Data_sm PDU cannot contain a short_message field. Actually data_sm
contains only TLVs and instead of "short_message" field we should use
TLV "message_payload" to send text. As a result text=xxxx is obsolete
when sending data_sm PDU. If we use data=xxxx what would be the value of
data since all necessary data will be included in "meta-data=?smpp?" ?
-----Original Message-----
From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:aguerri...@kannel.org]
Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 12:04 PM
To: Michael Zervakis
Cc: devel@kannel.org
Subject: Re: SMPP data_sm implementation for MT messages
>What about using "data=xxxx" instead of "text=xxxx" ?
>--
>Alejandro Guerrieri
>aguerri...@kannel.org
>
>
>
>On 27/11/2009, at 10:00, Michael Zervakis wrote:
>
>> Data_sm can be used as an alternate of submit_sm when transmitting
>> optional parameters (meta-data) and some carriers require the use of
>> data_sm for MT charging applications.
>> Since Kannel is not implementing this feature it's a good idea to
>> start a discussion on how this could be implemented.
>>
>> First of all it's obvious that "static int send_messages()" at gw
>> \smsc\smsc_smpp.c must be able to differentiate msgs that need to be
>> sent as data_sm.
>> I can think of two ways to achieve this:
>> 1) Alter MSG definition to inlcude a new parameter that defines type
>> of message Data or normal SMS
>> Possible ways to use the new parameter could be the following
>> /cgi-bin/sendsms?from=1111&to=2222&<new parameter>=data&meta-data=?
>> smpp?key=value
>> /cgi-bin/senddata?from=1111&to=2222&meta-data=?smpp?key=value
>> 2) Leave MSG definition untouched and use meta-data to mark msg as
>> data
>> /cgi-bin/sendsms?from=1111&to=2222&meta-data=?smpp?<new
>> parameter>=data&key=value
>>
>> Finally a new function has to be defined at gw\smsc\smsc_smpp.c to
>> build data_sm pdu from msg for example "static SMPP_PDU
>> *dmsg_to_pdu(SMPP *smpp, Msg *msg)"
>> and function "static int handle_pdu()" at gw\smsc\smsc_smpp.c has to
>> be modified to include a case for data_sm_resp PDU.
>>
>> Any comments?
>>
>>
