2006/4/20, John Novack (port) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
There should be no need for  TWO feature codes.

I fully second that : what matters most is to satisfy users.
Unified transfer method offer :
- simplicity,
- hardware independance (think about mobile phones, or people occasionnaly using foreign language configured phones when visiting a sister company abroad)
- and above all, it keeps calls from being lost.

So it should be implemented in Asterisk and it's up to Polycom, Snom and others to design phones that at least do not prevent people to use # sign based unified transfer method if they wish to.


For the sake of behaviour consistency, maybe :
- this unified transfer method (let's say U for unified) should be introduced in features.conf independently of previous t or T methods and it's up developpers to reuse, factorize or rewrite existing transfer code and as long as those 3 methods as supported,

- and previous t or T methods should be droped sometimes later on to simplify code support.

Cheers

_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --

Asterisk-Users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users

Reply via email to