On Mon, 2009-08-31 at 10:28 -0400, Carolyn Beeton wrote: > I received the following email from Polycom about the relation between > MWI and Shared Lines on the Polycom sets (they do not SUBSCRIBE to > message-summary for shared lines, so MWI does not work). I'd > appreciate some input on his last question: > > Is the intent to have all users of the shared line share and affect > the same voicemail box? > > I think the answer is "yes": that shared lines would access the same > mailbox, and should be treated exactly the same as not-shared ones for > the purpose of MWI (i.e. we set the msg.mwi.x.subscribe parameter and > it uses credentials for that user when you invoke the MWI callback (to > 101) from that line on the set). > > It never occured to me to have different sets access different > mailboxes for a shared line... I think this is what he's asking, and > I think that is NOT what we want.
Everything you say seems to be the Right Thing to do. The only oddity is that some phones have only one MWI indicator (e.g., LG-Nortel 68xx) even though they have multiple line appearances. But we handle that correctly, I think, in that sipXconfig configures the single MWI indicator to monitor the mailbox that the user specifies. For phones like Polycom which have separate MWI indications for each line appearance, it seems obvious that a shared appearance should show MWI for the line's mailbox. (Unless that is suppressed by special configuration, as you mention.) I mean, in a boss-secretary situation, the secretary is monitoring the boss's phone's busy status -- why wouldn't the secretary monitor the boss's voicemail as well? Dale _______________________________________________ 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/
