[Asterisk-Users] app_queue, fewestcalls and leastrecent logic

[Richard Lyman]

my point was your logic regarding 'calculating magic/metric' for
extremely long call times shouldn't be part of the 'logic' it
SHOULD be 'inhouse' policy where the mgr gives agentA a nice long
chat about how to sell/service the client more effectively.

i know there is at least one other out there that agrees with
me.  <G> 

 
Brian West wrote:
> 
> I was speaking in a logic related to real call routing and queueing.  In
> House policy can be built on top of your call strategy.  What we are
> needing is input on logic only ..
> 
> bkw
> 
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2003, Richard Lyman wrote:
> 
> > translation:  manager gets off thier fat ass and actually talks to
> > agentA regarding 'INHOUSE' policies, and how it will effect the agents
> > employment!
> >
> > <G>
> >
> > Brian West wrote:
> >
> > >But how do you translate inhouse to logic for app_queue. :P
> > >
> > >On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Richard Lyman wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>ok and what happens when agentA in on a 3 hour call? once again i think
> > >>this type of 'senario' should be covered by 'in house' policy.. not some
> > >>super queue tweek <G>
> > >>
> > >>Brian West wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>Ok just had my boss point something out:
> > >>>
> > >>>"I'd think dumping calls on most-idle would be fairly straightforward, but
> > >>>could be skewed if agentA is on a 40 minute call, agentB has a bunch of 5
> > >>>minute calls"
> > >>>
> > >>>So total call time should be counted in the logic somewhere.
> > >>>
> > >>>bkw
> > >>>
> > >>>On Sun, 10 Aug 2003, Brian West wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>I think we are starting to see what type of logic people are wanting in
> > >>>>fewestcalls and leastrecent strategy.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>bkw
> > >>>>
> > >>>>On Sun, 10 Aug 2003, Richard Lyman wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>i disagree, instead of thinking 'fallback' how about 'order' the agents
> > >>>>>(by effecting the 'metric') so you 'target' the agent you want first
> > >>>>>then if fail they go right to the next one in the 'ordered' list.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>Brian West wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>leastrecent suffers the same fait as fewestcalls onlying ringing the
> > >>>>>>leastrecent agent over and over endlessly.  It should have a fallback
> > >>>>>>option.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>roundrobin with leastrecent first
> > >>>>>>roundrobin with fewestcalls first
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>I would like to see a roundrobin with leastbusy first option.
> > >>>>>>(just because you have taken less call or leastrecent doesn't mean you
> > >>>>>>haven't been a busy agent!)
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>I'm sure better autologoff logic as per my first email would be a great
> > >>>>>>idea also.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>bkw
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>On Sun, 10 Aug 2003, Richard Lyman wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>well if you ask me, the leastrecent part would work if you reversed the
> > >>>>>>>logic on the metric.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>my other last_used mod would do a time_t on that agent the last time it
> > >>>>>>>was 'tried' (ast_request'd) then (i was using arrays) qsort so that (new
> > >>>>>>>agents) '0' would be on top, and the agent that got the most recent
> > >>>>>>>attempt would be on the bottom '1057174447' (below is an example)
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>  -- sorted agent array: 317 last_used: 0
> > >>>>>>>  -- sorted agent array: 318 last_used: 0
> > >>>>>>>  -- sorted agent array: 319 last_used: 0
> > >>>>>>>  -- sorted agent array: 300 last_used: 1057174447
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>that way, (for leastrecent anyway), you are always working with a full stack of agents.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>Brian West wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>First of all I would like to thank Mark for getting roundrobin to go
> > >>>>>>>>roundrobin.  Good job.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Now we have some options here for leastrecent and fewestcalls strategy. It
> > >>>>>>>>needs some work on the logic and Mark recommend that I ask the list and
> > >>>>>>>>get some input before he makes any changes to it.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>fewestcalls from what I have seen would always ring the agent with the
> > >>>>>>>>fewestcalls first then go into roundrobin if that agent didn't answer.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Next new caller would ring fewestcalls agent first then start roundrobin.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>What do you think should happen in fewestcalls?  Right now it just rings
> > >>>>>>>>the agent with the fewestcalls over and over with current app_queue logic.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>leastrecent from what I have been looking at will ring the agent that has
> > >>>>>>>>least recently take a call first then if they don't answer go into
> > >>>>>>>>roundrobin.  Then the next new call coming from queue would first go to
> > >>>>>>>>the leastrecent first then try every agent in roundrobin till answered
> > >>>>>>>>then starting over again.  New caller from queue hits leastrecent agent
> > >>>>>>>>first.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Same thing happens in leastrecent strategy. The leastrecent agent will
> > >>>>>>>>ring over and over with current app_queue logic.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Now some of you might recommend autologoff options.  But that also might
> > >>>>>>>>need some work.  I don't want to log off an agent for not answering the
> > >>>>>>>>phone only once.  So here is how I would like to see autologoff work.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Example:
> > >>>>>>>>queue timeout = 20
> > >>>>>>>>agent autologoff = 60
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>The agent would have to not answer their phone 3 times in a row to get
> > >>>>>>>>logged off.  As it stands now they did not answer just once and get logged
> > >>>>>>>>off.  Thus allow for an employee to use the excuse for not working when
> > >>>>>>>>they should be logged in and taking calls.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Unless i'm wrong here.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Please post your input on these options and how you would like them to see
> > >>>>>>>>them function function.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>Thanks,
> > >>>>>>>>Brian
> > >>>>>>>>CWIS Internet Services
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>>>>>>Asterisk-Users mailing list
> > >>>>>>>>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> > >>>>>>>>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>>>>>Asterisk-Users mailing list
> > >>>>>>>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> > >>>>>>>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>>>>Asterisk-Users mailing list
> > >>>>>>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> > >>>>>>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>>>Asterisk-Users mailing list
> > >>>>>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> > >>>>>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>>Asterisk-Users mailing list
> > >>>>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> > >>>>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>_______________________________________________
> > >>>Asterisk-Users mailing list
> > >>>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> > >>>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>_______________________________________________
> > >>Asterisk-Users mailing list
> > >>Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> > >>http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Asterisk-Users mailing list
> > >Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> > >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Asterisk-Users mailing list
> > Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk-Users mailing list
> Asterisk-Users at lists.digium.com
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users