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

I agree. I have a setup with close to 20 different connections, using 5
different types of SMSCs (emi, cgw, cimd2, smpp, at2). Because Kannel
isn't always able to pick up connections, or just to start up with a
failing connection, I'm forced to run many instances of Kannel. CIMD in
particular is problematic, as the CIMD SMSC usually doesn't allow two
simultanious connections, and causes Kannel not to start if a connection
has been badly broken (i.e. the SMCS thinks the connection is up, even
though it isn't). This is true also for smpp. The bearerbox shouldn't
panic if a connection isn't established during startup, it should try
again until it succeeds. Otherwise Kannel is extremly stable, and this
is just about the only problem I've ever had with it. It's also quite
annoying at times.  

Regards,

Anders

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Angel Fradejas
Sent: 11. helmikuuta 2002 16:42
To: Indrek Mandre; 'Stipe Tolj'
Cc: 'Kannel Developers'
Subject: 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.