Re: Shutdown of smsbox

There is still a window of oportunity for the smsbox to service sendsms
requests with Sent! before shutting.

lol the "If you do kill  bearerbox twice in a row"
why is that ?, very usually I need to issue 2 shutdown commands before it
seems to want to shutdown. (but not always)
I have implemented further checking of bb_status  in various loops,
and created a shutdown admin msg to send to smsbox.

However, It is still not completely satisfactory yet.

Killing smsbox first may be a answer, but its manual work to
hunt out the processid, issue a kill command etc etc...
Fred


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andreas Fink" <[email protected]>
To: "Georg von Zezschwitz" <[email protected]>
Cc: "devel Devel" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: Shutdown of smsbox


> If you do kill  bearerbox twice in a row, SMSbox looses its
> connection and kills itself pretty immediately. And when SMSbox gets
> killed, then theres for sure no one to accept any http connections.
> in other words, when you kill SMSBox first, there is no way any
> messages will be delivered.
>
>
> On 09.11.2006, at 02:07, Georg von Zezschwitz wrote:
>
> > Rodrigo Cremaschi schrieb:
> >> Hi Georg,
> >>
> >>     Maybe you already tried this:
> >>
> >> 1) Set Kannel to 'isolated' state.
> >> 2) Set Kannel to 'suspended' state.
> >> 3) Set Kannel to 'shutdown' state.
> >
> > Hi, thanks for this!
> >
> > However, I want to protect messages from the smsbox HTTP interface
> > to be protected from getting lost,
> > not from the SMSC (EMI) side.
> >
> > Both 'isolated' as well as 'suspended' will go on accepting new
> > messages via HTTP / smsbox.
> > In suspended mode, they even get dropped when terminating smsbox
> > and bearerbox.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> >
> > Georg
>
>