I agree Christain, it's a mess. I remain hopeful that the new info
work will help make this less messy.
On Nov 18, 2008, at 14:47 , Christian Stredicke wrote:
The word "snom" triggered my attention ;-)
Regarding buttons we implemented something on our own which probably
addresses the case below (see http://wiki.snom.com/Features/LED_Remote_Control)
. Not only Cisco does have their own extensions! It is not enough
for use to have F1 or HOLD buttons description; we must also be able
to control LED and displays associated with the button. So far our
little dirty protocol solves that problem in a nice way and we can
offer the features that the traditional PBX were able to offer.
But I agree. The interop level in SIP regarding buttons barely goes
beyond POTS and 12-key DTMF. Vendors like snom today have no other
choice but a selection box that says what kind of SIP the phones
should talk. It is a mess!
CS
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag
von Cullen Jennings
Gesendet: Dienstag, 18. November 2008 21:01
An: SIP List
Betreff: [Sip] INFO Use case
Let's imagine that there is a base DTMF package defined that
supports the 12 basic keys. Now cisco makes a vendor specific
package that is
pretty much the same but includes key presses for the "HOLD" button.
Nortel does pretty much the same but calls it the "F1" button. Now
SNOM wants to build a phone that supports both and in fact is
operating in an environment with a Nortel PBX, Cisco Voice Mail, and
Asterix SBC which understands both - the phone really needs to send
both and they need to be one atomic action so they are not
interpreted as the wrong thing or as double key presses.
It seems that things along the lines of the above will happen and
need to be considered. I don't know if this means an INFO needs to
carry more that one thing or not. The worst possible solution I can
imaging to this is that SNOM builds a new package that combines the
Cisco and Nortel package.
Cullen <in my individual contributor roll>
PS - I do not care if people want to solve this use case or not. I
just mention it as something I view as somewhat likely to happen. I
am happy with whatever get's decided.
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use [EMAIL PROTECTED]
for questions on current sip Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new
developments on the application of sip
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
