Carolyn wrote:
...
> The agreement we had in the kick-off call with Martin at the 
> start of development was that we would not implement support 
> for the "multiple appearances-per-phone" part of the I-D (the 
> x-line-id parameter, later called appearance or 
> sa:appearance).  I have basically ignored this parameter and 
> let the phones deal with it.  Especially, I am not at this 
> time putting the x-line-id parameter into an Alert-Info 
> header in the INVITE of a call to the shared AOR, as the I-D 
> requires (which would require the SAA to be plugged into the 
> Proxy).  When the call is answered at one of the phones, it 
> picks an x-line-id (it knows what numbers are available, 
> since it sees all the traffic for the group) and sends it in 
> the dialog;sla NOTIFY.
> 
> In our Polycom config plug-in, you can go into Advanced and 
> set the lineKeys parameter to 2 or more to get more than one 
> button per AOR.  It is possible that calls would be confused 
> if more than one was on hold - but I think that would be the 
> case anyway, even if all sets had the same number of 
> appearances, because sets can't be counted on to have all the 
> buttons in the same place, and even if they did, the person 
> would have to say "your call is on hold on the second from 
> the bottom button", or "middle button on the right" or some 
> such nonsense - and even then all phones would have to 
> guarantee not only the same number of line buttons for the 
> AOR, but buttons in the same physical place.  We could allow 
> only one appearance of the shared AOR per phone.  I would 
> like people to play with the feature a bit before we make 
> this decision.

Note also that Polycoms have a 'callsPerLineKey' setting: The number of
calls or conferences which may be active or on hold per line key for a
specific registration on the phone.

The blank default value results in the max value, which is either 8 or
24, depending on the model.

I don't think this constitutes "multiple appearances-per-phone", but I'm
not as familiar with the draft as you.  But it is at least probably
something to test.


-Paul
[email protected]

_______________________________________________
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/

Reply via email to