Hi,

1.5.0 is just labeled "Development" since it is the latest release. It is
production stable and you should prefer it, since it has many
fixes/enhancements over previous releases.

BR,
Nikos

On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Ahmed AL-Tahami <ahmed...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Wa Alikum AL-Salam
>
> Hi Bassam and Ramadhan kreem,
>
> I will try to contact the SMSC and figure out if they can help us regarding
> this issue,
> kannel 1.5 development release is out but i guess we cant relay on it since
> it is not stable yet.
>
> Thank you Bassam, which you all the best
> Best Regards.
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Bassam Al-Sarori <balsar...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Asalam Alikum,
>>
>> I saw your request on Kannel's mailing list
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/users@kannel.org/msg25030.html
>>
>> Allow me to answer, since the answer is out of the scope of Kannel :)
>>
>> From what I know about SMPP and Kannel, SMPP allows custom data in its
>> optional parameters (please do read the SMPP spec it will help you a
>> lot) but those optional parameters do not contain provider id; therefore
>> will be useless. In addition there is no way to retrieve that data from
>> Kannel (possible in Kannel 1.5 which under development) . However, I have a
>> solution for you, check with SMSC guys if they can sent you the provider id
>> in the service_type parameter (or even a vendor specific optional
>> parameter) of the deliver_sm command. If its possible then your problem is
>> solved just add %B parameter to the get-url or post-url of Kannel's
>> SMSService configuration. If the provider id is sent as a vendor specific
>> parameter then you will need to use Kannel 1.5 or customize Kannel to
>> retrieve it.
>>
>> I am sure that SMSC guys can send you the provider id using the
>> service_type because they use this field for charging. Also, VAS providers
>> use it to charge MT messages.
>>
>> Let me know if that works for you or if you need further information and
>> please don't feel shy to ask.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bassam Al-Sarori
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to