RE: [REPOST] [PATCH] emi2 driver login behaviour

Indrek Mandre wrote:

>> I also would like to have more points of view on that.
>> Anybody here thinks
>> that "give-up-on-error" behaviour can be considered a "feature"?

>I think I've missed the context of the original post but here
>is my 0.02 EURs:

>In a mission critical environment where there are multiple smsc
>connections kannel should always continue to work with other
>connections despite one has failed. And try to make the
>one that failed work again.

>And more: when kannel crashes, dies, restarts, machine gets
>restarted and kannel comes up and one of the smsc-s fails to
>initialize, then kannel should not close up but continue
>working.

That's _exactly_ my point of view.

>I've had many bad moments with the last one. I have emi2, cimd
>and smpp, can't remember right now tho which of them failed.
><sarcasm bitter="on">
>Anyway you should outline in the kannel architecture doc that
>kannel should be run one instance per smsc connection. That
>should save people like me from trouble.
></sarcasm>

I do not completely agree here (yes I know your're inside a </sarcasm>
tag...), because each SMS-C is different. Some would allow only one
connection, some would allow exactly two connections at once (that's my case
with one of my SMS-Cs), while others don't care about number of simultaneous
connections.
Anyway, some advice on the user guide wouldn't hurt anybody.

Any more eurocents? ;-)

Angel Fradejas.