I've heard people from cisco say not to do this, has anyone found out a bad 
thing about shared lines as primary lines on more than one phone?

Lelio
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst (CCS) * university of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo."      WJR

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

I recall they talked about IPCCExpress causing issues.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Simon" <BillS@psu.edu>
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio@uoguelph.ca>; "Cisco VoIPoE List"
<cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 12:13 PM
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] shared line as primary line


>I do it with my test phones, all have the same single DN assigned, and
> it doesn't seem to be a problem at all.  Why does cisco say not to do
> this?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenz
i
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 11:59 AM
> To: cisco VoIPoE List
> Subject: [cisco-voip] shared line as primary line
>
> I've heard people from cisco say not to do this, has anyone found out a
> bad thing about shared lines as primary lines on more than one phone?
>
> Lelio
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst (CCS) * university of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo."
> WJR
>
>
>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Lelio,

Did cisco explain why they are suggesting not to share the primary
lines?

I have shared many primary lines and my only thought for not sharing
the primary lines is for proper Emergency Response, i.e. E911.
Although, CER can distinguish calls from different Emergency Response
Locations and the Emergency Responders can be directed to the correct
location of the caller (assuming all configurations are correct), if
a return call to the shared numbered is answered by someone other
than the original caller, incorrect and/or confusing information
might be told the Emergency Response caller.

VM

On Jul 26, 2007, at 11:59 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:

> I've heard people from cisco say not to do this, has anyone found
> out a bad thing about shared lines as primary lines on more than
> one phone?
>
> Lelio
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst (CCS) * university of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo
> buffalo."      WJR
>
>  ________________________________________
_______
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

I do it with my test phones, all have the same single DN assigned, and
it doesn't seem to be a problem at all.  Why does cisco say not to do
this?


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 11:59 AM
To: cisco VoIPoE List
Subject: [cisco-voip] shared line as primary line

I've heard people from cisco say not to do this, has anyone found out a
bad thing about shared lines as primary lines on more than one phone?

Lelio
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst (CCS) * university of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo."
WJR

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

This would be an issue if your agent line was shared, wouldnt matter if it
was the primary number on a set or a secondary line. can cause phantom calls
in your supervisor display, if not other problems. Shared line for the agent
is one of the unsupported configurations on the phone (listed in the release
notes at least for v4.0.5)

On 7/26/07, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio@uoguelph.ca> wrote:
>
> I recall they talked about IPCCExpress causing issues.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Simon" <BillS@psu.edu>
> To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio@uoguelph.ca>; "Cisco VoIPoE List"
> <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 12:13 PM
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] shared line as primary line
>
> 
>
>  ________________________________________
_______
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>



--
Ed Leatherman
Senior Voice Engineer
West Virginia University
Telecommunications and Network Operations

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Actually the real issue is CallManager CTI interface does not know how to
deal with a number that shows up more then once, on anything.  It does not
understand partitons, etc.  Because of this, anything that needs CTI can't
do duplicate numbers or shared lines.  IE ipcc/ICM Attendant Console, etc.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Other than UCCX\UCCE agents I've had no issues with shared lines. Certainfea
tures have notes about shared line support.  Typically I have my home7961, m
y work 7961 and IPC all have the same shared dn -jason

________________________________

From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net on behalf of Bill Simon
Sent: Thu 7/26/2007 12:13 PM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi; cisco VoIPoE List
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] shared line as primary line



I do it with my test phones, all have the same single DN assigned, and
it doesn't seem to be a problem at all.  Why does cisco say not to do
this?


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 11:59 AM
To: cisco VoIPoE List
Subject: [cisco-voip] shared line as primary line

I've heard people from cisco say not to do this, has anyone found out a
bad thing about shared lines as primary lines on more than one phone?

Lelio
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst(CCS) * university of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo."
WJR

 ________________________________________
_______
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip





-----------------------------------------
Disclaimer:

This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
confidential and privileged information and is for use bythe
designated addressee(s) named above only.  If you are not the
intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
this email or itscontents is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful.  If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
from your computer. Thank you.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Bill Simon wrote:
> I do it with my test phones, all have the same single DN assigned, and
> it doesn't seem to be a problem at all.  Why does cisco say not to do
> this?

Maybe because it exposes the fact that not all the lines would start
ringing at the same time?  I'm running into this situation at a remote
site (Beijing, with call processing cluster in the U.S.) - no
receptionist, so the main number is on every phone.  When the main
number gets a call various phones start ringing, but the ring cadence is
such that they're "out of phase" with each other.

Without doing traces, I'm guessing it's because CM has to unicast to
each phone to get them to start ringing. (And because of TCP delay it
just makes it apparent)

CM 4.1.3sr2, phones are running 8.2.1

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Yup, the component that controls the line has to tell every phone that the
line exists on to start ringing.  The signal goes out to the component that
controls the phone in some random order and depending on how many phones the
line is shared across this can be quick enough to be simultaneous or it can
appear spread out.  If the phones are registered to different subscribers
the rings can be that much more spread out.


-Ryan
-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Robert Kulagows
ki
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 10:52 AM
To: cisco VoIPoE List
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] shared line as primary line

Bill Simon wrote:
> I do it with my test phones, all have the same single DN assigned, and
> it doesn't seem to be a problem at all.  Why does cisco say not to do
> this?

Maybe because it exposes the fact that not all the lines would start ringing
at the same time?  I'm running into this situation at a remote site
(Beijing, with call processing cluster in the U.S.) - no receptionist, so
the main number is on every phone.  When the main number gets a call various
phones start ringing, but the ring cadence is such that they're "out of
phase" with each other.

Without doing traces, I'm guessing it's because CM has to unicast to each
phone to get them to start ringing. (And because of TCP delay it just makes
it apparent)

CM 4.1.3sr2, phones are running 8.2.1
 ________________________________________
_______
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]