Yes Nikos, Alejandro is right. Change the code a thorn in the side. I don't want to do it. But they wait that value, dlr does not work.
What can i do? Mario 2011/9/13 Alejandro Guerrieri <[email protected]> > Yep, userguide is correct. The userguide doesn't specify anything about > what values does it send over SMPP (because Kannel abstracts all that > complexity from the end user as much as possible and it makes sense imho). > > However, if the carrier _really_ asks for setting the bit 2, I don't see > any option other than patching and branching. If he uses SVN to keep the > code updated shouldn't be a big deal, though yes of course not patching is > even easier. > > Regards, > > Alex > > On Tuesday, September 13, 2011, Nikos Balkanas wrote: > >> I would suggest against it. If you change the code, you are branching off, >> and afterwards any updates may need manual merging. I suspect that you >> didn't understand correctly your SMSc. Maybe he is just asking not to >> request intermediates. Have you tried with dlr-mask = 31 and failed? Anyway, >> any SMSc that doesn't support a particular type of DLR (I.e. buffered) >> should simply ignore that type, not err all DLRs. >> >> BTW userguide is absolutely correct on dlr-mask. >> >> BR, >> Nikos >> >> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Mario Noboa <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Thanks guys! I figured that. I going to patch the code. >> >> >> That should be some like this? >> >> /* ask for the delivery reports if needed */ >> if (DLR_IS_SUCCESS_OR_FAIL(msg->sms.dlr_mask)) >> pdu->u.submit_sm.registered_delivery = 1; >> else if (DLR_IS_FAIL(msg->sms.dlr_mask) && >> !DLR_IS_SUCCESS(msg->sms.dlr_mask)) >> pdu->u.submit_sm.registered_delivery = 2; >> else if (DLR_IS_NOT_FINAL(msg->sms.dlr_mask) ) >> pdu->u.submit_sm.registered_delivery = 5; >> >> >> Regards, >> >> >> Mario >> >> >> 2011/9/13 Alejandro Guerrieri <[email protected]> >> >> SMPP's registered_delivery and the dlr-mask parameters are not correlated >> at all. Setting 5 in dlr-mask won't send a 5 to the carrier, but a 1. >> >> Keep in mind that Kannel's parameters are usually an abstraction on top of >> many different protocols and not just an SMPP gateway alone. >> >> Also, dlr-mask handles different scenarios that are not directly related >> to getting a deliver_sm DLR message (for example, a submit_sm_resp would >> trigger a DLR on Kannel side). >> >> Right now, Kannel only supports value 1/2 (for final success and failure >> respectively) and 17/18 (for intermediate dlr's support, it'd add 16 to the >> parameter). >> >> There's no way to send a "5" without patching the code. If you want to do >> it, you should start looking at gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c around this lines: >> >> /* ask for the delivery reports if needed */ >> if (DLR_IS_SUCCESS_OR_FAIL(msg->sms.dlr_mask)) >> pdu->u.submit_sm.registered_delivery = 1; >> else if (DLR_IS_FAIL(msg->sms.dlr_mask) && >> !DLR_IS_SUCCESS(msg->sms.dlr_mask)) >> pdu->u.submit_sm.registered_delivery = 2; >> >> if (DLR_IS_INTERMEDIATE(msg->sms.dlr_mask)) >> pdu->u.submit_sm.registered_delivery += 16; >> >> Hope it helps, >> >> Alex >> >> On Tuesday, September 13, 2011, Nikos Balkanas wrote: >> >> I don't think so. Either dlr-mask doesn't correspond to bits set directly, >> or bits requested are contradicting text description. For example dlr-mask = >> 5 reports delivery success and smsc buffered, but no delivery failure, which >> is requested. One could argue if SMSc buffered is asked or rather SMSc ACK >> (and I assume NACK). Obviously the latter. In either case, Mario can always >> try both values, and see what works. >> >> BR, >> Nikos >> >> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Milan P. Stanic <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 20:45, Nikos Balkanas wrote: >> > Sorry, for that dlr-mask should be 27... >> >> If the OP must set dlr-mask to binary 00101 that is 5 in decimal. So >> your previous post was correct. >> >> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 8:41 PM, Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > Have you tried setting dlr-mask to 5? >> > > >> > > BR, >> > > Nikos >> > > >> > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Mario Noboa <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > >> > >> hi list, >> > >> >> > >> I glad to write you. The operator ask me send the submit_sm with >> > >> register_deliver parameter in this way: >> > >> >> > >> .... ..01 = Delivery receipt : Delivery receipt requested (for >> success or >> > >> failure) (0x01) >> > >> .... 01.. = Message type : SME delivery acknowledgement >> requested >> > >> (0x01) >> > >> ...0 .... = Intermediate notif: No intermedi >> >>
