Hi all,

Dara (cc'd) is investigating using sipXecs with a Contact Centre.  

There is a feature which he feels is critical, which we don't seem to
have.  The contact center must be able to INVITE an agent such that the
call is automatically picked up at the agent's phone if it isn't
manually picked up before a specified "answer after" timeout.  

Sounds perfect for the sipXecs Intercom feature, except for one thing.
The "answer after" timeout must be dynamic, and specified in the INVITE
message.  

Our Intercom feature has a single system-wide "Ring time", which
requires rebooting the phones in order to change.  It's implemented
using the (RFC 3261 standard) Alert-Info header, in which a number of
phones accept a pre-defined secret value as a trigger for the
non-standard behaviour.  (Polycom and Nortel IP 12x0 phones support
this.)

Dara had suggested using the (RFC 3261 standard) Call-Info header, but
with the Broadsoft Talk and Hold non-standard "Answer-After"
Info-parameter (http://tinyurl.com/ye58rtc, Section 2.3.)  This approach
is less secure, because there is no pre-defined secret value.  But the
timeout value can be dynamic.  (Polycoms do not support this, but Nortel
IP 12x0 phones may in the near future.)


So, how should we handle delivering this functionality in sipXecs?
Should we advise that phones implement the Call-Info "Answer-After"
Info-parameter?  

On a practical note, I'm not sure if that would work for Polycom.  Their
Alert-Info functionality is already quite extensive, and could easily be
used to deliver the functionality.  (Multiple pre-defined secrets can be
configured, each with a different "Ring time."  The INVITE can then just
dynamically send the Alert-Info secret corresponding to the desired
timeout.)  I doubt Polycom would be keen on developing a second
mechanism for delivery functionality they already support.


How else could we deliver the functionality?  

Maybe we could enhance the Intercom feature, so that it accepts the
Call-Info "Answer-After" Info-parameter, but uses the Polycom mechanism
in the resulting transformed INVITE?  This would keep the security
problem out of the phones, and the Intercom feature can be left off in
deployments that do not require it.  I think Intercom calls are also
authenticated, which means there could be authorization over who can
force an endpoint to auto-answer. 


Thoughts?


-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