29 Nov
2015
29 Nov
'15
5:04 a.m.
Hi Holger,
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 8:12 AM, Holger Freyther <holger(a)freyther.de> wrote:
Actually, our end goal is to support TS 124 390 or at least get close
enough to it. When we discussed integration of SIP into OsmoNITB there
was a strong opposition from you and Harald, so we were looking for
the best way to export required functionality from OsmoNITB to avoid
adding SIP into the OsmoNITB itself. Within this logic SMPP just adds
overhead and extra complexity without offering any benefits.
--
Regards,
Alexander Chemeris.
CEO, Fairwaves, Inc.
https://fairwaves.co
On 25 Nov 2015, at 14:07, sergey kostanbaev
<sergey.kostanbaev(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, initially I thought about using SMPP for USSD. But it looked really complicated
since only few external SMPP libraries have support of USSD and most of that few are in
C#/Java/etc. Moreover I didn't have any working software for USSD over SMPP to test
interoperability with.
Hmm. We try to follow standard protocol when they exist.