Re: Kannel not load balancing after restart and messages get stuckinqueue

Hi Nikos,

this panic is reached only if SMSC module has wrong configuration.
This panic has nothing todo with active/offline/not connected SMSCs.

Thanks,
Alex

Am 10.06.2009 um 14:32 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:

> Hi Milan,
>
> Please edit gw/bb_smsccconn.c and go to smsc2_start:
>
> for (i = 0; i < gwlist_len(smsc_groups) &&.
>       (grp = gwlist_get(smsc_groups, i)) != NULL; i++) {
>       conn = smscconn_create(grp, 1);.
>       if (conn == NULL)
>           panic(0, "Cannot start with SMSC connection failing");
>       gwlist_append(smsc_list, conn);
>   }
>
> That's panic. That's what I am talking about.
>
> I didn't write these rules, and l am sorry, I don't have the time to  
> continue this debate.
>
> BR,
> Nikos
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Milan P. Stanic" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 2:55 PM
> Subject: Re: Kannel not load balancing after restart and messages  
> get stuckinqueue
>
>
>> On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 14:32, Nikos Balkanas wrote:
>>> I happen to agree also. But the fact is, that this is how kannel
>>> currently works. And i have to abide by that. Anyway, read my  
>>> response to
>>> Alvaro, it may be just a configuration issue.
>>
>> I'm not sure if we are talking about same behavior of bearerbox but  
>> as
>> I see it, bearerbox in 1.4.3 version (and some previous) starts and
>> stays even if no one smsc (smsbox can't connect to SMSC) is running  
>> or in
>> online status.
>>
>> If you talk about some specific configuration (smsc routing or load
>> balancing) then you might be right. I didn't tested such use cases.
>>
>> Or, I misunderstood your post totally.
>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan McNatty" <[email protected] 
>>> >
>>> To: <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 2:23 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Kannel not load balancing after restart and messages  
>>> get
>>> stuck inqueue
>>>
>>>
>>>> Milan P. Stanic wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 10:02, Nikos Balkanas wrote:
>>>>>> I must be the one thanking you for the discussion. You see I am  
>>>>>> a wap
>>>>>> guy, and don't know of many of the issues that sms people face.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The only concern is at startup. After it has bbox has started
>>>>>> succesfully, and therefore sms_router, started as well, it  
>>>>>> doesn't
>>>>>> matter. You can take all the smscs you want offline to service  
>>>>>> them.
>>>>>> sms_router will work with the rest of them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The only issue is for startup. I cannot test the scenario you  
>>>>>> describe,
>>>>>> because i don't have real smsc connections. However, if both  
>>>>>> connections
>>>>>> are active the minute kannel starts (1st case0, there should be  
>>>>>> no
>>>>>> problem. In the second case, the unavailable smsc should be
>>>>>> commented out
>>>>>> the configuration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess the only question is: Under what circumstances bbox  
>>>>>> will start,
>>>>>> if the 2nd smsc is not responding?
>>>>>
>>>>> Bearerbox should always start. Even if there is no one smsc  
>>>>> active.
>>>>> Smsc can become active later for miscellaneous reasons.
>>>>>
>>>> I agree 100% with Milan here. SMSC's are not in our control - there
>>>> could be many points of failure between kannel and SMSC. Firewalls,
>>>> VPN's etc may be unhappy and we lose connectivity .. we need  
>>>> kannel to
>>>> be stable (in operation and restart, etc) and manage the  
>>>> reconnect and
>>>> message distribution (SMPP is pretty good here).
>>>>
>>>> As Alvaro was suggesting earlier in the thread some sort of dynamic
>>>> redistribution of queued message (maybe like keepalived or sim.)  
>>>> could
>>>> be ideal .. but obviously some work ..
>>>>
>>>> Nikos I appreciate you have been busy doing some development. I  
>>>> can help
>>>> test some of the SMSC 'stuff' (from SMPP) perspective - it's  
>>>> obviously
>>>> in my interest here ;). As of now I haven't used a-lot of the  
>>>> routing
>>>> features so this is a bit new to me (I will try and get back into  
>>>> it and
>>>> hopefully make some suggestions).
>>
>> -- 
>> Kind regards,  Milan
>
>