Re: Making SMPP esm_class configurable?

Hi,

please don't change default because we want that SMSC _store_ and _forward_ our message that
is what we also tell SMSC. This works in 99% cases but sometimes buggy SMSCs don't accept this
and rejects messages.

Please keep default as is and make config option for buggy SMSCs.

Thanks,
Alex

Am 02.08.2011 um 06:11 schrieb Alan McNatty:

> Sorry that should be ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_DEFAULT_SMSC_MODE.
> 
> 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_SUBMIT_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;
> 
> On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 15:59 +1200, Alan McNatty wrote:
>> 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
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
>