What about IP IVR?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 19, 2020, at 9:16 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> +100 for Anthony! 😊
>  
>  
>  
> From: Anthony Holloway <[email protected]> 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 10:48 AM
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi <[email protected]>
> Cc: Matthew Loraditch <[email protected]>; Charles Goldsmith 
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] [External] IPCC best practice
>  
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph. Do 
> not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know 
> the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to 
> [email protected]
>  
> Wait Lelio, CRA is older terminology than CRS, so it should go:
>  
> +1 IPCC
> +2 CRS
> +3 CRA
>  
> Right?
>  
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 8:53 AM Lelio Fulgenzi <[email protected]> wrote:
>  
> Not much more to add here, except +1 for calling in IPCC. :) you’d have 
> gotten +2 if you called it CRA. ;)
>  
> But, seriously, you have to weigh the pros and cons of injecting a point of 
> failure vs ease of administration. 
>  
> My thought process is, can you build automatic recovery? Or easily understood 
> manual backup. 
>  
> And is the design something you can easily hand off to someone?
>  
> Lots of things to consider. 
>  
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> 
> On Aug 19, 2020, at 9:00 AM, Matthew Loraditch 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph. Do 
> not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know 
> the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to 
> [email protected]
>  
> We still use Call Handlers. We have fewer resources who can handle script 
> editing and somewhat frequent requests to change hours and such that we need 
> the regular techs to be able to handle.
>  
> Definitely a preference thing.
>  
>  
> Matthew Loraditch​
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: 443.541.1518
> w: www.heliontechnologies.com
>  | 
> e: [email protected]
> <image137282.png>
>  
> <image428710.png>
>  
> <image540273.png>
>  
> <image899251.png>
>  
> From: cisco-voip <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Charles 
> Goldsmith
> Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 8:39 AM
> To: Johnson, Tim <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] [External] IPCC best practice
>  
> [EXTERNAL]
>  
> Agreed with TIm, it's just simpler to involve less systems if you can.  With 
> 12.0 UCCX and higher, the calendar function is a nice addition, no more XML 
> files for schedules.
>  
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 7:37 AM Johnson, Tim <[email protected]> wrote:
> It seems to me that there's not a "best practice" label for most scenarios. 
> When I started with UCCX, we went to a call handler first to provide us with 
> an easy way to provide a schedule, and a familiar way for the customer to 
> record a greeting. Later, we ended up building the schedule into our script 
> and directing calls to the trigger. That's my preference, just to involve 
> less systems. 
> 
> Tim Johnson
> Voice & Video Engineer
> Central Michigan University
> Call me: +19897744406
> Video Call me: [email protected]
> Fax me: +19897795900
> Meet me: http://cmich.webex.com/meet/johns10t
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-voip <[email protected]> On Behalf Of 
> [email protected]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 8:19 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [External] [cisco-voip] IPCC best practice
> 
> 
> Hello, I just have a quick question.
> When setting up a call center for a SMB, Is it best practice to have the main 
> number go to a unity call handler 1st, with caller input going to uccx 
> triggers, or is it considered best practice to have the main number go right 
> to CCX?  I have seen both ways.
> 
> Thank you.
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Reply via email to