Re: access log format

Alok,

Which version are specifically using to do this tests? CVS? Date?

Maybe you have a routing issue and messages are being re-injected? Or,  
if you're using 1.4.3 or an old CVS, intermediate DLR's would be seen  
as MO's as well.

Regards,
--
Alejandro Guerrieri
[email protected]



On 18/09/2009, at 12:48, Alok Vaidya wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Thanks for replying. Yes I checked the documentation we can  
> certainly have a custom format, but it is about the events that I  
> talking here like "Sent SMS"/"FAILED SMS"/"Discarded SMS" etc., I  
> see some changes there. Mostly I have figured them out but, I fail  
> to understand some other entries which I have mentioned below as  
> also I want to know more such changes.
>
> Let me elaborate why this causes problems. Our parser uses patterns  
> such as "Failed SMS" to search for current (14.2 box) entries, now  
> this event logging has changed to "FAILED SEND SMS" naturally this  
> will not be picked up and hence we loose on such entries. That's my  
> point here.
>
> Entries I cannot figure out:
>
> [1]
> 2009-09-18 13:27:45 Receive SMS [SMSC:smpp_g12] [SVC:] [ACT:labroc]  
> [BINF:] [from:sssstest1] [to:+919920315112] [FID:] [UUID: 
> 48425955-1cad-4fe3-8867-bb56fc0bd685] [flags:-1:2:-1:0:-1] [msg: 
> 132 
> : 
> 69643A34383633636164632D633162322D346239662D623335382D623739386336633638356436207375623A30303020646C7672643A303031207375626D697420646174653A30393039313831323033303720646F6E6520646174653A30393039313831323033313220737461743A52454A45435444206572723A30303020746578743A 
> ] [udh:6:050003DC0901]
>
> [2]
> 2009-09-18 13:27:45 Receive SMS [SMSC:smpp_g12] [SVC:] [ACT:labroc]  
> [BINF:] [from:sssstest1] [to:+919920315112] [FID:]  
> [UUID:eed80f6d-3d78-4140-a556-dbb59a856d8f]     [flags:-1:0:-1:0:-1]  
> [msg:132:id:0f22f6f9-8faf-4290-94c1-ce451fa18e21 sub:000 dlvrd:001  
> submit date:090918120227 done date:090918120242 stat:REJECTD err:000  
> text:] [udh:6:050003DB0801]
>
> [3]
> 2009-09-18 13:27:45 Receive SMS [SMSC:smpp_g73] [SVC:] [ACT:labroc]  
> [BINF:] [from:sssstest1] [to:+919920315112] [FID:] [UUID:a935aaad- 
> b36c-4e42-8fee-d8e1f03571bf] [flags:-1:2:-1:0:-1] [msg: 
> 132 
> : 
> 69643A66363666323135382D333732352D343337652D616137312D633763333161633234366665207375623A30303020646C7672643A303031207375626D697420646174653A30393039313831323337353720646F6E6520646174653A30393039313831323338323520737461743A52454A45435444206572723A30303020746578743A 
> ] [udh:6:050003DD0901]
>
> The first entry appears to be a normal MT, why then it is named  
> "Receive SMS" instead of "Sent SMS" ? The second entry though it has  
> the same event "Receive SMS" appears to be a DLR. Again the 3 rd  
> entry seems to be a notmal MT message. I tried to make sense of the  
> flags but to no use.
>
> Alejandro Guerrieri wrote:
>>
>> Alok,
>>
>> Check the documentation, you can specify the access log format to  
>> be whatever you like.
>>
>> Regards,
>> --
>> Alejandro Guerrieri
>> [email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>> On 18/09/2009, at 12:23, Alok Vaidya wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am writing to this list instead of the "users" one because  
>>> people from this list are more probable of having an answer to my  
>>> question.
>>>
>>> Can anyone please elaborate the new access-log-format, I know we  
>>> have moved from 1.4.x to 1.5, I see some compatibility broken  
>>> here. We have a process that parses the log files and this format  
>>> change/break could cost us dear.
>>> <alok.vcf>
>>
> <alok.vcf>