[cisco-voip] shared lines and primary lines, why not?

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

So it's more when the phones/lines are associate to a user in the directory than actually programming the phones?
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Kevin Thorngren 
  To: Lelio Fulgenzi 
  Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net 
  Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 6:51 PM
  Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] shared lines and primary lines, why not?


  I believe there are some apps that will use the Primary Extension when performing dial by name, as an example. If there is more than one user associated to a DN as a Primary Extension the application may become confused and select the wrong user. This is just a guess on my part, I would have to take a deeper look if needed.

  Kevin
  On Apr 14, 2006, at 5:58 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:


    Just wondering if any of the Cisco folk can comment on why this restriction (or caveat) is in place. I'm more interested than anything.
     

      From Cisco CallManager System Guide, Release 4.1(3): IP Phones
       
      Do not configure shared line appearances on the primary lines of the phones; for example, if two phones have a shared line appearance, only one of the phones should have the primary line configured as shared (the other phone should have the secondary line configured as shared).--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.     Network Analyst (CCS)
    University of Guelph     Guelph, Ontario     N1G 2W1
    (519) 824-4120 x56354     (519) 767-1060 FAX 
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    Sanity First : Number of days with less than
    50 messages in my inbox at the end of the day:    buffer overrun_______________________________________________
    cisco-voip mailing list
    cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
    https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20060414/bece7ba7/attachment.html