[asterisk-users] BLF and Snom phones

[Steve Davies]

Hi,

Could you explain for the benefit of the list what you have changed in
the snom image that will benefit this ticket? I am already receiving
your current beta images, through our distributor, up-to about
2008-13-19, and am not aware of any changes that affect BLF behaviour
or short-dials...

NOTE to list: User beware - The last few versions of beta firmware I
tested break re-invites. Of course this may be fixed by now.

Regards,
Steve

On 26/03/2008, Christian Stredicke <Christian.Stredicke at snom.de> wrote:
>
>
> Anyone who is willing to try out an image please send me a private email.
>
> CS
>
>  ________________________________
>  Von: Christian Stredicke
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 23. März 2008 11:56
> An: 'Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion'
> Betreff: AW: [asterisk-users] BLF and Snom phones
>
>
>
> I agree with Russel that vendor specific things should be the exception. The
> RFC was not written for features like call pickup, and the way snom
> interpreted it years ago (even my snom 100 already supported dialog state!)
> was just because we wanted to avoid additional provisioning. If there should
> be something in the snom phones that needs to be done, then we can take a
> look into this. Looking at the ticket, it seems to be simple.
>
> CS [from snom]
>
>  ________________________________
>  Von: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
> [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] Im Auftrag
> von Rob Hillis
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 23. März 2008 11:01
> An: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
> Betreff: Re: [asterisk-users] BLF and Snom phones
>
>
> Bill Hackensack wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 7:17 AM, Philipp Kempgen <philipp.kempgen at amooma.de>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >  http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=5014
> >
> >
>
> The response on that issue from Russell is the kind of response that really
> ticks me off.  No, no, no, we don't want any real features that users want,
> we want basic, boring features.  Asterisk is a call center system, not for
> regular, everyday business users.
>
> It could be so much more, though...
>
> Works great as an advanced IVR as a front end to a real phone system,
> though.
> While his basic point makes sense (we want to get away from channel specific
> implementation stuff) what he seems to be ignoring is that this patch
> actually provides no benefit at all to non-SIP channels, since the Snom
> phones don't support any technology other than SIP.
>
> I still think Asterisk is more than just a front-end to a "rea"l phone
> system.  What you can achieve with Asterisk is vastly beyond anything you
> can achieve with most other PABX systems without spending an utter fortune.
>