Carolyn Beeton wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >> Krzeminski, Damian (BL60:9D30) >> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 4:53 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [sipX-dev] Config for bridged line appearances >> (XX-4762/XX-5439) >> >>> Carolyn wrote: >>> ... >>>> There is no "master" in the BLA sense. Any set that >> registers with >>>> the shared line is part of the group, if it accepts >> subscriptions to >>>> the proper package (i.e. dialog;sla in the current implementation) >>>> and subscribes to the proper package. In my config I don't have >>>> "boss/admin" but just "sharedLine" and both sets register to the >>>> sharedLine. No phone gets special treatment for the line, and it >>>> doesn't need to be the "prime" line anywhere. >> We have to implement it in a generic way (not limited to >> Polycom sets). >> Polycom plugin can recognize that lines are shared and create >> a specific configuration. In the sense of "plug-in" vs. >> "core" functionality it's no different from let's say >> phonebooks or time zone features. > > In addition to the set-specific config, the shared user must be saved in > some file so that the Appearance Agent (or Shared Line Agent, or other > name suggestions welcomed) knows about it. I am not sure if that should > be done on the main Add User page, or should be implicit from doing the > set-specific config (though I prefer the set-specific stuff to be > implicit, and the shared setting done at the user level - which might > impose the limitation that all appearances of a user marked shared will > in fact be shared - which is not actually required by the I-D, but seems > reasonable to me). > > I admit to some confusion about "user" vs "line" vs "appearance". I > think I use them interchangeably. The feature is "shared appearances of > an Address of Record" (taken from the > draft-ietf-bliss-shared-appearances draft, which is the latest evolution > of the feature, though not the one implemented by the Polycom sets or my > current implementation for sipx (which is draft-anil-sipping-bla-02)). > In practice the AOR is a user, which is added as a line to sets.
Exactly: in sipXconfig lingo - user is an AOR, line is an association between user and a phone (user agent). > >> Before we decide how to expose it from UI I have some questions... >> >> - Is this an admin configurable or user configurable feature? >> In other words are users allowed to add shared lines to their sets? > > I would think the "shared" nature of a line should be only > admin-configurable. Can users add regular lines to their sets? I don't > think so (but I am not sure). But in any case, since things must be > shared between more than one user - it should require agreement between > both users, or at least the oversight of the admin, before the line is > marked shared. Otherwise I could share someone else's line, and steal > any call they put on hold. Of course the feature might be used to > transfer calls between two phones owned by a single person (e.g. a > softphone and a hardphone). Make sense to leave it for the admin (at least for now). That said things do not have to ve shared between 'users' - there is only one user (one AOR) involved. There is more than 1 physical person involved, but that's a social not a configuration interaction. > >> - "Shared" line is like any other line on the phone (in a >> sense you can make and receive calls on it). The only >> difference is that others see the status of that line. Is >> that correct? > > Yes and no. The shared line is like any other line on the phone (in the > sense that you can make and receive calls on it). And as you say, others > see the status of that line. The big difference is that calls can be > handed back and forth between sets with an appearance of the shared line > just by putting the call on hold on one set and taking it off hold (by > pressing the button with the flashing light) on another - no transfer > required. > Let's put it on wiki. It's going to be a FAQ. >> - Can "external" lines (lines registered to a different PBX) >> be "shared"? > > Hmmm... if they are registered to a different PBX then the line would > be need to be marked shared on that PBX, but I don't see why it would > not work. > OK - let's limit this to internal lines at least for now. >> - If you were to explain to someone not familiar with SIP (or >> phones) the difference between BLA and monitored speed dials >> what would you say? >> > > I said it above. The monitored speed dials feature shows the status of > the line but does not allow the other sets to grab the call. Future > evolutions of the shared line feature allow the other sets to join in > the call as well (the first implementation only allows the call to be > passed around by holding it). > > Carolyn _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
