Re: smsbox

On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Stipe Tolj wrote:

> > Well my question was not about how it can be done but how they do do it
> > right now :]
> 
> we do terminate and restart smsbox to re-read the updated
> configuration.

Okay, just curious about possible open HTTP connections etc. so they do 
not cause problems? (like lost replies later on requeed with store system)

> > What I meant here is that dynamic configuration loading inside Kannel
> > without stopping the smsc connections can be done (quite easily), thus
> > effectually same thing as never stopping bearerbox but restarting smsbox
> 
> which is what we do. 
> 
> But you still have to stop and restart bearerbox if you change smsc
> groups (adding or modifying) and hence those who are not affected have
> to go down and up too.

Yes, the same way it goes with the integrated one.

> I'm also thinking of problems arrising from the planed modularization.
> As far as I see we will have modularization (which is already there)
> for SMSC modules and SMS services (i.e. sendsms, sendota,
> sendringtone, sendlogo etc). which means if someone links in a SMS
> service module (into smsbox scope) and smsbox is implemented as
> threads inside bearerbox and the new code dumps core, the whole
> systems blows up. Which is not the way we would like to see it.

That is a valid point. If I start to speak ideally, I would get rid of all 
such services and instead implement just one simple http sender/receiver 
and all those services would be done by external filter/proxy/whatever.
No idea to make basic _gateway_ an application server.

But that is of course 'if I was the king of the world and would do redo 
everything' -talk. Things that aleady exist are hard to move away (like 
those prefix-suffix things in sms-service groups.. one in 200 uses them 
and thus they cannot be removed and left to be application problem..)



-- 
&kalle marjola
product concept manager
NETikos finland (http://www.netikos.fi)