I ran into similar situations myself, as when I hit the url to send a
msg, I'd get "accepted for delivery" with no notification that there's
eleventy million msg's already in queue waiting to go out..  

What I ended up doing is writing a world accessible page, that turned
around and hit the internal admin interface and get a status report and
relay that back to my system that hits kannel.. so that way the system
who's sending the msg's can get some visibility into kannel's queue's
and can stop sending if the queue gets to high.   

If you want, i can post the php script I used to facilitate this.  Bear
in mind, I am no kannel expert, as my ribbings on this list will
illustrate, so there may be a much better way to talk to kannel, but
that quick and easy hack worked for me.

The kannel interface url to get the status is:
$]curl "http://localhost:13000/status?password=yourpass";

assuming your admin password is "yourpass"

** sample response is:
Kannel bearerbox version `1.4.3'.
Build `Nov  5 2010 20:36:45', compiler `4.4.5'.
System Linux, release 2.6.35-22-generic-pae, version #35-Ubuntu SMP Sat
Oct 16 22:16:51 UTC 2010, machine i686.
Hostname smsserver1, IP 192.168.1.110.
Libxml version 2.7.7.
Using native malloc.

Status: running, uptime 0d 9h 48m 50s

WDP: received 0 (0 queued), sent 0 (0 queued)

SMS: received 2 (0 queued), sent 5 (0 queued), store size -1
SMS: inbound (0.03,0.01,0.00) msg/sec, outbound (0.02,0.01,0.00) msg/sec

DLR: 0 queued, using internal storage

Box connections:
    smsbox:(none), IP 127.0.0.1 (0 queued), (on-line 0d 9h 48m 40s)  

SMSC connections:
    gsm_modem    AT2[gsm_modem] (re-connecting, rcvd 2, sent 5, failed
0, queued 0 msgs)




Hope all this helps!!

Matt "Trollboy" Wiseman


On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 17:50 +0100, Marcin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> throughput option is used for limiting number of messages per second.
> What happens when protocol e.g. cimd2 do not support throttling? Kannel 
> makes its own queue and sleep between sending request, or simply ignore 
> this option?
> 
> I can't understand this clearly from UG.
> 
> Thanks
> MK
> 



Reply via email to