<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hi Bernhard,<br>
<br>
I do not have details but it is well known configuration (first
question from our CTI group) if superprovider is enabled or not. I
have not had time to verify yet, but I suspect superprovider membership
may alter behavior of GetDevice such that all terminals associated to
the user are not returned. Again, this is only my initial guess.<br>
<br>
/Wes<br>
<br>
Bernhard Albler wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:58E3A987C96298428F32F9CE6BF2136E4D1E4195D6@srvgraz08.nts.at"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Wes,
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">2. is that user a member of all groups that contain *CTI* (there are several) except SuperProvider. Do not make it a member of superprovider.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Something i saw recently fits with what you are seeing there, and I was kind of curious, if you could give some background on this.
A Application was registering phones for monitoring, and it would not get InService Events for some Lines. Now, when the app was starting, it could monitor those lines.
Now, basically this turned out to be happening when SuperProv was active, the user still had all the Phones manually assigned, it was just a misconfiguration.
Now, i always thought SuperProv just gave you the ability to open any phones you wanted, so i wasn't expecting it to be harmful. Is there any change to the cti / device assignment logic because of superprov, which actually breaks apps which don't support it properly (still assuming phones are assigned to the user properly etc.)?
Thanks,
bernhard
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>