Re: DLR counters on the status page
Alejandro Guerrieri <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.mobile.kannel.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Working on it already, it'll be ready for tomorrow probably. Regards, -- Alejandro Guerrieri [email protected] On 11/11/2009, at 19:35, Alvaro Cornejo wrote: > Hi > > Just don't forget the patch for the kannel-monitor > > Thanks / Good work > > Alvaro > | > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > Envíe y Reciba Datos y mensajes de Texto (SMS) hacia y desde cualquier > celular y Nextel > en el Perú, México y en mas de 180 paises. Use aplicaciones 2 vias via > SMS y GPRS online > Visitenos en www.perusms.NET www.smsglobal.com.mx y > www.pravcom.com > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Alexander Malysh > <[email protected]> wrote: >> commited to cvs... >> >> Am 11.11.2009 um 17:21 schrieb Alexander Malysh: >> >>> I will commit it shortly... >>> >>> Am 11.11.2009 um 16:54 schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri: >>> >>>> Yes you're right, now that we have MO and MT dlr info, it makes >>>> more sense to have that on the "dlr" section instead of having it >>>> along the SMS data. >>>> >>>> Also on the smsc's, having the <received> and <sent> nodes is >>>> more clear. >>>> >>>> I'm +1 on this new format. >>>> >>>> Do you want me to commit it myself or will you do it? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> -- >>>> Alejandro Guerrieri >>>> [email protected] >>>> >>>> On 11/11/2009, at 16:46, Alexander Malysh wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Alex, >>>>> >>>>> I changed your patch a bit. I hope that it would me more clear >>>>> for users what the all counters means. >>>>> >>>>> New patch attached... >>>>> Please let me know what you think? >>>>> >>>>> <dlr_status.diff> >>>>> >>>>> Here examples: >>>>> >>>>> TXT: >>>>> Status: running, uptime 0d 0h 0m 9s >>>>> >>>>> WDP: received 0 (0 queued), sent 0 (0 queued) >>>>> >>>>> SMS: received 0 (0 queued), sent 0 (0 queued), store size -1 >>>>> SMS: inbound (0.00,0.00,0.00) msg/sec, outbound (0.00,0.00,0.00) >>>>> msg/sec >>>>> >>>>> DLR: received 0, sent 0 >>>>> DLR: inbound (0.00,0.00,0.00) msg/sec, outbound (0.00,0.00,0.00) >>>>> msg/sec >>>>> DLR: 0 queued, using internal storage >>>>> >>>>> No boxes connected >>>>> >>>>> SMSC connections: >>>>> FAKE[FAKE] FAKE:20000 (connecting, rcvd: sms 0 / dlr 0, >>>>> sent: sms 0 / dlr 0, failed 0, queued 0 msgs) >>>>> >>>>> XML: >>>>> <?xml version="1.0"?> >>>>> <gateway> >>>>> <status>running, uptime 0d 0h 0m 35s</status> >>>>> <wdp> >>>>> <received><total>0</total><queued>0</queued></ >>>>> received> >>>>> <sent><total>0</total><queued>0</queued></sent> >>>>> </wdp> >>>>> <sms> >>>>> <received><total>0</total><queued>0</queued></ >>>>> received> >>>>> <sent><total>0</total><queued>0</queued></sent> >>>>> <storesize>-1</storesize> >>>>> <inbound>0.00,0.00,0.00</inbound> >>>>> <outbound>0.00,0.00,0.00</outbound> >>>>> </sms> >>>>> <dlr> >>>>> <received><total>0</total></received> >>>>> <sent><total>0</total></sent> >>>>> <inbound>0.00,0.00,0.00</inbound> >>>>> <outbound>0.00,0.00,0.00</outbound> >>>>> <queued>0</queued> >>>>> <storage>internal</storage> >>>>> </dlr> >>>>> <boxes> >>>>> </boxes> >>>>> <smscs><count>1</count> >>>>> <smsc> >>>>> <name>FAKE:20000</name> >>>>> <admin-id>FAKE</admin-id> >>>>> <id>FAKE</id> >>>>> <status>connecting</status> >>>>> <received><sms>0</sms><dlr>0</dlr></received> >>>>> <sent><sms>0</sms><dlr>0</dlr></sent> >>>>> <failed>0</failed> >>>>> <queued>0</queued> >>>>> </smsc> >>>>> </smscs> >>>>> </gateway> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Am 11.11.2009 um 14:27 schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri: >>>>> >>>>>> Please see attached. I'm adding the patch for the kannel- >>>>>> monitor later. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Alejandro Guerrieri >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> <kannel-dlr-status-v2.diff.zip> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 11/11/2009, at 12:33, Alexander Malysh wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 11.11.2009 um 12:09 schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Ok, so you'd like the patch to transparently handle the >>>>>>>> concept of "outgoing" dlrs? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> yes that would be great... This is 5 minutes patch :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It would be useless on many drivers where Kannel's acting as >>>>>>>> a "client" only (SMPP for instance) but yes, on HTTP and >>>>>>>> derivatives would make sense. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Alejandro Guerrieri >>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 11/11/2009, at 11:42, Alexander Malysh wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Am 11.11.2009 um 11:38 schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Alex, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Outgoing DLR's? At least on SMPP, there's not such a thing: >>>>>>>>>> when you submit an MT with dlr-mask/dlr-url set, the >>>>>>>>>> submit_sm PDU has the delivery receipt flag set. When the >>>>>>>>>> message is accepted (the SMSC sends a submit_sm_resp), >>>>>>>>>> kannel creates a first incoming DLR and later on the SMSC >>>>>>>>>> sends one incoming (deliver_sm) DLR (or more, if >>>>>>>>>> intermediate DLR's are enabled) with the message status(es). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What do you mean with "outgoing DLR's" ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> at least for HTTP smsc we can implement DLR forwarding... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Alejandro Guerrieri >>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 11/11/2009, at 9:36, Alexander Malysh wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Alex, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think we have to expand this patch to handle incoming >>>>>>>>>>> and outgoing DLRs. >>>>>>>>>>> Now we don't differentiate DLRs from SMS traffic and >>>>>>>>>>> therefore this is not a issue. >>>>>>>>>>> But if we start to differentiate DLRs from SMS we need to >>>>>>>>>>> split it to incoming/outgoing >>>>>>>>>>> the same as for SMS traffic. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> Alexander Malysh >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Am 11.11.2009 um 08:13 schrieb Alejandro Guerrieri: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Any objections? Can I commit? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Alejandro Guerrieri >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/11/2009, at 15:46, Stipe Tolj wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alejandro Guerrieri schrieb: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This patch adds separate dlr counters on the status >>>>>>>>>>>>>> page. This is much >>>>>>>>>>>>>> clearer than now imho, where we have dlr's and mo's >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mixed on the same >>>>>>>>>>>>>> counter. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> For example: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> SMS: inbound (0.00,0.00,0.00) msg/sec, *dlr >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (0.23,0.12,0.12) msg/sec*, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> outbound (0.12,0.06,0.06) msg/sec >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> SMSC connections: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *fake*[fake] FAKE:10000 (online 109s, rcvd 0, *dlr >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 14*, sent 7, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> failed 0, queued 0 msgs) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.blogalex.com/archives/222 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> yep, I'm in... +0 from my side. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >>