Re: Making SMPP esm_class configurable?
"Nikos Balkanas" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.mobile.kannel.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <286EEA5ABAA146E1A3A6C835EAE9496A@drwho> |
Hi Alan, According to the spec SMPP 5.0, p 125, ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_DEFAULT_SMSC_MODE is the default esm class. That part should be patched in. As far as making it configurable, I have no objections to it. A few people over the years have had to manually patch it in. BR, Nikos ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan McNatty" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 6:21 AM Subject: Making SMPP esm_class configurable? > Hi All, > > I found a thread on this from back in Feb 2005 (having received a query > from provided now myself) .. last word by Alejandro and a lukewarm (+0 - > +1) comment from Stipe about committing if patch provided. I would > provide a config patch if anyone would vote in it's favour? > > Consider: > > gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c > 875 /* > 876 * set the esm_class field > 877 * default is store and forward, plus udh and rpi if requested > 878 */ > 879 pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class = > ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_STORE_AND_FORWARD_MODE; > > But the 'default' is surely ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_DEFAULT_SMSC_MODE, no? > > Cheers, > Alan > > > >