From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5104657670945239245==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Denis Kenzior Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] Add a MessageWaiting interface to track message waiting indications. Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 11:35:29 -0500 Message-ID: <200908101135.30188.denkenz@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============5104657670945239245== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Andrew, > 2009/8/5 Denis Kenzior : > > Hi Andrew, > > > >> > For setting mailbox numbers, a working EF-MBDN is required since the > >> > only alternative would be to store them on the filesystem. > >> > >> mw_set_indicator does the right thing, I missed this fact. But when a > >> mailbox number is set or received from network all clients get a > >> PropertyChanged and the new number can be retrieved from the interface > >> but only when the store succeeded, previously it would be available > >> regardless of MBDN on the card and the writing to card was secondary. > >> The number is kind of important if you want to hear the messages. > > > > So you're right that even if we get an enhanced voice mail notification > > message the Mailbox number won't be signaled unless we have the SIM > > provisioned with EF-MBI & EF-MBDN. > > > > The problem is, if we don't have the SIM files available, then the next > > time oFono is restarted this information is lost anyway until the next > > MWI notification arrives. So you're back to not being able to dial the > > mailbox. > > > > This is also an issue with the indications themselves. If we don't have > > EF- MWIS provisioned, the information is lost when oFono is restarted. > > So we're now inconsistent between MBDN/MWIS, so maybe we shouldn't > > update them either in this case. > > True. (or update them both in this case) > > It would make sense for the providers to resend the MWI information > everytime subscriber connects the network and then it would be less > problematic in case the information couldn't be written to SIM, but I > don't know if they ever do this. Probably they don't, there are also weird roaming cases to consider, where = you = receive MWI, turn phone off, step on a plane and turn phone on with some ot= her = network entirely. Can we make the MWI interface smarter somehow? Perhaps by not enabling it = unless at least the EFmwis file is available, or by always storing the EFmw= is = contents on the filesystem? Regards, -Denis --===============5104657670945239245==--