Re: sendsms HTTP 202 status response
Stipe Tolj <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.mobile.kannel.devel |
|---|---|
| Organization | Wapme Systems AG |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Dziugas Baltrunas wrote: > > thanks for the answer, Angel. > > when I wrote the previous message, I exactly thought about future implementation > of ack/nack handling between smsbox and bearerbox - there 202 response > would be very suitable. > > it's not a problem for me to use fsockopen() or other higher level functions, I just > was interseted, what's the reason of 202 at all. the main reason is that smsbox answers to the HTTP client. And as smsbox can not know if the SMS will definetly be transported it answers with "202 Accepted", which semantically means: "ok, I got it, looks good, I'll try to deliver it". And smsbox can't answer "200 OK", because this would imply to the external entity that he can be sure that everything went well. Stipe [email protected] ------------------------------------------------------------------- Wapme Systems AG Vogelsanger Weg 80 40470 Düsseldorf Tel: +49-211-74845-0 Fax: +49-211-74845-299 E-Mail: [email protected] Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de ------------------------------------------------------------------- wapme.net - wherever you are