Re: [RFC] SMPP: refusing DLRs that are not found in DLR storage?

"fred" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.mobile.kannel.devel
Message-ID <01cb01c6c4ad$9bf886a0$0500a8c0@FRED4>
Thanks for bringing this up,
we use many kannel instances, some with the same operator, and on occasion a
DLR would return
via a different bind/instance to which the MT went on...the numbers were
small in comparison so we didn't
do anything about it yet - actually don't know if its still happening, i
should check.
Anyway, this is interesting to perhaps try this ESME_RX_R_APPN for those
occasions.

and YES, kannel design already handles the response incorrectly,  rather
recently this has
caused a problem
see my message  "probelm:kannel forwards MO msgs to smsbox before
deliver_sm_respsuccess"

Cheers
Fred




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stipe Tolj" <[email protected]>
To: "Kannel Development list" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2006 10:12 AM
Subject: [RFC] SMPP: refusing DLRs that are not found in DLR storage?


> Hi list,
>
> I wonder if we should/can change logic to refuse any deliver_sm PDU
containing a
> DLR information when we don't find the associated DLR temp data in our
internal
> storage?
>
> This could be done by responding with deliver_sm_resp.command_status =
> ESME_RX_R_APPN, which reads for me in the spec like "I got the message,
but
> refuse to accept it".
>
> Anyone knows what behaviour after this a SMSC is expected to have? It's
not
> defined directly via the spec. Will it discard the DLR, or retry, and if
yes,
> how often?
>
> The case issue is: connecting Kannel to a SMPP account, that is already
bound by
> an other SMPP client application. The other application injects MTs, but
> randomly Kannel get's DLR MOs for the MTs of the other application. Now,
we
> could refuse those simply, either to force the SMSC to pick another RX
session
> to deliver, or to drop.
>
> I know that the "design" of this is already the "wrong way to do it". The
client
> should make sure that a RX session is always logically bound to the
application
> layer that needs the DLR processing.
>
> But just currious if this is a simple add-on feature and what SMSC will do
if we
> reject "unknown" DLRs. Comments? Experimental results please?
>
> Stipe
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Kölner Landstrasse 419
> 40589 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
>
> tolj.org system architecture      Kannel Software Foundation (KSF)
> http://www.tolj.org/              http://www.kannel.org/
>
> mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org           mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.