++1 for me.
From: Ben Suffolk
To: Kannel Development list
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 2:30 PM
Subject: Fwd: [PATCH] dlr-group-id : Multiple SMSCs and a DLR group
Guys,
I have been using this for nearly a month now in production without any
problems.
Is there any reason why it should not be�committed to CVS?
Regards
Ben
Begin forwarded message:
From: Ben Suffolk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 29 January 2007 13:26:30 GMT
To: Ben Suffolk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Kannel Development list <devel@kannel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] dlr-group-id : Multiple SMSCs and a DLR group
I think a simple fix would be to have another field say dlr-id, which if
not set would default to the smsc-id. This field would then be used for the
smsc name in the dlr tables. This way you can group multiple smscs into a
logical dlr group, but still have individual control over them.
Any thoughts on this before I have a go at implementing it?
Well I got no responses in the negative to this idea, so I have implemented
it.
This patch allows you to add a config option to the smsc group called
dlr-group-id, this lets you have several SMSCs with different id's grouped
together so that they can share DLR data. i.e. in the situation that you send a
message via one SMSC and get the DLR back via the other but you want to allow
all the SMSCs to have different id's for control / logging purposes.
If you do not specify dlr-group-id in the config is uses smsc-id as before.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regards
Ben
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guys,
I have been using this for nearly a month now in production without
any problems.
Is there any reason why it should not be committed to CVS?
Regards
Ben
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Ben Suffolk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 29 January 2007 13:26:30 GMT
> To: Ben Suffolk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Kannel Development list <devel@kannel.org>
> Subject: [PATCH] dlr-group-id : Multiple SMSCs and a DLR group
>
>> I think a simple fix would be to have another field say dlr-id,
>> which if not set would default to the smsc-id. This field would
>> then be used for the smsc name in the dlr tables. This way you can
>> group multiple smscs into a logical dlr group, but still have
>> individual control over them.
>>
>> Any thoughts on this before I have a go at implementing it?
>
> Well I got no responses in the negative to this idea, so I have
> implemented it.
>
> This patch allows you to add a config option to the smsc group
> called dlr-group-id, this lets you have several SMSCs with
> different id's grouped together so that they can share DLR data.
> i.e. in the situation that you send a message via one SMSC and get
> the DLR back via the other but you want to allow all the SMSCs to
> have different id's for control / logging purposes.
>
> If you do not specify dlr-group-id in the config is uses smsc-id as
> before.
>
>

> Regards
>
> Ben
