Can Kannel act as an SMSC?

Alexander Malysh amalysh at kannel.org
Sat Feb 26 13:46:54 CET 2011


HI,

sorry for late response...
unfortunately this code is not sharable yet.

Thanks,
Alexander Malysh

P.S.  for commercials you can contact me privately

2011/2/24 Sanjay Bhandari <sanjay at ziffusion.com>

> Dude! :)
>
> Why didn't you say that in the first place?! And what would it take for you
> to share the code with the rest of us? I can order a keg or something
> delivered to your house.
>
> Sanjay
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Alexander Malysh <amalysh at kannel.org>wrote:
>
>> nothing wrong in this idea, I already done this in my tree :)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alexander Malysh
>>
>> Am 24.02.2011 um 20:53 schrieb Sanjay Bhandari:
>>
>> Less moving parts. And more efficient, right? There wouldn't be that loop
>> through bearerbox.
>>
>> Based on you knowledge of the code, would it be a bad call to teach
>> bearerbox to act like a SMSC over the SMPP protocol? What are the caveats?
>>
>> Sanjay
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Alexander Malysh <amalysh at kannel.org>wrote:
>>
>>> why do you want todo this if it's already implemented in opensmppbox?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Alexander Malysh
>>>
>>> Am 24.02.2011 um 17:06 schrieb Sanjay Bhandari:
>>>
>>> > Oh great! Thanks for the info. That seems like will work for us.
>>> >
>>> > Just another question, while I have your attention. It's bearerbox that
>>> > speaks the SMPP protocol, right? What is your opinion on modifying the
>>> > code there to enable it to talk to ESMEEs (in addition to SMSCs, like
>>> it
>>> > does now)? I am just trying to pick your brains (someone who has looked
>>> > at the code extensively), to see if I am under-thinking this. Do you
>>> > think there are any major blockers?
>>> >
>>> > Sanjay
>>> >
>>> > On 2/24/2011 10:50 AM, Alexander Malysh wrote:
>>> >> yes, please read userguide for details...
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks,
>>> >> Alexander Malysh
>>> >>
>>> >> Am 24.02.2011 um 16:31 schrieb Sanjay Bhandari:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Does that allow me to do these two simultaneously?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> SMSC <==> bearerbox <==> smsbox <==> applications
>>> >>> ESMEE <==> bearerbox <==> smsbox <==> applications
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Or is it that no traffic will be able to go out to the SMSC at all?
>>> Like,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> ESMEE <==> smppbox <==> bearerbox <==> loop SMSC <==> bearerbox
>>> >>> <==> smsbox <==> applications
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Is all traffic outboud to SMSC looped back?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Sanjay
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 2/24/2011 9:38 AM, Alexander Malysh wrote:
>>> >>>> Hi,
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> bearerbox has loop SMSC module. This allow you to loop traffic via
>>> bearerbox to smsbox...
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Thanks,
>>> >>>> Alexander Malysh
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Am 24.02.2011 um 14:22 schrieb Sanjay Bhandari:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> A few others suggested this as well, so I looked into it.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Correct me if I am wrong, but opensmppbox and smppbox direct
>>> traffic
>>> >>>>> from ESMEEs towards bearerbox, and eventually the SMSCs. Our use
>>> case is
>>> >>>>> such that we want to enable SMS flow between ESMEEs and smsbox (and
>>> >>>>> eventually the applications talking to smsbox).
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Here is what we are after. Kannel does the following now:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> SMSC <==> bearerbox <==> smsbox <==> applications
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> We need to enable the following:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> ESMEE <==> bearerbox <==> smsbox <==> applications
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> As you can see, this requires bearerbox to be the SMSC on the SMPP
>>> >>>>> protocol bind. Hence my question. But, of course, any configuration
>>> is
>>> >>>>> fine as long as the SMS flow between ESMEEs and applications is
>>> enabled.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> ESMEE <==> whatever <==> smsbox <==> applications
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Do you have a suggestion for that?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Sanjay
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On 2/24/2011 5:55 AM, Stipe Tolj wrote:
>>> >>>>>> Am 23.02.2011 20:12, schrieb Sanjay Bhandari:
>>> >>>>>>> We have a bind where the peer wants to act as the ESMEE. I can't
>>> find a way to
>>> >>>>>>> configure Kannel as an SMSC. Am I missing it somehow?
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> More importantly, if we decided to modify the code to try and
>>> support the SMSC
>>> >>>>>>> role, are there any hidden gotchas that we should be aware of? I
>>> guess, I am
>>> >>>>>>> wondering why this capability is not implemented in Kannel
>>> already. Are there
>>> >>>>>>> any blocking reasons?
>>> >>>>>> Kannel has 2 options to act as SMPP server:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> a) via the open source Kannel opensmppbox, which is located in the
>>> SVN trunk
>>> >>>>>> repository.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> b) via the commercial add-on Kannel SMPP v3.4 server (smppbox),
>>> which has a much
>>> >>>>>> wider complexity and feature scope, including a plugin API layer
>>> for additional
>>> >>>>>> logics and various accounting support methods.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> In case you're interested in b), please let me know.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Stipe
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.kannel.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20110226/119aea17/attachment.html>


More information about the devel mailing list