My goal is pass all traffics from ESME A to ESME B and vice versa (it's a about reroute I guess). So there should be and SMPPBOX rather than BEARERBOX in between, CMIIW :)
sangprabv sangpr...@gmail.com On Jun 19, 2010, at 10:16 PM, Rene Kluwen wrote: > Pass-thru seems to work the other way around. For this to work, your clients > need to run smppbox. > > The setup will be as follows: > > / SMPPBOX_CLIENT_1 > YOUR_BEARERBOX < > \ SMPPBOX_CLIENT_2 > > > With the bearerbox reroute-smsc-id messages can be passed in between the > client. > > Probably this setup is not what you wanted. But it is a possibility. > > == Rene > > > -----Original Message----- > From: sangprabv [mailto:sangpr...@gmail.com] > Sent: zaterdag 19 juni 2010 13:55 > To: Rene Kluwen > Cc: users@kannel.org > Subject: Re: For the ones using (open) smppbox... > > What about a pass-thru(forward) configuration between connections? Is it > possible, let's say we want to pass traffics SMPP_CLIENT_A > <->SMPPBOX<->SMPP_CLIENT_B. > > > > sangprabv > sangpr...@gmail.com > > > On Jun 19, 2010, at 3:31 AM, Rene Kluwen wrote: > >> Today, I committted a patch to smppbox svn trunk that allows for long >> (catenated) messages to be delivered via the same smsc, in case of load >> balancing. >> >> This version obsoletes that patch that is available for download on the >> chimit server. >> >> For the latest (stand-alone) version, use svn co >> https://svn.kannel.org/smppbox/trunk >> >> == Rene Kluwen >> >> >> > > >
