Re: Making SMPP esm_class configurable?

Hi Nikos,

You mean simply change the default: 

Index: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c
===================================================================
--- gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c	(revision 4913)
+++ gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c	(working copy)
@@ -876,7 +876,7 @@
      * set the esm_class field
      * default is store and forward, plus udh and rpi if requested
      */
-    pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class =
ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_STORE_AND_FORWARD_MODE;
+    pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class = ESM_CLASS_DEFAULT_SMSC_MODE;
     if (octstr_len(msg->sms.udhdata))
         pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class = pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class |
             ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_UDH_INDICATOR;

Anyone think we should have a config option? Or just happy to run with
he above. I need to test myself but is this likely to be a compatibility
breaker for anyone?

Cheers,
Alan

On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 07:13 +0300, Nikos Balkanas wrote:
> 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
> >
> >
> >
> > 
>