| Issue 169: | "Groups" functionality. | |
| 1 person starred this issue and may be notified of changes. | Back to list |
Sign in to add a comment
|
Each alias may hold a list of numbers. Messages sent to "alias" will be automatically expanded to multiple messages, according to the individual numbers that this alias holds. |
||||||||||||
,
Jan 25, 2009
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Labels: Priority-Medium
|
|||||||||||||
,
Jan 26, 2009
Naming: alias -> group.
Summary: "Groups" functionality.
|
|||||||||||||
,
Jan 26, 2009
Implemented for core library: r1730 |
|||||||||||||
,
Jan 31, 2009
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Status: Completed
Labels: -Component-SMSServer |
|||||||||||||
,
Feb 11, 2009
Hi, Thanasis. It's me again :) I was reviewing SMPP spec recently and saw special message type: submit_multi. This message type provide ability to send message to multiple destinations. Obviously, it fits nicely into "groups" idea, but current groups implementation prevent usage of this functionality. Maybe "OutboundMessage" should be reviewed? I sometimes think that "message" should be responsible for tracking it's state inside service (delivery attempts by different gateways, group-send state, etc, etc). Btw, regarding comment about message cloning when group-sending them: yes, messages should be cloned. Otherwise, as now, you just send several messages to last recipient in the group. And if message is cloned, message unqueue operation should be fixed, because in this case it will unqueue original message, but not it's clones. |
|||||||||||||
,
Feb 11, 2009
Hi :) Yep, the cloning should be fixed - I incorrectly set this issue to "Completed". I hate Clonable though... I will fix it with a "Copy Constructor" like solution. As for the first one: How does the submit_multi work? Does it have a message-embedded destination list or something? And how does it handle the submitted multiple references? I think that by separating the messages at the smslib level allows for better handling. On the other hand, I have not read much about SMPP so I may miss something. About the "intelligent" message: This is so big of a change, that I hasitate to even think about it :) You are talking about a complete redesign of the current model. This is certainly a discussion by itself.
Status: Started
|
|||||||||||||
,
Feb 12, 2009
submit_multi contains field dest_addresses, that in turn can contain one or more (up to 254) SME addresses (phone numbers?) or distribution list names (this one is established by mutual agreement between SMSC and ESMS; I guess it is predefined groups that SMPP provider can store). Submit_multi_resp contains similar field indicating to whom the message was not delivered (SMEs and distribution lists). SMPP providers can have different prices for submits and submit_multies. For example, our provider declares longer delivery time, but smaller price for this "advertisement traffic". |
|||||||||||||
,
Feb 14, 2009
Cloning -> r1756 |
|||||||||||||
,
Mar 04, 2009
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Status: Completed
|
|||||||||||||
,
Mar 29, 2009
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Status: Fixed
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||