Re: AW: smpp panic at reception (dlr probably)

2002-01-17 Thread Andreas Fink
>Jörg Pommnitz wrote: >> >> I cannot comment on this exact problem, but it does not >> seem to warrant a panic. >> >> IMHO a defect PDU should be dropped without taking down >> all of Kannel. > >I agree. Defect send-in messages should not break further operations >of Kannel. > I'll work on a

Re: AW: smpp panic at reception (dlr probably)

2002-01-17 Thread Stipe Tolj
Jörg Pommnitz wrote: > > I cannot comment on this exact problem, but it does not > seem to warrant a panic. > > IMHO a defect PDU should be dropped without taking down > all of Kannel. I agree. Defect send-in messages should not break further operations of Kannel. Stipe [EMAIL PROTECTED]

AW: smpp panic at reception (dlr probably)

2002-01-17 Thread Jörg Pommnitz
I cannot comment on this exact problem, but it does not seem to warrant a panic. IMHO a defect PDU should be dropped without taking down all of Kannel. Regards Jörg > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: Nisan Bloch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Gesendet am: Mittwoch, 16. Januar 2002