[Asterisk-Dev] switch => Parking/companya

[Chris Parker]

At 12:29 PM 4/28/2004, brian wrote:
>Ok after talking to a few users of normal PBX's this is the way I think it
>could work.
>
>Current call parking as it is in asterisk isn't very sip friendly.  And you
>can't natively park a call without using some parkandannounce hack, which
>isn't very elegant.  I have also looked at how Cisco Call Manager does it
>and it allows absolute parking to a slot in the defined parking range.
>
>Now this is what I am looking at and I want to know if others agree:
>
>Example bob parks a call using a blind transfer to 704,  Mary tries to park
>a call on 704 it should return a busy and not bridge the two calls.  To
>pickup the call you would dial *704,  Mary would get a busy and would be
>able to take the call back and transfer to 705 or some other slot.
>
>7XX to park
>*7XX to pickup
>(these would be definable ranges like ccm does)
>
>On a 7960 for example it would just fail if you tried to park two calls on
>top of each other and you could just hit resume, more and blind transfer
>again to a different slot.  Both parking options should be available
>shouldn't they?  And let the PBX installer/user pick the one that the
>customer wishes to use?
>
>Input anyone?

As a "normal" wired PBX user, when a call is parked it goes to a unique
slot per call.  It two calls are parked simultaneously they should *not*
be bridged.  If you want to bridge calls, that should be a explicit
operation, not a side-effect of parking two calls.

If you have park bridge calls, then it's no longer really a 'Park'
function as most PBX users see it.

Yes, SIP makes it a bit challenging to implement, but as this is deployed,
you have to look at it from the viewpoint of someone who's been using a
nortel PBX for the last 10 years and how they understand "Park" to work.

-Chris
-- 
    \\\|||///  \   Chris Parker    -   Segmentation Fault ( core dumped )
    \ ~   ~ /   \
    | @   @ 
|    \   http://www.segv.org     |    cparker at segv.org
oOo   (_)   oOo  \
------------------------------------------------------------------------
#             OS's are nothing more than device drivers!               #