nothing wrong in this idea, I already done this in my tree :) Thanks, Alexander Malysh
Am 24.02.2011 um 20:53 schrieb Sanjay Bhandari: > Less moving parts. And more efficient, right? There wouldn't be that loop > through bearerbox. > > Based on you knowledge of the code, would it be a bad call to teach bearerbox > to act like a SMSC over the SMPP protocol? What are the caveats? > > Sanjay > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Alexander Malysh <[email protected]> wrote: > why do you want todo this if it's already implemented in opensmppbox? > > Thanks, > Alexander Malysh > > Am 24.02.2011 um 17:06 schrieb Sanjay Bhandari: > > > Oh great! Thanks for the info. That seems like will work for us. > > > > Just another question, while I have your attention. It's bearerbox that > > speaks the SMPP protocol, right? What is your opinion on modifying the > > code there to enable it to talk to ESMEEs (in addition to SMSCs, like it > > does now)? I am just trying to pick your brains (someone who has looked > > at the code extensively), to see if I am under-thinking this. Do you > > think there are any major blockers? > > > > Sanjay > > > > On 2/24/2011 10:50 AM, Alexander Malysh wrote: > >> yes, please read userguide for details... > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Alexander Malysh > >> > >> Am 24.02.2011 um 16:31 schrieb Sanjay Bhandari: > >> > >>> Does that allow me to do these two simultaneously? > >>> > >>> SMSC <==> bearerbox <==> smsbox <==> applications > >>> ESMEE <==> bearerbox <==> smsbox <==> applications > >>> > >>> Or is it that no traffic will be able to go out to the SMSC at all? Like, > >>> > >>> ESMEE <==> smppbox <==> bearerbox <==> loop SMSC <==> bearerbox > >>> <==> smsbox <==> applications > >>> > >>> Is all traffic outboud to SMSC looped back? > >>> > >>> Sanjay > >>> > >>> On 2/24/2011 9:38 AM, Alexander Malysh wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> bearerbox has loop SMSC module. This allow you to loop traffic via > >>>> bearerbox to smsbox... > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Alexander Malysh > >>>> > >>>> Am 24.02.2011 um 14:22 schrieb Sanjay Bhandari: > >>>> > >>>>> A few others suggested this as well, so I looked into it. > >>>>> > >>>>> Correct me if I am wrong, but opensmppbox and smppbox direct traffic > >>>>> from ESMEEs towards bearerbox, and eventually the SMSCs. Our use case is > >>>>> such that we want to enable SMS flow between ESMEEs and smsbox (and > >>>>> eventually the applications talking to smsbox). > >>>>> > >>>>> Here is what we are after. Kannel does the following now: > >>>>> > >>>>> SMSC <==> bearerbox <==> smsbox <==> applications > >>>>> > >>>>> We need to enable the following: > >>>>> > >>>>> ESMEE <==> bearerbox <==> smsbox <==> applications > >>>>> > >>>>> As you can see, this requires bearerbox to be the SMSC on the SMPP > >>>>> protocol bind. Hence my question. But, of course, any configuration is > >>>>> fine as long as the SMS flow between ESMEEs and applications is enabled. > >>>>> > >>>>> ESMEE <==> whatever <==> smsbox <==> applications > >>>>> > >>>>> Do you have a suggestion for that? > >>>>> > >>>>> Sanjay > >>>>> > >>>>> On 2/24/2011 5:55 AM, Stipe Tolj wrote: > >>>>>> Am 23.02.2011 20:12, schrieb Sanjay Bhandari: > >>>>>>> We have a bind where the peer wants to act as the ESMEE. I can't find > >>>>>>> a way to > >>>>>>> configure Kannel as an SMSC. Am I missing it somehow? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> More importantly, if we decided to modify the code to try and support > >>>>>>> the SMSC > >>>>>>> role, are there any hidden gotchas that we should be aware of? I > >>>>>>> guess, I am > >>>>>>> wondering why this capability is not implemented in Kannel already. > >>>>>>> Are there > >>>>>>> any blocking reasons? > >>>>>> Kannel has 2 options to act as SMPP server: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> a) via the open source Kannel opensmppbox, which is located in the SVN > >>>>>> trunk > >>>>>> repository. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> b) via the commercial add-on Kannel SMPP v3.4 server (smppbox), which > >>>>>> has a much > >>>>>> wider complexity and feature scope, including a plugin API layer for > >>>>>> additional > >>>>>> logics and various accounting support methods. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> In case you're interested in b), please let me know. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Stipe > >>>>>> > >> > >
