Re: Kannel queue management
Hi Alejandro: Just to confirm, were you were able to test the Kannel queue priority? I too had a similiar problem and would like to hear your experience. I checked the code and was only able to find that the priority we sent is set into submit_sm by kannel. I also noted that in smpp 3.4 0 is the lowest priority (3 is highest). So is it differenent for Kannel or it is a mistake in user guide? I went through the code, in kannel 1.4.1 their is something maintained as priority_queue. This is not there in previous version of kannel. Is this a new change in Kannel? Please let me know if this queue priority feature really jumps kannel queue. Regards Shantanu Chauhan - Original Message - From: Alejandro Guerrieri [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: users@kannel.org Sent: Friday, September 14, 2007 11:08 PM Subject: Re: Kannel queue management Yes, I know, fake smsc it's too fake sometimes :) What I'll do is: 1. Modify the default priority level to 1 (or anything bigger than 0 and lower than 4, for instance), so I don't have to modify each and every application we have. 2. Try setting priority=0 on some messages during a heavily queued scenario. 3. See if this improves things. Thanks for your help, Alejandro On 9/14/07, info.ubichip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you make test with the fake sms, it could not work, what I'm quite sure is that works with normal traffic. Regards Ps : if you need more help, don't hesitate -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: vendredi 14 septembre 2007 10:05 To: users@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel queue management Thanks a lot for your help. I'll follow your advice and do some tests, to see if it solves our particular problem. Regards, Alejandro On 9/14/07, info.ubichip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I cannot answering directly in reference with the source code but what I could tell you that we are using this feature sometime with the kannel gateway I got, and the feature is working fine. We send periodically some test sms in order to valid the quality of service of the queue. We put high priority on them and they always become on the top when we submit them whatever could be the queue size. So I suggest you make some tests and so you will be able to see if it is running ;-) Hope I give you some help. -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: vendredi 14 septembre 2007 09:33 To: info.ubichip Cc: users@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel queue management The priority flag is part of the SMPP specs and gets set using the priority parameter. I agree with you, I don't think that any SMSC would base his internal priority queue on my behalf. What I didn't find (yet, at least) is any actions being take by kannel in spite of the priority setting. I mean, I see it's being passed on the SMPP PDU, but I don't see any actions being take on kannel's internal queueing. Under this scenario, if I have thousands of messages queued on the store file, setting higher priority to a new message won't make any difference. Am I correct here or am I missing something? Thank you in advance, Alejandro On 9/14/07, info.ubichip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I don't think any operator let you send the priority parameter to their SMSC through SMPP, if yes, they will override your value in any case. What I suggest to you is to put all your regular traffic as lowest priority and so your emergency sms with higher priority. I already using this in Kannel and it is working perfectly whatever we got lot sms in queues. Hope thath helps ! Regards -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: jeudi 13 septembre 2007 18:30 To: users@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel queue management I've been checking the source code, and so far I've found that the priority parameter get sent into the SMPP PDU, so at least that wouldn't help in my case, specially since the default priority is zero (the highest, BTW). This parameter seems to be passed as is to the underlying protocol. If I have thousand of messages queued on my side, there won't be any difference setting the priority field. Am I wrong? Anybody can throw some light on this? BTW, I've found an error on the comments on the source code: /* check for any specified priority value in range [0-5] */ if (cfg_get_integer(priority, grp, octstr_imm(priority)) == -1) priority = SMPP_DEFAULT_PRIORITY; else if (priority 0 || priority 3) panic(0, SMPP: Invalid value for priority directive in configuraton (allowed range 0-3).); [0-5] should say [0-3] :) (Sorry this snippet should have gone to the devel list) Regards, Alejandro On 9/13/07, info.ubichip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, To answer your Q1 and Q4:as far as I know, the priority parameter
RE: Kannel queue management
I cannot answering directly in reference with the source code but what I could tell you that we are using this feature sometime with the kannel gateway I got, and the feature is working fine. We send periodically some test sms in order to valid the quality of service of the queue. We put high priority on them and they always become on the top when we submit them whatever could be the queue size. So I suggest you make some tests and so you will be able to see if it is running ;-) Hope I give you some help. -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: vendredi 14 septembre 2007 09:33 To: info.ubichip Cc: users@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel queue management The priority flag is part of the SMPP specs and gets set using the priority parameter. I agree with you, I don't think that any SMSC would base his internal priority queue on my behalf. What I didn't find (yet, at least) is any actions being take by kannel in spite of the priority setting. I mean, I see it's being passed on the SMPP PDU, but I don't see any actions being take on kannel's internal queueing. Under this scenario, if I have thousands of messages queued on the store file, setting higher priority to a new message won't make any difference. Am I correct here or am I missing something? Thank you in advance, Alejandro On 9/14/07, info.ubichip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I don't think any operator let you send the priority parameter to their SMSC through SMPP, if yes, they will override your value in any case. What I suggest to you is to put all your regular traffic as lowest priority and so your emergency sms with higher priority. I already using this in Kannel and it is working perfectly whatever we got lot sms in queues. Hope thath helps ! Regards -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: jeudi 13 septembre 2007 18:30 To: users@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel queue management I've been checking the source code, and so far I've found that the priority parameter get sent into the SMPP PDU, so at least that wouldn't help in my case, specially since the default priority is zero (the highest, BTW). This parameter seems to be passed as is to the underlying protocol. If I have thousand of messages queued on my side, there won't be any difference setting the priority field. Am I wrong? Anybody can throw some light on this? BTW, I've found an error on the comments on the source code: /* check for any specified priority value in range [0-5] */ if (cfg_get_integer(priority, grp, octstr_imm(priority)) == -1) priority = SMPP_DEFAULT_PRIORITY; else if (priority 0 || priority 3) panic(0, SMPP: Invalid value for priority directive in configuraton (allowed range 0-3).); [0-5] should say [0-3] :) (Sorry this snippet should have gone to the devel list) Regards, Alejandro On 9/13/07, info.ubichip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, To answer your Q1 and Q4:as far as I know, the priority parameter interact directly with the kannel queue, that means a message with a higher priority is sent quicker than previous one. I'm using it to pass debug and emergency sms in case of failure of one server. To determine if 0 is the highest or the lowest, you have to test or take a look in the source code ;-) BR -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: jeudi 13 septembre 2007 09:45 To: users@kannel.org Subject: Kannel queue management Hi, I'm facing some problems with carrier's connections due to limited throughput on their part. It's not really a kannel problem, the SMSC connection has a lower throughput, so at peak hours we experience message queueing. The problem is, we need some messages to get sent as soon as posible, but when we have thousands of messages queued for delivery there's a significant delay (it may be hours from the time of queueing). So my question is: is there any way to handle individual message's priority at sending time? My goal is to be able to enqueue some messages with critical priority and they should be sent asap. I've checked the user guide and found the priority parameter: prioritynumber Optional. Sets the Priority value (range 0-3 is allowed). This leads to some questions: 1. Do this parameter affect the queuing of outgoing messages inside kannel as I expect it to be, or it's just a parameter being passed as part of the PDU? 2. Which priority gets set by default if the paremeter is missing? 3. Which one is the highest (zero I guess?) 4. Does it work for SMPP and HTTP connections as well? Thank you in advance, Alejandro. -- Alejandro Guerrieri Magicom http://www.magicom-bcn.net/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/aguerrieri _ Antivirus avast! http://www.avast.com : message Sortant sain. Base
Re: Kannel queue management
Yes, I know, fake smsc it's too fake sometimes :) What I'll do is: 1. Modify the default priority level to 1 (or anything bigger than 0 and lower than 4, for instance), so I don't have to modify each and every application we have. 2. Try setting priority=0 on some messages during a heavily queued scenario. 3. See if this improves things. Thanks for your help, Alejandro On 9/14/07, info.ubichip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you make test with the fake sms, it could not work, what I'm quite sure is that works with normal traffic. Regards Ps : if you need more help, don't hesitate -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: vendredi 14 septembre 2007 10:05 To: users@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel queue management Thanks a lot for your help. I'll follow your advice and do some tests, to see if it solves our particular problem. Regards, Alejandro On 9/14/07, info.ubichip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I cannot answering directly in reference with the source code but what I could tell you that we are using this feature sometime with the kannel gateway I got, and the feature is working fine. We send periodically some test sms in order to valid the quality of service of the queue. We put high priority on them and they always become on the top when we submit them whatever could be the queue size. So I suggest you make some tests and so you will be able to see if it is running ;-) Hope I give you some help. -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: vendredi 14 septembre 2007 09:33 To: info.ubichip Cc: users@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel queue management The priority flag is part of the SMPP specs and gets set using the priority parameter. I agree with you, I don't think that any SMSC would base his internal priority queue on my behalf. What I didn't find (yet, at least) is any actions being take by kannel in spite of the priority setting. I mean, I see it's being passed on the SMPP PDU, but I don't see any actions being take on kannel's internal queueing. Under this scenario, if I have thousands of messages queued on the store file, setting higher priority to a new message won't make any difference. Am I correct here or am I missing something? Thank you in advance, Alejandro On 9/14/07, info.ubichip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I don't think any operator let you send the priority parameter to their SMSC through SMPP, if yes, they will override your value in any case. What I suggest to you is to put all your regular traffic as lowest priority and so your emergency sms with higher priority. I already using this in Kannel and it is working perfectly whatever we got lot sms in queues. Hope thath helps ! Regards -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: jeudi 13 septembre 2007 18:30 To: users@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel queue management I've been checking the source code, and so far I've found that the priority parameter get sent into the SMPP PDU, so at least that wouldn't help in my case, specially since the default priority is zero (the highest, BTW). This parameter seems to be passed as is to the underlying protocol. If I have thousand of messages queued on my side, there won't be any difference setting the priority field. Am I wrong? Anybody can throw some light on this? BTW, I've found an error on the comments on the source code: /* check for any specified priority value in range [0-5] */ if (cfg_get_integer(priority, grp, octstr_imm(priority)) == -1) priority = SMPP_DEFAULT_PRIORITY; else if (priority 0 || priority 3) panic(0, SMPP: Invalid value for priority directive in configuraton (allowed range 0-3).); [0-5] should say [0-3] :) (Sorry this snippet should have gone to the devel list) Regards, Alejandro On 9/13/07, info.ubichip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, To answer your Q1 and Q4:as far as I know, the priority parameter interact directly with the kannel queue, that means a message with a higher priority is sent quicker than previous one. I'm using it to pass debug and emergency sms in case of failure of one server. To determine if 0 is the highest or the lowest, you have to test or take a look in the source code ;-) BR -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: jeudi 13 septembre 2007 09:45 To: users@kannel.org Subject: Kannel queue management Hi, I'm facing some problems with carrier's connections due to limited throughput on their part. It's not really a kannel problem, the SMSC connection has a lower throughput, so at peak hours we experience
Re: Kannel queue management
I've been checking the source code, and so far I've found that the priority parameter get sent into the SMPP PDU, so at least that wouldn't help in my case, specially since the default priority is zero (the highest, BTW). This parameter seems to be passed as is to the underlying protocol. If I have thousand of messages queued on my side, there won't be any difference setting the priority field. Am I wrong? Anybody can throw some light on this? BTW, I've found an error on the comments on the source code: /* check for any specified priority value in range [0-5] */ if (cfg_get_integer(priority, grp, octstr_imm(priority)) == -1) priority = SMPP_DEFAULT_PRIORITY; else if (priority 0 || priority 3) panic(0, SMPP: Invalid value for priority directive in configuraton (allowed range 0-3).); [0-5] should say [0-3] :) (Sorry this snippet should have gone to the devel list) Regards, Alejandro On 9/13/07, info.ubichip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, To answer your Q1 and Q4:as far as I know, the priority parameter interact directly with the kannel queue, that means a message with a higher priority is sent quicker than previous one. I'm using it to pass debug and emergency sms in case of failure of one server. To determine if 0 is the highest or the lowest, you have to test or take a look in the source code ;-) BR -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: jeudi 13 septembre 2007 09:45 To: users@kannel.org Subject: Kannel queue management Hi, I'm facing some problems with carrier's connections due to limited throughput on their part. It's not really a kannel problem, the SMSC connection has a lower throughput, so at peak hours we experience message queueing. The problem is, we need some messages to get sent as soon as posible, but when we have thousands of messages queued for delivery there's a significant delay (it may be hours from the time of queueing). So my question is: is there any way to handle individual message's priority at sending time? My goal is to be able to enqueue some messages with critical priority and they should be sent asap. I've checked the user guide and found the priority parameter: prioritynumber Optional. Sets the Priority value (range 0-3 is allowed). This leads to some questions: 1. Do this parameter affect the queuing of outgoing messages inside kannel as I expect it to be, or it's just a parameter being passed as part of the PDU? 2. Which priority gets set by default if the paremeter is missing? 3. Which one is the highest (zero I guess?) 4. Does it work for SMPP and HTTP connections as well? Thank you in advance, Alejandro. -- Alejandro Guerrieri Magicom http://www.magicom-bcn.net/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/aguerrieri _ Antivirus avast! http://www.avast.com : message Sortant sain. Base de donnees virale (VPS) : 000774-5, 13/09/2007 Analyse le : 13/09/2007 12:40:55 avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software. -- Alejandro Guerrieri Magicom http://www.magicom-bcn.net/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/aguerrieri
RE: Kannel queue management
Hi, I don't think any operator let you send the priority parameter to their SMSC through SMPP, if yes, they will override your value in any case. What I suggest to you is to put all your regular traffic as lowest priority and so your emergency sms with higher priority. I already using this in Kannel and it is working perfectly whatever we got lot sms in queues. Hope thath helps ! Regards -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: jeudi 13 septembre 2007 18:30 To: users@kannel.org Subject: Re: Kannel queue management I've been checking the source code, and so far I've found that the priority parameter get sent into the SMPP PDU, so at least that wouldn't help in my case, specially since the default priority is zero (the highest, BTW). This parameter seems to be passed as is to the underlying protocol. If I have thousand of messages queued on my side, there won't be any difference setting the priority field. Am I wrong? Anybody can throw some light on this? BTW, I've found an error on the comments on the source code: /* check for any specified priority value in range [0-5] */ if (cfg_get_integer(priority, grp, octstr_imm(priority)) == -1) priority = SMPP_DEFAULT_PRIORITY; else if (priority 0 || priority 3) panic(0, SMPP: Invalid value for priority directive in configuraton (allowed range 0-3).); [0-5] should say [0-3] :) (Sorry this snippet should have gone to the devel list) Regards, Alejandro On 9/13/07, info.ubichip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, To answer your Q1 and Q4:as far as I know, the priority parameter interact directly with the kannel queue, that means a message with a higher priority is sent quicker than previous one. I'm using it to pass debug and emergency sms in case of failure of one server. To determine if 0 is the highest or the lowest, you have to test or take a look in the source code ;-) BR -Original Message- From: Alejandro Guerrieri [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: jeudi 13 septembre 2007 09:45 To: users@kannel.org Subject: Kannel queue management Hi, I'm facing some problems with carrier's connections due to limited throughput on their part. It's not really a kannel problem, the SMSC connection has a lower throughput, so at peak hours we experience message queueing. The problem is, we need some messages to get sent as soon as posible, but when we have thousands of messages queued for delivery there's a significant delay (it may be hours from the time of queueing). So my question is: is there any way to handle individual message's priority at sending time? My goal is to be able to enqueue some messages with critical priority and they should be sent asap. I've checked the user guide and found the priority parameter: prioritynumber Optional. Sets the Priority value (range 0-3 is allowed). This leads to some questions: 1. Do this parameter affect the queuing of outgoing messages inside kannel as I expect it to be, or it's just a parameter being passed as part of the PDU? 2. Which priority gets set by default if the paremeter is missing? 3. Which one is the highest (zero I guess?) 4. Does it work for SMPP and HTTP connections as well? Thank you in advance, Alejandro. -- Alejandro Guerrieri Magicom http://www.magicom-bcn.net/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/aguerrieri _ Antivirus avast! http://www.avast.com : message Sortant sain. Base de donnees virale (VPS) : 000774-5, 13/09/2007 Analyse le : 13/09/2007 12:40:55 avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software. -- Alejandro Guerrieri Magicom http://www.magicom-bcn.net/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/aguerrieri _ Antivirus avast! http://www.avast.com : message Sortant sain. Base de donnees virale (VPS) : 000774-5, 13/09/2007 Analyse le : 13/09/2007 20:43:30 avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.
