Re: [PATCH] Service routing based on the account field

Please unsubcribe me from this mailing list.

>From: Stipe Tolj <[email protected]>
>To: Alejandro Guerrieri <[email protected]>
>CC: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] Service routing based on the account field
>Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 15:27:13 +0200
>
>Alejandro Guerrieri wrote:
>
>>Stipe, Rene,
>>
>>We work with aggregators from around the world, and we are using many
>>flavors of the HTTP smsc modules (we even made a couple of modules to
>>support specific cases).
>>
>>The scenario is exactly as you described it: The account field is used
>>to encode the "real" operator's smsc id, since the aggregator appears
>>to kannel as a single smsc.
>>
>>Regarding architectural assumptions, I'll quote the user guide:
>>
>>"%o account identifier/information of incoming message. The value
>>depends on the SMSC module and has been introduced to allow the
>>forwarding of an operator ID from aggregator SMSCs to the application
>>layer, hence the smsbox HTTP calling instance."
>>
>>So it seems that this was one of the purposes for the account field.
>>It looked logic to me to be able to do some routing on it, so that's
>>why I've made that patch.
>>
>>It works for us, maybe it's useful for other people. I don't think it
>>"hurts" to have this feature available, but I'm not the one deciding
>>here :)
>>
>>Regarding criticism, don't be afraid, I won't get mad at it, all the 
>>contrary!
>>
>>I don't pretend for you guys to include this patch in the core kannel at 
>>all.
>>
>>I've just feel that it's a nice feature to have and maybe other people
>>are having similar scenarios as I do, so making it public could help
>>other kannel users.
>>
>>YOU (meaning core kannel developers in general) have all the rights in
>>the world to decide what's right and what's not regarding kannel.
>>
>>I think maybe other kannel users may benefit from this patch, and
>>maybe if you consider it's worth having it on the core could be
>>applied to CVS, but as I've said before, that wasn't the reason why
>>I've send it.
>
>Hi Alejandro,
>
>ok, since this is a generic "feature-add" and no behaviour change, I'd be 
>+0 on getting this now to CVS.
>
>Could you please resubmit the patch against current CVS and also include in 
>the patch section for the user's guide explaining the logic arround it.
>
>Simply send it again to devel@ list as new thread and I'll glance over it 
>and commit.
>
>Thanks.
>
>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
>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>