++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