Also one more thing user 200 calls rejected by user 200 and user 201
calls rejected user 201 or consider person X having 2 lines 200(ply-1)
and 201(ply-2) .In which person X reject both the call...
Regards,
Kumaran T
On 11/28/2011 5:44 PM, Kumaran T wrote:
OK. Then in my scenario why there is 2 behavior?In which scenario 1 is
working and scenario 2 is not working ...
Regards,
Kumaran T
On 11/28/2011 5:01 PM, Tony Graziano wrote:
The premise is the same. The original call was for user 200. No other
user can really reject the call because their phone is not auth'd as
user 200.
On Nov 28, 2011 6:30 AM, "Venkateshwaran T"
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Its not a Hunt group scenario I mentioned.Its call forwarding
scenario for user 200..
Regards,
Kumaran T
On 11/28/2011 4:56 PM, Tony Graziano wrote:
Right. 201 can't reject a call for user 200 because the REJECT button
on the polycom assumes the original target is 201, so the VM system
wont AUTH the deposit to deposit the REJECT from user 201 to 200's
mailbox. REJECT is only valid if the call is to the phone that is the
original intended target.
Like I said, I don't think rejecting a call on a hunt group would be
a valid scenario. If they instead ignored the call it would work.
Also, NOT ALL phones have a reject button.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 6:08 AM, Venkateshwaran T
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Tony,
In my scenario user 200 and 201 is rejecting the call and
202 is the caller..
Regards,
Kumaran T
On 11/28/2011 4:21 PM, Tony Graziano wrote:
Actually, I don't think that's a valid scenario:
1. Not all sip UA's have a reject button.
2. user 202 cannot reject a forwarded call because the intended
recipient is 200. Rejecting the call to go to voicemail would be
to user 202's vm, and user 202's phone is not authenticated as 200.
I think this is a valid behavior.
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 5:32 AM, Kumaran T
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi All,
Please check the following scenario in which 2nd scenario
seems to have problem...
Scenario1:
Call forwarding:
1.user 200 -30sec
At the same time to user 201-30 secs
No response to user 202-30 sec
2.user 202 calls 200
user 200 and 201 not answering the call or
reject the call both the user after 3 sec
3.Call will go to VM in 202 phone
Its a valid behavior
Scenario2:
Call forwarding:
1.user 200 -30sec
At the same time to user 201-30 secs
No response to user 202-30 sec
2.user 202 calls 200
user 200 and 201 reject the call within 1-3 secs
3.Call will not connect to VM rather than it will
try to connectts self(202) and call ended after few sec..
This behavior is seen in both 4.4 and 0.0.4.5.2.. IMO
call should go VMin any case when user reject the call..
Regards,
Kumaran T
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
_______________________________________________
sipx-users mailing list
[email protected]
List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
