ppg push - incorrect pap result?

Hi all,

I'm using Openwave's WAP push library to push messages to Kannel's ppg, 
however, it doesn't work too well. One thing is that the library tells 
me the response from the PPG is wrong. I am looking at the XML response 
generated by Kannel (cvs version) which looks like this:

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE pap PUBLIC "-//WAPFORUM//DTD PAP 1.0//EN" 
"http://www.wapforum.org/DTD/pap_1.0.dtd">
<pap>
    <push-response push-id="1" sender-name="bas-laptop.localdomain; 
WAP/1.3 (Kannel/cvs-20030307)" reply-time="2003-03-19T14:53:11Z" 
sender-address="/wappush">
    </push-response>
    <response-result code ="1001" desc="The request has been accepted for 
processing"></response-result>
</pap>

I compared this to the output of another PPG and looked at the PAP spec 
(WAP-247-PAP-20010429-a.pdf). As far as I can tell, it looks like the 
document returned by Kannel is not correct: the 'response-result' 
element is a child of 'pap', which is not ok according to the spec. It 
should be a child of the 'push-response' element. That would look like 
this:

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE pap PUBLIC "-//WAPFORUM//DTD PAP 1.0//EN" 
"http://www.wapforum.org/DTD/pap_1.0.dtd">
<pap>
    <push-response push-id="1" sender-name="bas-laptop.localdomain; 
WAP/1.3 (Kannel/cvs-20030307)" reply-time="2003-03-19T14:53:11Z" 
sender-address="/wappush">
       <response-result code ="1001" desc="The request has been accepted 
for processing"></response-result>
    </push-response>
</pap>

I just modified gw/wap_push_ppg.c to format the XML like this and now it 
works with the Openwave push library.

Can anyone "in the know" comment on this?

Below find the patch,

regards,

Bas.





Index: wap_push_ppg.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/gateway/gw/wap_push_ppg.c,v
retrieving revision 1.51
diff -c -r1.51 wap_push_ppg.c
*** wap_push_ppg.c	15 Feb 2003 01:09:29 -0000	1.51
--- wap_push_ppg.c	19 Mar 2003 15:20:24 -0000
***************
*** 2937,2943 ****
       }

       octstr_format_append(reply_body, "%s", ">"
- 	     "</push-response>"
                "<response-result code =\"");
       octstr_format_append(reply_body, "%d", e->u.Push_Response.code);
       octstr_format_append(reply_body, "%s", "\"");
--- 2937,2942 ----
***************
*** 2950,2955 ****
--- 2949,2955 ----

       octstr_format_append(reply_body, "%s", ">"
                 "</response-result>"
+               "</push-response>"
            "</pap>");

       octstr_destroy(url);
***************
*** 3003,3009 ****
       octstr_format_append(reply_body, "%s", "\"");

       octstr_format_append(reply_body, "%s", ">"
- 	     "</push-response>"
                "<response-result code =\"");
       octstr_format_append(reply_body, "%d", code);
       octstr_format_append(reply_body, "%s", "\"");
--- 3003,3008 ----
***************
*** 3014,3019 ****
--- 3013,3019 ----

       octstr_format_append(reply_body, "%s", ">"
                 "</response-result>"
+               "</push-response>"
            "</pap>");

       debug("wap.push.ppg", 0, "PPG: tell_fatal_error: %s", 
octstr_get_cstr(dos));