[cisco-voip] CUxAC queue handling

[Beck, Andre]

Hi Jamie,

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 09:45:53AM -0400, Jamie Gale wrote:
> Hi Andre,
> 
> The first issue is not something I have heard of or seen before, I will try to replicate it in my lab with a high call volume. If you do see it happen again then it would be worth gathering the traces from the client and server along with some screenshots and then a case can be opened with TAC to investigate, I realize that taking screenshots whilst having high call volume isn't ideal but think we will need it regardless.

Ok, if this ever surfaces again, I'll try to get all the traces and screen
shots. We have, however, meanwhile applied an overflow target that keeps
the queue down to 16 callers, so if it really depends on the volume we had
when it struck first, it could well be gone forever.

> The second item is something that cannot currently be done but I have added to a feature tracker in order to try and get this implemented as part of a new release.

Thats wonderful, neither me nor the customer expected an instant solution,
having it on a roadmap is great.

When we are at discussing feature ideas: Do you consider to split up
the overflow targets (so a different destination could be specified per
reason) in some future version? I think there are a lot of scenarios where
it would make sense to deal with a queue growing too long, a user dangling
in there for an excessive time and - specifically - "no operator" overflow
in slightly different ways.

Something else that I'm missing, maybe I just didn't read the docs correctly:
When pushing the CTI Gateway/Service/Park port configuration to CCM, all of
the CTI ports use the same template for the Phone/DN settings. In our case,
we always have to clean up after that as MOH has to be different for the
Gateway ports vs. the Service/Park ports. I think that's also what most
other users want, as having the Queue MOH undistinguishable from the MOH
when being held by an operator is quite disturbing for callers (when that
happens to me, I always fear the operator has dropped me back into the
entry queue for another long wait). I understand that Gateway ports are
allocated on a first come first serve schedule, so you cannot have individual
MOH per queue (that, of course, would be really cool, but it would require
some kind of Gateway port grouping and may explode the number of ports that
have to be configured) - but I think having individual templates for Gateway
ports vs. Service ports vs. Park ports would already go a long way towards
a solution. Or am I missing something?

Thanks a lot,
Andre.
-- 
                    Cool .signatures are so 90s...

-> Andre Beck    +++ ABP-RIPE +++      IBH IT-Service GmbH, Dresden <-