On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Thomas Kenyon
wrote:
> On 15/6/10 06:22, Randy R wrote:
>> In October, they will begin charging for Skype Manager (required for
>> SfS) and a per seat charge for that.
>>
> SfA also requires Skype Manager, and only works with users that were
> created with it. (At
On 15/6/10 06:22, Randy R wrote:
> By the way, I am currently testing this product from Skype. I would
> like to be able to receive calls ona Skype name on our pbx.
>
> 1) It works beautifully and you don't have to do anything in particular.
>
> 2) It's disproportionally expensive which is why I wa
By the way, I am currently testing this product from Skype. I would
like to be able to receive calls ona Skype name on our pbx.
1) It works beautifully and you don't have to do anything in particular.
2) It's disproportionally expensive which is why I want Skype for
Asterisk to work.
SfS costs $
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Tim Panton wrote:
> There are fewer limitations to SFA than SFS. SFA gets presence and full user
> info, plus it can
> make calls to Skype users, which SFS cant.
>
> I'm hoping that Digium will extend this difference by adding support for
> text and perhaps video..
On 23 Mar 2009, at 19:42, Gordon Henderson wrote:
Anyone connected up to it yet?
http://www.skypeforsip.com/
It would seem to make Digiums chan_skype rather pointness, or am I
missing
something?
Or is this Digiums chan_skype in a hosted box somewhere?
Gordon
There are fewer limita
I wonder why they only allow G.729 with this ... where's the great sound of
the skype call now ?
Martin
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Gordon Henderson <
gordon+aster...@drogon.net > wrote:
>
> Anyone connected up to it yet?
>
> http://www.skypeforsip.com/
>
> It would seem to make Digiums c
Anyone connected up to it yet?
http://www.skypeforsip.com/
It would seem to make Digiums chan_skype rather pointness, or am I missing
something?
Or is this Digiums chan_skype in a hosted box somewhere?
Gordon
___
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Prov
