what doesn't do sense for you? validity period in kannel is given relative
in minutes. relative to whatever timestamp
and this timestamp is wrong. validity as well as deferred should be
_absolute_ timestamp.
Correct expression would be:
"...validity is in relative time and not absolute time"
"...validity is not in absolute time"
"...validity is in minutes and not in seconds"
"...validity is not in seconds"
"minutes" doesn't have anything to do with "absolute time". Like comparing
apples with oranges.
Hope this is clearer now.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alexander Malysh" <amal...@kannel.org>
To: "Nikos Balkanas" <nbalka...@gmail.com>
Cc: "Devel Kannel" <de...@vm1.kannel.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 4:35 PM
Subject: Re: Patch: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (Re: syncronize kannel with smsc)
huh you seems to be on the wrong way! btw "imbecil" is wrong spelled... that
should be "imbecile"... but anyway it's just YOUR opinion
but not mine and we will stick to the facts...
Consider your answer:
"I don't see why we have to switch to relative time again. Only bug in
kannel is, that validity is in minutes and not
absolute time. The same bug apply to deferred."
what doesn't do sense for you? validity period in kannel is given relative
in minutes. relative to whatever timestamp
and this timestamp is wrong. validity as well as deferred should be
_absolute_ timestamp.
I hope you understand it now and if not please read code...
Thanks,
Alexander Malysh
Am 15.12.2010 um 15:18 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
Maybe you didn't mean to. But there are people from different cultures
frequenting this forum, and calling someone "imbecil" publicly is
certainly not flattering. All the same, please avoid using any suggestions
or personal characterizations on me. Just stick to the facts.
You should also re-read and correct your replies before posting them:
Consider your answer:
"I don't see why we have to switch to relative time again. Only bug in
kannel is, that validity is in minutes and not
absolute time. The same bug apply to deferred."
I am sorry, it just doesn't make any sense to me.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Malysh" <amal...@kannel.org>
To: "Nikos Balkanas" <nbalka...@gmail.com>
Cc: "Devel Kannel" <de...@vm1.kannel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: Patch: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (Re: syncronize kannel with smsc)
Nikos,
it was in no way an insult! but sometimes it better for all of us to think
a little bit longer before write a answer...
Thanks,
Alexander Malysh
Am 14.12.2010 um 13:45 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
Please avoid using such expressions. Simply, sometimes it is difficult to
understand what you say.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Malysh"
<amal...@kannel.org>
To: "Nikos Balkanas" <nbalka...@gmail.com>
Cc: "Milan P. Stanic" <m...@arvanta.net>; "ishagh ouldbah"
<ishagh...@yahoo.com>; "Devel Kannel" <devel@kannel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 2:32 PM
Subject: Re: Patch: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (Re: syncronize kannel with smsc)
Nikos,
sometimes you have to think a bit more before you write answer ;)
Converting validity to seconds will not fix this issue because it's again
relative
to something and this something is not the timestamp when message was
created but when message is sent and this is wrong.
Thanks,
Alexander Malysh
Am 14.12.2010 um 13:25 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
Yeah, but that's putting too much trust on external conditions, like the
SMSc, for which we have no knowledge. Relative time should fix this,
regardless of what the SMSc is doing. Bottom line, less problems for the
user.
As far as the validity period goes, I think that someone is asking for
it if he specifies 1' validity period. But I don't object to it, if you
want to have it specified in seconds, it's a trivial thing to do.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Malysh"
<amal...@kannel.org>
To: "Nikos Balkanas" <nbalka...@gmail.com>
Cc: "Alexander Malysh" <amal...@vm1.kannel.org>; "Milan P. Stanic"
<m...@arvanta.net>; "ishagh ouldbah" <ishagh...@yahoo.com>;
<de...@vm1.kannel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: Patch: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (Re: syncronize kannel with
smsc)
Hi,
it's a condition for every time based parameter that server synchronized
to NTP.
If this not a case it's not our bad.
I don't know reason for switching to absolute time anymore.
As to the bug: just imagine, you send message with validity of 1min,
kannel try to deliver to SMSC but SMSC is not reachable for 2 min.
Then SMSC is reachable again and kannel submits message to SMSC with
validity of 1min BUT validity is already expired because we
waited for 2 mins for SMSC.
Thanks,
Alexander Malysh
Am 13.12.2010 um 22:19 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
Hi,
I was not aware that you were in relative time before.
The only reason for switching is that it offers greater accuracy than
absolute time. There is no guarantee that SMScs are correctly
synchronized to NTP. Some users seem to objection to this. (or the UG
entry). You obviously had your reasons for switching to absolute time.
Could you list them or send me an email reference?
In kannel, in SMPP, the validity is correctly converted to calendar
date before sending out. There is no bug, and the resolution in
configuration is perefectly acceptable (seconds are an overkill).
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Malysh"
<amal...@kannel.org>
To: "Nikos Balkanas" <nbalka...@gmail.com>
Cc: "Milan P. Stanic" <m...@arvanta.net>; "ishagh ouldbah"
<ishagh...@yahoo.com>; <devel@kannel.org>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 7:29 PM
Subject: Re: Patch: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (Re: syncronize kannel with
smsc)
Hi,
I don't see why we have to switch to relative time again. Only bug in
kannel is, that validity is in minutes and not
absolute time. The same bug apply to deferred.
Thanks,
Alexander Malysh
Am 27.11.2010 um 09:09 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
I stand corrected. bb sends in, at least in SMPP, absolute time as GMT
+ validity * 60 for validity and scheduled delivery time. Not very
safe or good. Needs the server to be synchronized with SMSc, which
would probably mean both have to be ntp synchronized.
This is a defect of the SMPP spec. It defines the format of relative
time in absolute terms, instead of seconds, making it difficult to
calculate and reconstruct.
The proposed patch makes smpp work with relative time. Please test, I
do not have access to an SMSc. Let me know how it goes. I hope that
all SMScs support it. It is more accurate than absolute time, since it
doesn't require synchronization between smsc and bearerbox.
Please vote.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message ----- From: "Milan P. Stanic" <m...@arvanta.net>
To: <us...@kannel.org>
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: syncronize kannel with smsc
On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 05:31, ishagh ouldbah wrote:
are you sure?
According to SMPP version 3.4 time can be absolute or relative.
Absolute
time is default.
How it is implemented in particular software is another question. I
think that the kannel uses absolute time, at least for SMPP.
Here is comment from gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c
---------------------------------------------------------
/*
* check for validity and defered settings
* were message value has higher priiority then smsc config group
* value
* Note: we always send in UTC and just define "Time Difference" as
* 00 and
* direction '+'.
*/
----------------------------------------------------------
________________________________
From: Nikos Balkanas <nbalka...@gmail.com>
To: ishagh ouldbah <ishagh...@yahoo.com>; us...@kannel.org
Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 1:00:48 PM
Subject: Re: syncronize kannel with smsc
Well, UG is wrong there. In the SMSc definitions it states:
validityperiod integer
How long the message will be valid, i.e., how long the SMSC will try
try to send
the message to the recipient. Defined in minutes.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message ----- From: ishagh ouldbah
To: Nikos Balkanas ; us...@kannel.org
Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: syncronize kannel with smsc
thans for your reponce
but in SMS Push (send-sms) CGI Variables it is writen in the
userguid that to
use
the variable validity you should syncronize with smsc
contant
Optional. If given, Kannel will
inform SMS Center that it should
only try to send the message for
this many minutes. If the
destination mobile is off other
situation that it cannot receive
the sms, the smsc discards the
message. Note: you must have
your Kannel box time
synchronized with the SMS
Center.
note that i need to specify it for a specified service
regards
From: Nikos Balkanas <nbalka...@gmail.com>
To: ishagh ouldbah <ishagh...@yahoo.com>; us...@kannel.org
Sent: Sun, November 21, 2010 4:00:52 PM
Subject: Re: syncronize kannel with smsc
Hi,
You don't need to. SMPP protocol works with validity period
(relative time).
Therefore, no absolute time is ever involved and you don't need to
synchronize.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message ----- From: ishagh ouldbah
To: us...@kannel.org
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010 4:18 PM
Subject: syncronize kannel with smsc
Hi all,
I want to set validity variable so I need to syncrnize with the smsc
my question is
How can I syncronize kannel box with smsc
regards
--
Kind regards, Milan
--------------------------------------------------
Arvanta, IT Security http://www.arvanta.net
Please do not send me e-mail containing HTML code.
<smsc_smpp.diff>
