get a interpretable error code, then "fall-back" to the "normal way". > > But a config directive may be also applicable. > > Any other opinions on these issues? > > 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 > ------------------------------------------------------------------- >
