in relation to: modem unable to send sms
Dear all, I have a modem which last week began to refuse to send sms (it could receive sms, establish gprs connection, etc.) I've posted about it yesterday. Only weird thing I've noticed is it keeps saying is roaming: AT+CREG responds +CREG: 0,5 even though I'm inside the 'native' area where that same SIM belongs and used to work. AT+COPS? returns the right info for my provider. How come this modem could be roaming? could this be related to the problem of unable to send sms? BTW that same chip sends sms withouth problem if plugged in a regular cell phone. best regards
Re: Using SSL with a Certificate Authority (CA)
Hi Jim This is not an issue related to Kannel but to the SSL Certification Authority mechanism. In order for a browser to "accept" a cert as valid by default, the owner of the CA should register itself with the browser developper/owner (MS/Mozilla/Opera/etc) and, depending on the browser, this could cost several thousands -and even millions- of dollars. Therefore only big/medium CA are able to be listed on default accepted CA within most common browsers. Normally once you tell your browser to accept a cert from a non listed CA, your browser will remember this and should not ask you to accept the cert again. I do work with self signed certs and just tell my customers about this and have no problems. Regards Alvaro On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Jim Cropcho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does anybody know how (or if it's possible) to use SSL with a CA? For > example, when I access Kannel's status page in > Firefox, I get the familiar > > XXX is not a trusted site. Do you want to accept the cert permanently, > temporarily or not at all? > > My cert is the GoDaddy TurboSSL variety, and *IMPORTANT* came with a > certificate chain (or "intermediate bundle") file. > > If I ignore the warning and accept the cert, everything works fine, > however other machines using my sms gateway are subject to a 'man in the > middle' attack. (right?) > > Thanks in advance for your help! > -- |-| Envíe y Reciba Datos y mensajes de Texto (SMS) hacia y desde cualquier celular y Nextel en México y en mas de 180 paises. Use aplicaciones 2 vias via SMS y GPRS online Visitenos en www.smsglobal.com.mx y www.pravcom.com
Using SSL with a Certificate Authority (CA)
Does anybody know how (or if it's possible) to use SSL with a CA? For example, when I access Kannel's status page in Firefox, I get the familiar XXX is not a trusted site. Do you want to accept the cert permanently, temporarily or not at all? My cert is the GoDaddy TurboSSL variety, and *IMPORTANT* came with a certificate chain (or "intermediate bundle") file. If I ignore the warning and accept the cert, everything works fine, however other machines using my sms gateway are subject to a 'man in the middle' attack. (right?) Thanks in advance for your help!
Re: SMPP in VPN
exactly, for the firewall itself, is just to allow the IPSec or whatever traffic and on the VPN policies you can restrict the ports, IPs, protocol inside if the VPN On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Alejandro Guerrieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sowmi, > > The SMPP traffic will be encapsulated inside the tunnel, son afaik no > specific rules needs to be done. The firewall should only allow the VPN > traffic to pass through, the firewall won't "see" the SMPP but an encrypted > stream going through the VPN. > > Regards, > > Alejandro > > > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 4:20 PM, sowmi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > We have a VPN connection to a mobile operator. Our Network Administrator & > > the operators admin, want to set up firewall rules to be as restrictive as > > possible. > > > > Now if I want to bind my SME in Transceiver mode, what kind of Firewall > > rules does my admin & the operators admin need to set up? > > > > I know the SMSC's IP & Port so that definitely has to be allowed on my > > firewall rules as outbound. What about the operator's side? When they send > a > > MO message what port on the SME will they be sending it to? Is it a > standard > > port or is it negotiated by the protocol? > > > > Please help! > > > > Thanks in anticipation. > > -- > > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/SMPP-in-VPN-tp15909733p15909733.html > > Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > > > > > > > -- > Alejandro Guerrieri > Magicom > http://www.magicom-bcn.net/ > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/aguerrieri
Re: Proposal: Kannel Wiki
yep, I agree, mediawiki is much better On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 1:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Its quite important also to consider prior to populating the current > http://wiki.kannel.org based on DokuWiki, if we should migrate to > http://www.mediawiki.org that I personally find most suitable for kannel. > I do find www.voip-info.org as an example Wiki well formated and easy > to find info. > > Any other suggestions for a Wiki base? > >
Re: SMPP in VPN
Alejandro Guerrieri schrieb: Sowmi, The SMPP traffic will be encapsulated inside the tunnel, son afaik no specific rules needs to be done. The firewall should only allow the VPN traffic to pass through, the firewall won't "see" the SMPP but an encrypted stream going through the VPN. now, the VPN is the pure "secured" trasport layer, like IP in the non-VPN way. But I guess they still want to secure the end-points of the VPNs where the packet packing/unpacking happens. Sowmi, generally speaking: the server port is "fix", so you have to allow your client-side to connect to the IP:port of the operator, to bind the transceiver session. The client side will have a random socket port assigned, so the operator won't be able to limit based on your client IP:port, but ONLY on your client IP. So you have this factors to obey: operator(IP:port)client(IP) you (client) regulate the operator(IP:port) they (operator) regulate the client(IP) Stipe --- Kölner Landstrasse 419 40589 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany tolj.org system architecture Kannel Software Foundation (KSF) http://www.tolj.org/ http://www.kannel.org/ mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org ---
Re: DLR with OTA
hi Alexander try this one : gateway/contrib/php-admin/sendota.php -Original Message- From: users@kannel.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 29 Февруари 2008 г. To: seik Subject:DLR with OTA > Hi! > Is it possible to get DLR when sending OTA settings with > /cgi-bin/sendota? > I'm using SMPP connection and can get DLRs from usual SMSs but when i > send OTA settings there is no DLR flag in kannel access log: > 2008-02-29 14:37:39 Sent SMS [SMSC:XXX] [SVC:] [ACT:] [BINF:] > [from:XXX] [to:XXX] [flags:-1:1:-1:-1:-1] > dlr-mask set to 31 and dlr-url set too. > thanks.
Re[3]: Proposal: Kannel Wiki
I read all the time only congratulations for the good wiki idea .. :) how to proceed further? i have searched hundreds of pages in my early days in a view to automate the modem initialization, modem reset ... best modem baudrates, USB drivers ...etc small but not strictly kannel related issues. Same for VPN connectivity to telco SMSC ... Same for the DLR issue, most of the common users cannot make the difference between the internal kannel DLR storage and the DLR status of a sent message and the usual accuses come right away - the DLR mechanism doesnt work ... help me to get the DLR status. Why the hell DLR db table is empty, even there is no errors in the kannel log ... :) The manual is written by the developers, people with clear understanding of the kannel architecture .. This is the reason, by my understanding, the manual to be good for average experienced kannel users, not for beginners. the voip wiki has a lot of examples, from point 0 to the end , and the examples are per different scenarios. Well, we could define the usual scenarios. And to start writing the examples. That means registration, write access privileges ... :) We could go on separate host different than wiki.kannel.org Or, to contribute to wiki.kannel.org .. The question which way we will go ? I really dont know. Hope someone else does. cheers -Original Message- From: users@kannel.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 10 2008 ?. To: seik Subject:Proposal: Kannel Wiki > I totally agree with Alejandro, > > But sometimes as my case, im running kannel as the core platform > for all my company’s operations and we usually don’t have the time > to search through years of mailings. So our best shot is to ask at > once, so for me wiki would be very helpful because is easier to > search, and if its not there, then I can ask the list. > > For people like me, where time its really money, would it better > yet to have a paid 24/7 online support (chat, vip mailing list, etc) > Think about it. > > From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sбbado, 08 de Marzo de 2008 10:07 p.m. > To: Juan Nin > Cc: users@kannel.org > Subject: Re: Re: Proposal: Kannel Wiki > > That was my point, yes. > One of the most commonly seen questions being made on the mailing > list is how to send a wap-push using kannel. Juan has put together a > very thorough how-to using kannel's PPG. I've made a PHP function to > encode a wap-push into a binary message and send it using kannel > (without ppg). Many others has put similar pieces of code using Java and > other languages. > I think I've sent a link to the my email on gmane about 10 times. Similar > with Juan's code. > Both articles are easily found by googling a little bit, yet many > people is lazy enough to ask before finding by themselves. > IRC won't be any good with this particular problem. Even if being > recorded, the question wouldn't be asked, nor answered, at once. > That'd make very difficult to google it. Anyway, it doesn't work > with the mailing list, why would it work with the IRC log? > Regards, > Alejandro > On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 10:02 PM, Juan Nin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I understand Alejandro's point of view, and agree with him. > He's not saying that IRC is no good. > What he's saying is that IRC is not the solution to the problem I > mentioned, since there's no record of that... > It's a solution for that right moment, and for someone who's there. > But won't allow a new guy looking for some solution to search for an > already discussed one and see it. > On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 8:33 PM, Michael Sole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Alejandro, >> >> >> >> I disagree I think IRC is a great solution so long as people are there to >> help. >> >> >> >> As for answering the same question over and over again. Yeah that can be >> tiresome but entirely important in an open source community. >> >> >> >> The fact is that not everyone searches the same way and sometimes what is >> obvious to one is not so obvious to another. >> >> >> >> Michael >> >> >> >> >> From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 2:53 PM >> To: users@kannel.org >> Subject: UNS: Re: Proposal: Kannel Wiki >> >> >> >> IRC's not good for helping moderate-size communities imho. >> >> * It requires both parts to be available at the same time to be able to >> help. >> * Conversations are rarely stored and searchable. That's the whole point of >> a wiki: to have things in written once and forever. >> * It doesn't scale well when there's a lot of people talking. >> >> It has even more problems than a mailing list. People ask the "wap-push >> question" even with tons of threads archived by gmane, mail-archive and >> similar services. How many times are you willing to answer it? >> >> I think the wiki could be a good idea, but extending the users guide or a >> faq addressing some of the most commonly asked quest
Re: DLR with MCC / MNC return values
Hi George, As far as I know this doesn't work this way according to the standards, allthough I have seen some suppliers having this in their DLRs. But for most suppliers they do not supply this information, since they want to comply with the standards. Some providers have the posibility to do HLR lookup, where you can request MCC and MNC for a certain mobile number. .. Med venlig hilsen / Best Regards Mads N. Vestergaard Teknisk ansvarlig / CTO CoolSMS www.coolsms.com Phone: +45 7026 1272 Fax:+45 7630 1046 Mobile: +45 4270 1272 This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Den 10/03/2008 kl. 01.19 skrev [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hello, Is there a way when sending via SMPP, to get within DLR, MCC/MNC values for billing purposes? Is there a way to force such a return value and if provider needs to enable it, what is it exactly they need to enable so we can communicate this parameter to them? Regards George
Re: SMPP in VPN
Sowmi, The SMPP traffic will be encapsulated inside the tunnel, son afaik no specific rules needs to be done. The firewall should only allow the VPN traffic to pass through, the firewall won't "see" the SMPP but an encrypted stream going through the VPN. Regards, Alejandro On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 4:20 PM, sowmi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > We have a VPN connection to a mobile operator. Our Network Administrator & > the operators admin, want to set up firewall rules to be as restrictive as > possible. > > Now if I want to bind my SME in Transceiver mode, what kind of Firewall > rules does my admin & the operators admin need to set up? > > I know the SMSC's IP & Port so that definitely has to be allowed on my > firewall rules as outbound. What about the operator's side? When they send > a > MO message what port on the SME will they be sending it to? Is it a > standard > port or is it negotiated by the protocol? > > Please help! > > Thanks in anticipation. > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/SMPP-in-VPN-tp15909733p15909733.html > Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > -- Alejandro Guerrieri Magicom http://www.magicom-bcn.net/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/aguerrieri
SMPP in VPN
Hi, We have a VPN connection to a mobile operator. Our Network Administrator & the operators admin, want to set up firewall rules to be as restrictive as possible. Now if I want to bind my SME in Transceiver mode, what kind of Firewall rules does my admin & the operators admin need to set up? I know the SMSC's IP & Port so that definitely has to be allowed on my firewall rules as outbound. What about the operator's side? When they send a MO message what port on the SME will they be sending it to? Is it a standard port or is it negotiated by the protocol? Please help! Thanks in anticipation. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/SMPP-in-VPN-tp15909733p15909733.html Sent from the Kannel - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Kannel Machine Connection with Operator VPN
Dear Hammad, you can use mikrotik as VPN aggregator as i am also using same produjt with almost all telcos best regards, Kashif Ali [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Khan, Hammad Aslam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi All, > > I know this is unrelated to post here about OpenSwan - but i dont find > enough help else where and deadline is killing me... :( > > Operator, I am trying to connect with, wants to use > - Preshared Key (he says we can define only ONE key and u also have to use > the same) > - NATed IP > > Can someone please make me IPSec.conf file for openswan for this > configuration as povided by operator... > > > Site-to-Site VPN Request Form Date: 11-02-2008 > > VPN Configuration ME Operator > Hardware Openswan[Linux] (Dell 2400) Cisco VPN Concentrator 3000 > DH Group Diffie-Helman Group 2 > Production Peer 5.5.5.5 6.6.6.6 > Encryption Domain 192.168.100.21 NAT into 10.5.5.5 172.18.104.244 > Encryption 3DES > Authentication MD5 > Life Time 86400 sec > PreShared Key P_R > Protocol ESP > SMSC Connectivity Customer Operator > Ecnryption domain (SMPP host IP-Address) NATed IP address for SMPP host > 10.5.5.5 10.8.8.8 > 172.18.104.244 > Protocol TCP/Ports 17601-17606 > > > NATed IP added by operator 10.5.125.105 > 192.168.100.21 Our Kannel Machine > > Regards, > Hammad > Flexilogix Inc > > > > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 4:37 PM, Reza Anwar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Hammad, > > I've actually had some experience connecting Kannel to an SMSC thru a > > VPN. At the time I used a linux box (PC) with FreeS/WAN (http:// > > www.freeswan.org/) as a VPN router interconnected to the operator's > > VPN router (I believe it was Checkpoint VPN-1) without any problems, > > perhaps you can use this setup too. > > > > Regards, > > --Reza > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 29, 2008, at 2:55 PM, Khan, Hammad Aslam wrote: > > > > > Hi All, > > > What is the the best proposed setup for integration of Kannel > > > Machine with operator SMSC? > > > VPN (site-to-site) is a bit costly because of VPN concentrator/ > > > routers. I read some postings in listing that suggested only kannel > > > machine can be directly connected to operator VPN and then to SMSC. > > > > > > Can someone tell me the procedure for that please. > > > > > > Its very urgent as operator is waiting for our VPN access request. > > > > > > regards, > > > hammad > > > > > > -- Syed Kashif Ali Bukhari +92-300-4295604 http://www.sysadminsline.com http://www.kashifbukhari.com
Proposal: Kannel Wiki
Its quite important also to consider prior to populating the current http://wiki.kannel.org based on DokuWiki, if we should migrate to http://www.mediawiki.org that I personally find most suitable for kannel. I do find www.voip-info.org as an example Wiki well formated and easy to find info. Any other suggestions for a Wiki base?
RE: Re: Proposal: Kannel Wiki
I totally agree with Alejandro, But sometimes as my case, im running kannel as the core platform for all my companys operations and we usually dont have the time to search through years of mailings. So our best shot is to ask at once, so for me wiki would be very helpful because is easier to search, and if its not there, then I can ask the list. For people like me, where time its really money, would it better yet to have a paid 24/7 online support (chat, vip mailing list, etc) Think about it. _ From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sábado, 08 de Marzo de 2008 10:07 p.m. To: Juan Nin Cc: users@kannel.org Subject: Re: Re: Proposal: Kannel Wiki That was my point, yes. One of the most commonly seen questions being made on the mailing list is how to send a wap-push using kannel. Juan has put together a very thorough how-to using kannel's PPG. I've made a PHP function to encode a wap-push into a binary message and send it using kannel (without ppg). Many others has put similar pieces of code using Java and other languages. I think I've sent a link to the my email on gmane about 10 times. Similar with Juan's code. Both articles are easily found by googling a little bit, yet many people is lazy enough to ask before finding by themselves. IRC won't be any good with this particular problem. Even if being recorded, the question wouldn't be asked, nor answered, at once. That'd make very difficult to google it. Anyway, it doesn't work with the mailing list, why would it work with the IRC log? Regards, Alejandro On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 10:02 PM, Juan Nin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I understand Alejandro's point of view, and agree with him. He's not saying that IRC is no good. What he's saying is that IRC is not the solution to the problem I mentioned, since there's no record of that... It's a solution for that right moment, and for someone who's there. But won't allow a new guy looking for some solution to search for an already discussed one and see it. On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 8:33 PM, Michael Sole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Alejandro, > > > > I disagree I think IRC is a great solution so long as people are there to > help. > > > > As for answering the same question over and over again. Yeah that can be > tiresome but entirely important in an open source community. > > > > The fact is that not everyone searches the same way and sometimes what is > obvious to one is not so obvious to another. > > > > Michael > > > > > From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2008 2:53 PM > To: users@kannel.org > Subject: UNS: Re: Proposal: Kannel Wiki > > > > IRC's not good for helping moderate-size communities imho. > > * It requires both parts to be available at the same time to be able to > help. > * Conversations are rarely stored and searchable. That's the whole point of > a wiki: to have things in written once and forever. > * It doesn't scale well when there's a lot of people talking. > > It has even more problems than a mailing list. People ask the "wap-push > question" even with tons of threads archived by gmane, mail-archive and > similar services. How many times are you willing to answer it? ;) > > I think the wiki could be a good idea, but extending the users guide or a > faq addressing some of the most commonly asked questions would do the trick > also. > > Regards, > > Alejandro > > > On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Khary Sharpe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > An even better idea is people should hangout in > irc://irc.freenode.net/kannel , that way help can be provided near > realtime. > > Just in case we have some irc newbies read here - > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRC > > k# > > > > > Khary Sharpe wrote: > > Maybe I missed something ..but doesn't http://wiki.kannel.org > > already exist? > > There is nothing much there at the moment, especially where repeat > > questions are concerned but we can change that. > > > > All those who are interested can simply register and start adding > > pages. (hopefully the approval is automated) > > > > k# > > > > > > > > > > > > Juan Nin wrote: > >> here u got: > >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.mobile.kannel.user/11009 > >> > >> you may have problems with linefeeds by copying the code from the > >> webpage, at the end of January or beggining of February someone sent > >> my code as an attached PHP file > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Juan > >> > >> On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Clarence Carino > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> i am one of the guys asking for a wap push how-to. > >>> yeah. having a wiki would greatly help. and some examples too > >>> because i'm > >>> searching users@kannel.org through nabble and all i can see it go > >>> to this > >>> and go to that, use this, use that without explaining. and before i > >>> post > >>> my help, i already searched 250++ of this mailing list. i did ra
Kannel hangs
Dear All, I hope you can help me out with one problem that I have with Kannel. Let me explain what kind of system I set up: I have two machines, where two GSM modems are installed and where Kannel works with my applications, that interact with Kannel by means of two services (each service triggers one application). The first service is the default one, and the other one is triggered whenever Kannel receives a SMS with one specific word. The reason for having two machines is to provide my system with some redundancy, so that the two of them are programmed to send the other one a SMS twice per day, at certain hours. (I have done it with the crontab tool that Linux provides). This SMS will say one machine that the other is alive. For sending them I have written one script in PERL, which is the task programmed in the crontab file and that uses the HTTP Kannel interface to send the message. I have tested all of this separately and everything works fine. The problem I am finding is that the whole system works pretty well for two or three days, but after that, it apparently hangs. By checking Kannel logs, I have seen the following: - Bearerbox Access log: it stops when the last redundancy message is received. - Bearerbox log: After the last redundancy message is received it continues, but when the time of sending more redundancy messages comes, I see "Dumping x messages to store", where x increases with every send attempt. (I guess messages are queued). - Smsbox Access log: After the system hangs, I can see that the HTTP requests for sending red. Messages are added. - Smsbox log: I have not seen something special there, but it stops after the system hangs. - And the last thing; my services do not work anymore after the system hangs, obviously, but I have checked the Kannel status by using the http interface and I can see it is still connected to the smsbox , but some messages have been indeed queued. And it appears strange to me that both machines hang at the very same moment. Hereby I attach the portion of the logs I was speaking about above and the configuration file I am using. Thank you very much in advance for your help, Carlos. -- Carlos Ghabrous Larrea CERN - European Organization for Nuclear Research 1211 Geneva - Switzerland Department/Group/Section: IT/CS/TC Office: Building 31-S025 Office Phone: +41 22 76 71322 Mobile: +41 76 487 0002 -- bearerboxAccess.log 2008-03-07 20:30:05 Sent SMS [SMSC:AT2[/dev/ttyS2]] [SVC:ghabsms] [ACT:] [BINF:] [from:+41764875825] [to:41764872712] [flags:-1:0:-1:-1:-1] [msg:10:redundancy] [udh:0:] 2008-03-07 20:30:14 Receive SMS [SMSC:AT2[/dev/ttyS2]] [SVC:] [ACT:] [BINF:] [from:+41764872712] [to:+41764875825] [flags:-1:0:-1:0:-1] [msg:10:redundancy] [udh:0:] bearerbox.log 2008-03-07 20:30:02 [6630] [9] DEBUG: boxc_receiver: sms received 2008-03-07 20:30:02 [6630] [9] DEBUG: send_msg: sending msg to box: <127.0.0.1> 2008-03-07 20:30:14 [6630] [10] DEBUG: send_msg: sending msg to box: <127.0.0.1> 2008-03-07 20:30:14 [6630] [10] DEBUG: boxc_sender: sent message to <127.0.0.1> 2008-03-07 20:30:14 [6630] [9] DEBUG: boxc_receiver: got ack 2008-03-07 20:30:16 [6630] [8] DEBUG: Dumping 0 messages to store 2008-03-07 20:30:30 [6630] [9] DEBUG: boxc_receiver: heartbeat with load value 0 received 2008-03-08 08:30:01 [6630] [9] DEBUG: boxc_receiver: sms received 2008-03-08 08:30:01 [6630] [9] DEBUG: send_msg: sending msg to box: <127.0.0.1> 2008-03-08 08:30:13 [6630] [8] DEBUG: Dumping 1 messages to store 2008-03-08 20:30:01 [6630] [9] DEBUG: boxc_receiver: sms received 2008-03-08 20:30:01 [6630] [9] DEBUG: send_msg: sending msg to box: <127.0.0.1> 2008-03-08 20:30:20 [6630] [8] DEBUG: Dumping 2 messages to store 2008-03-09 08:30:01 [6630] [9] DEBUG: boxc_receiver: sms received 2008-03-09 08:30:01 [6630] [9] DEBUG: send_msg: sending msg to box: <127.0.0.1> 2008-03-09 08:30:18 [6630] [8] DEBUG: Dumping 3 messages to store 2008-03-09 20:30:02 [6630] [9] DEBUG: boxc_receiver: sms received 2008-03-09 20:30:02 [6630] [9] DEBUG: send_msg: sending msg to box: <127.0.0.1> 2008-03-09 20:30:15 [6630] [8] DEBUG: Dumping 4 messages to store 2008-03-10 08:30:02 [6630] [9] DEBUG: boxc_receiver: sms received 2008-03-10 08:30:02 [6630] [9] DEBUG: send_msg: sending msg to box: <127.0.0.1> 2008-03-10 08:30:22 [6630] [8] DEBUG: Dumping 5 messages to store smsboxAccess.log 2008-03-07 08:30:01 send-SMS request added - sender:ghabsms:+41764875825 127.0.0.1 target:41764872712 request: 'redundancy' 2008-03-07 08:30:14 SMS HTTP-request sender:+41764872712 request: '' url: 'http://localhost/redundancy/test_red.php?phone=%2B41764872712&text=redundancy&sent_time=2008-03-07+07:30:01' reply: 200 '<< successful >>' 2008-03-07 20:30:02 send-SMS request added - sender:ghabsms:+41764875825 127.0.0.1 target:41764872712 request: 'redundancy' 2008-03-07 20:3
