Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

handle Delivery Receipt(deliver_sm) Format #82

Open
komuw opened this issue Jan 24, 2019 · 2 comments
Open

handle Delivery Receipt(deliver_sm) Format #82

komuw opened this issue Jan 24, 2019 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@komuw
Copy link
Owner

komuw commented Jan 24, 2019

The informational content of an SMSC Delivery Receipt may be inserted into the
short_message parameter of the deliver_sm operation. The format for this Delivery Receipt
message is SMSC vendor specific but following is a typical example of Delivery Receipt report:

id:IIIIIIIIII sub:SSS dlvrd:DDD submit date:YYMMDDhhmm done
date:YYMMDDhhmm stat:DDDDDDD err:E Text: . . . . . . . . .

see: Appendix B Delivery Receipt Format of SMPP spec v3.4 document

@komuw
Copy link
Owner Author

komuw commented Feb 9, 2019

This is going to be hard to do and I'm not sure it is worth the effort.

The delivery receipt format is vendor specific; each SMSC/telco can have their own.
The way other smpp clients implement this is via hand-wavy regex. I'm not convinced this is worthy of tackling.

see:

  1. Vendor specific delivery receipt format breaks Deliver_sm opentelecoms-org/jsmpp#62
  2. SMPP raises error when trying to parse Safaricom delivery reports. praekeltfoundation/vumi#298 (<- Safaricom)
  3. The SMPP transport should look for PDU params to detect delivery reports praekeltfoundation/vumi#637

@komuw
Copy link
Owner Author

komuw commented Feb 9, 2019

One way to do this is to let users who know their SMSC's specific delivery receipt format to write a python regex for it; and then they can pass that regex in when they are instantiating a naz client. naz would then try and use that regex in a try ... except.. pass block.

But it is still a bad idea.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant