Hi, Alex, I tried that but I couldn't get the id, I called:

debug(0, "test message_id: %d", msg->sms.foreign_id);

and allways get "test message_id: 0"

Just for you know, If I do:

debug(0, "test message_id: %d", msg->sms.dlr_url);

I get the Id correctly.




2011/1/19 Alejandro Guerrieri <alejandro.guerri...@gmail.com>

> Command status, it's not available directly, but it'll affect the DLR
> outcome (if it's not 0, it's an error and you'll get a NACK instead of an
> ACK). On the SVN code you get the smpp "dlr_err" optional parameter as well.
>
> message_id, it's the %F "foreign_id" parameter.
>
> Regards,
>
> Alex
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Santiago Cattaneo <santia...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hello, I'm trying to obtain from submit_sm_resp the highlighted data from
>> C code of gwlib.
>>
>> command_id: 2147483652 = 0x80000004
>> command_status: 0 = 0x00000000
>> sequence_number: 7 = 0x00000007
>> message_id: "2B23AF36"
>>
>> I know that exist the Msg structure, but I could't find on the web the
>> field names for that, I found the Msg->sms structure with this information:
>>
>> MSG(sms,
>>     {
>>         OCTSTR(sender)
>>         OCTSTR(receiver)
>>         OCTSTR(udhdata)
>>         OCTSTR(msgdata)
>>         INTEGER(time)
>>         OCTSTR(smsc_id)
>>         OCTSTR(smsc_number)
>>         OCTSTR(foreign_id)
>>         OCTSTR(service)
>>         OCTSTR(account)
>>         UUID(id)
>>         INTEGER(sms_type)
>>         INTEGER(mclass)
>>         INTEGER(mwi)
>>         INTEGER(coding)
>>         INTEGER(compress)
>>         INTEGER(validity)
>>         INTEGER(deferred)
>>         INTEGER(dlr_mask)
>>         OCTSTR(dlr_url)
>>         INTEGER(pid)
>>         INTEGER(alt_dcs)
>>         INTEGER(rpi)
>>         OCTSTR(charset)
>>         OCTSTR(boxc_id)
>>         OCTSTR(binfo)
>>         INTEGER(msg_left)
>>         VOID(split_parts)
>>         INTEGER(priority)
>>         INTEGER(resend_try)
>>         INTEGER(resend_time)
>>         OCTSTR(meta_data)
>>     })
>>
>> I have to use dlr_mask??? Any Idea?
>>
>> Thanks a lot.
>>
>
>

Reply via email to