[asterisk-users] Polycom Speakerphone

Doug Doug at NaTel.net
Mon Nov 12 14:33:02 CST 2007

At 13:05 11/12/2007, John Millican, wrote:
 >> Excellent speakerphone.  Extremely cumbersome to
 >> configure.
 >I do not understand how you can say that the Polycoms are  "Extremely
 >cumbersome to configure".   I find them rather nice.  Once you have one
 >working config it is very easy to copy that config over to the mac address
 >files for the other phones that you have and only change the per 
phone bits.
 >Set up a site wide sip.cfg and then use phone-(macaddress).cfg files for the
 >individual settings for each phone. real nice when you have more than a
 >couple phones to configure.
 >It is not my intention to start any war here just giving my 2 cents worth.

At 13:13 11/12/2007, David Gomillion wrote:
 >> Excellent speakerphone.  Extremely cumbersome to
 >> configure.
 >I agree about the speakerphone, and disagree with the claim about
 >configuration. The XML is extremely to generate through scripts, and
 >once the framework is built, I find it to be far simpler to manage the
 >deployment than other IP phones.
 >Of course, YMMV.

I agree that once the .cfg files are working, duplicating
them to use on other phones if fairly straightforward.

That having been said, getting the .cfg files hammered
into a usable form is quite tedious.

Also, getting the Polycoms to accept the new configs
frequently involve defaulting the phone, or resetting
the "local configuration".

Upgrading firmware on older phones may require many
steps by upgrading through intermediate versions.

Compared to an analog ATA, Polycoms are about 10 times
more difficult and time consuming to get running well.
If you haven't had to deal with these problems, count
yourself very lucky.

More information about the asterisk-users mailing list