Re: Patch: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (Re: syncronize kannel with smsc)

>>what doesn't do sense for you? validity period in kannel is given relative 
>>in minutes. relative to whatever timestamp
>>and this timestamp is wrong. validity as well as deferred should be 
>>_absolute_ timestamp.

Correct expression would be:

"...validity is in relative time and not absolute time"
"...validity is not in absolute time"
"...validity is in minutes and not in seconds"
"...validity is not in seconds"

"minutes" doesn't have anything to do with "absolute time". Like comparing 
apples with oranges.

Hope this is clearer now.

BR,
Nikos

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alexander Malysh" <[email protected]>
To: "Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Devel Kannel" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 4:35 PM
Subject: Re: Patch: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (Re: syncronize kannel with smsc)


huh you seems to be on the wrong way! btw "imbecil" is wrong spelled... that 
should be "imbecile"... but anyway it's just YOUR opinion
but not mine and we will stick to the facts...

> Consider your answer:
>
> "I don't see why we have to switch to relative time again. Only bug in 
> kannel is, that validity is in minutes and not
> absolute time. The same bug apply to deferred."

what doesn't do sense for you? validity period in kannel is given relative 
in minutes. relative to whatever timestamp
and this timestamp is wrong. validity as well as deferred should be 
_absolute_ timestamp.

I hope you understand it now and if not please read code...

Thanks,
Alexander Malysh

Am 15.12.2010 um 15:18 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:

> Maybe you didn't mean to. But there are people from different cultures 
> frequenting this forum, and calling someone "imbecil" publicly is 
> certainly not flattering. All the same, please avoid using any suggestions 
> or personal characterizations on me. Just stick to the facts.
>
> You should also re-read and correct your replies before posting them:
>
> Consider your answer:
>
> "I don't see why we have to switch to relative time again. Only bug in 
> kannel is, that validity is in minutes and not
> absolute time. The same bug apply to deferred."
>
> I am sorry, it just doesn't make any sense to me.
>
> BR,
> Nikos
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Malysh" <[email protected]>
> To: "Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]>
> Cc: "Devel Kannel" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 2:54 PM
> Subject: Re: Patch: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (Re: syncronize kannel with smsc)
>
>
> Nikos,
>
> it was in no way an insult! but sometimes it better for all of us to think 
> a little bit longer before write a answer...
>
> Thanks,
> Alexander Malysh
>
> Am 14.12.2010 um 13:45 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
>
>> Please avoid using such expressions. Simply, sometimes it is difficult to 
>> understand what you say.
>>
>> BR,
>> Nikos
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Malysh" 
>> <[email protected]>
>> To: "Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]>
>> Cc: "Milan P. Stanic" <[email protected]>; "ishagh ouldbah" 
>> <[email protected]>; "Devel Kannel" <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 2:32 PM
>> Subject: Re: Patch: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (Re: syncronize kannel with smsc)
>>
>>
>> Nikos,
>>
>> sometimes you have to think a bit more before you write answer ;) 
>> Converting validity to seconds will not fix this issue because it's again 
>> relative
>> to something and this something is not the timestamp when message was 
>> created but when message is sent and this is wrong.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alexander Malysh
>>
>> Am 14.12.2010 um 13:25 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
>>
>>> Yeah, but that's putting too much trust on external conditions, like the 
>>> SMSc, for which we have no knowledge. Relative time should fix this, 
>>> regardless of what the SMSc is doing. Bottom line, less problems for the 
>>> user.
>>>
>>> As far as the validity period goes, I think that someone is asking for 
>>> it if he specifies 1' validity period. But I don't object to it, if you 
>>> want to have it specified in seconds, it's a trivial thing to do.
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Nikos
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Malysh" 
>>> <[email protected]>
>>> To: "Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]>
>>> Cc: "Alexander Malysh" <[email protected]>; "Milan P. Stanic" 
>>> <[email protected]>; "ishagh ouldbah" <[email protected]>; 
>>> <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2010 1:27 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Patch: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (Re: syncronize kannel with 
>>> smsc)
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> it's a condition for every time based parameter that server synchronized 
>>> to NTP.
>>> If this not a case it's not our bad.
>>>
>>> I don't know reason for switching to absolute time anymore.
>>>
>>> As to the bug: just imagine, you send message with validity of 1min, 
>>> kannel try to deliver to SMSC but SMSC is not reachable for 2 min.
>>> Then SMSC is reachable again and kannel submits message to SMSC with 
>>> validity of 1min BUT validity is already expired because we
>>> waited for 2 mins for SMSC.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Alexander Malysh
>>>
>>> Am 13.12.2010 um 22:19 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I was not aware that you were in relative time before.
>>>>
>>>> The only reason for switching is that it offers greater accuracy than 
>>>> absolute time. There is no guarantee that SMScs are correctly 
>>>> synchronized to NTP. Some users seem to objection to this. (or the UG 
>>>> entry). You obviously had your reasons for switching to absolute time. 
>>>> Could you list them or send me an email reference?
>>>>
>>>> In kannel, in SMPP, the validity is correctly converted to calendar 
>>>> date before sending out. There is no bug, and the resolution in 
>>>> configuration is perefectly acceptable (seconds are an overkill).
>>>>
>>>> BR,
>>>> Nikos
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alexander Malysh" 
>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>> To: "Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: "Milan P. Stanic" <[email protected]>; "ishagh ouldbah" 
>>>> <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
>>>> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 7:29 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Patch: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (Re: syncronize kannel with 
>>>> smsc)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I don't see why we have to switch to relative time again. Only bug in 
>>>> kannel is, that validity is in minutes and not
>>>> absolute time. The same bug apply to deferred.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Alexander Malysh
>>>>
>>>> Am 27.11.2010 um 09:09 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:
>>>>
>>>>> I stand corrected. bb sends in, at least in SMPP, absolute time as GMT 
>>>>> + validity * 60 for validity and scheduled delivery time. Not very 
>>>>> safe or good. Needs the server to be synchronized with SMSc, which 
>>>>> would probably mean both have to be ntp synchronized.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a defect of the SMPP spec. It defines the format of relative 
>>>>> time in absolute terms, instead of seconds, making it difficult to 
>>>>> calculate and reconstruct.
>>>>>
>>>>> The proposed patch makes smpp work with relative time. Please test, I 
>>>>> do not have access to an SMSc. Let me know how it goes. I hope that 
>>>>> all SMScs support it. It is more accurate than absolute time, since it 
>>>>> doesn't require synchronization between smsc and bearerbox.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> BR,
>>>>> Nikos
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Milan P. Stanic" <[email protected]>
>>>>> To: <[email protected]>
>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 4:25 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: syncronize kannel with smsc
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 05:31, ishagh ouldbah wrote:
>>>>>>> are you sure?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> According to SMPP version 3.4 time can be absolute or relative. 
>>>>>> Absolute
>>>>>> time is default.
>>>>>> How it is implemented in particular software is another question. I
>>>>>> think that the kannel uses absolute time, at least for SMPP.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here is comment from gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> /*
>>>>>> * check for validity and defered settings
>>>>>> * were message value has higher priiority then smsc config group
>>>>>> * value
>>>>>> * Note: we always send in UTC and just define "Time Difference" as
>>>>>> * 00 and
>>>>>> *       direction '+'.
>>>>>> */
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>> From: Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> To: ishagh ouldbah <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>>>>>>> Sent: Mon, November 22, 2010 1:00:48 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: syncronize kannel with smsc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, UG is wrong there.  In the SMSc definitions it states:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> validityperiod integer
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How long the message will be valid, i.e., how long the SMSC will try 
>>>>>>> try to send
>>>>>>> the message to the recipient. Defined in minutes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BR,
>>>>>>> Nikos
>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: ishagh ouldbah
>>>>>>> To: Nikos Balkanas ; [email protected]
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2010 1:31 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: syncronize kannel with smsc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thans for your reponce
>>>>>>> but in SMS Push (send-sms) CGI Variables it is writen in the 
>>>>>>> userguid that to
>>>>>>> use
>>>>>>> the variable validity you should syncronize with smsc
>>>>>>> contant
>>>>>>> Optional. If given, Kannel will
>>>>>>> inform SMS Center that it should
>>>>>>> only try to send the message for
>>>>>>> this many minutes. If the
>>>>>>> destination mobile is off other
>>>>>>> situation that it cannot receive
>>>>>>> the sms, the smsc discards the
>>>>>>> message. Note: you must have
>>>>>>> your Kannel box time
>>>>>>> synchronized with the SMS
>>>>>>> Center.
>>>>>>> note that i need to specify it for a specified service
>>>>>>> regards
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: Nikos Balkanas <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> To: ishagh ouldbah <[email protected]>; [email protected]
>>>>>>> Sent: Sun, November 21, 2010 4:00:52 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: syncronize kannel with smsc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You don't need to. SMPP protocol works with validity period 
>>>>>>> (relative time).
>>>>>>> Therefore, no absolute time is ever involved and you don't need to 
>>>>>>> synchronize.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BR,
>>>>>>> Nikos
>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: ishagh ouldbah
>>>>>>> To: [email protected]
>>>>>>> Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010 4:18 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: syncronize kannel with smsc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>> I want to set validity variable so I need to syncrnize with the smsc
>>>>>>> my question is
>>>>>>> How can I syncronize kannel box with smsc
>>>>>>> regards
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Kind regards,  Milan
>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Arvanta, IT Security        http://www.arvanta.net
>>>>>> Please do not send me e-mail containing HTML code.
>>>>> <smsc_smpp.diff>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>