Pretty much, yeah. Smsc2 will be used only if smsc1 has problems, i.e. is
down, queue is full , etc.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message -----
From: Latitude Berlin
To: Nikos Balkanas
Cc: Konstantin Vayner ; users
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: sending SMS out via preferred SMSC
Thanks Nikos.
Making sure that I understood you:
group = smsc
smsc = smpp
smsc-id = smsc1
...
preferred-smsc-id = smsc1
group = smsc
smsc = smpp
smsc-id = smsc2
...
preferred-smsc-id = smsc2
and http req with: &smsc=smsc1
will send messages via smsc1. smc2 will _ONLY_ be used if smsc1 is down.
Kindly confirm.
Cheers
2010/6/23 Nikos Balkanas <nbalka...@gmail.com>
Hi,
Using allowed-smsc-id = smsc1, will build up queue if smsc1 is down. There
is no sense in using denied-smsc-id when using allowed-smsc-id. If, however,
you use preferred-smsc-id = smsc1 and smsc1 goes down, SMS will go through
another smsc. In that scenario, denied-smsc-id make sense.
BR,
Nikos
----- Original Message ----- From: Konstantin Vayner
To: Latitude Berlin
Cc: users
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 1:16 PM
Subject: Re: sending SMS out via preferred SMSC
I'm sending bulks much larger than that... queues build up separately
if smsc1 is down messages will be queued until it comes back up (or until
they expire)
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Latitude Berlin
<latitude...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Thanks - did you try sending a bulk of messages (say 6 messages via smsc1)?
I have the feeling that if you send a bulk with &smsc=smsc1, and smsc1 is
busy, it will use smsc2.
Also do you know what happens if smsc1 is down? Will smsc2 be used or the
msg will be queued until smsc1 comes up?
Cheers
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Konstantin Vayner <pon...@appcell.net>
wrote:
yep, thats what i use...
for example:
group = smsc
smsc = smpp
smsc-id = smsc1
...
allowed-smsc-id = smsc1
group = smsc
smsc = smpp
smsc-id = smsc2
...
allowed-smsc-id = smsc2
and then when passing message to sendsms add &smsc=smsc1 or &smsc=smsc2Ξ’
works fine for me
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Latitude Berlin
<latitude...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Hi Konstantin,
And you use ..&smsc=<CONN_NAME>?
I tired this too but didn't work for me.
Cheers.
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Konstantin Vayner <pon...@appcell.net>
wrote:
I actually prefer using "allowed-smsc-id" (set to self - or name you give to
group of smscs that should be balanced between...) in such cases, especially
when there are a lot of links defined
Regards,
Ξ’ Ξ’ Konstantin
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Latitude Berlin
<latitude...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Hi,I have configured kannel to send SMS via SMPP with 2 groups defined. As I
understand, Kannel does load balancing itself and choses one of the
configured to send out SMS.
I am sending bulk of messages and want to use only connection1. Β I did this
the following way:
kannel.conf --------------------------- # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc = smpp
smsc-id = conn1... denied-smsc-id = conn2 # SMSC SMPP group = smsc smsc =
smpp smsc-id = conn2
... denied-smsc-id = conn1
HTTP send req:--------------------...&smsc=conn1
My question is that whether  denied-smsc-id … is really required? If
I don't add this, Β I see kannel ignoring my ...&smsc=conn1request and
crossing the SMSC group itself.
Regards.
