Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Vernon

  1. I think you misunderstand what the issue is. It's not about the call pick up promises or the blinking, it's about the dialogue the PBX sends. I found a reference picture that can help understand what the BLF buttons look like under the new version. Any call that comes in into an ACD triggers all the agents to go "Talking", which is incorrect, they should be ringing, and only the agent that picks up the call is "Talking". I should have included the captured data from an older PBX that showed the call states, but only included for the tested version. In the new version the ACD sends out a <state>confirmed</state>\r\n packet for an incoming call and this causes all the monitored agents to show up as "Talking" compared to the older PBX that sent <state>early</state>\r\n which would tag the BLF key as "Ringing". This is only a problem for phones that are capable of providing extra BLF information, in my tests it's the Yealink T48S+ models.
  2. Hello, As with my earlier posts and doing more testing i think i found something that doesn't look to be influenced by the phone config settings. The issue is when a manager is monitoring multiple agents and a call comes in, all agents go into "Talking" mode even though the caller is in the early call stage and nobody has picked up. It takes a couple of seconds for the status to clear but it becomes hard to gauge who is picking up calls as it doesn't seem to go through the list of agents before the status changes. This shows up on the T48+ type models that track call states via BLF's on top of other functions. Digging into it, it looks like the call states may be mis-attributed when calls go through an agent group. When calling an extension directly the state is labelled as early and shows appropriately on the phone BLF. Data below bolded. Direct Call <?xml version="1.0"?>\r\n <dialog-info xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:dialog-info" version="186" state="full" entity="sip:100@test.domain.com:5060">\r\n <dialog id="57" call-id="921e247c@pbx" direction="recipient">\r\n <state>early</state>\r\n <local><identity display="TEST MAIN">sip:1234567890@test.domain.com</identity></local>\r\n <remote><identity display="TEST CALLER ">sip:0987456321@test.domain.com</identity><target uri="sip:*87100@test.domain.com"/></remote>\r\n </dialog>\r\n </dialog-info>\r\n When calling the agent group however, the state is confirmed even though the caller hasn't connected to any agent yet. Agent Group <?xml version="1.0"?>\r\n <dialog-info xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:dialog-info" version="183" state="full" entity="sip:100@test.domain.com:5060">\r\n <dialog id="56" call-id="b6ae8646@pbx" direction="recipient">\r\n <state>confirmed</state>\r\n <local><identity display="TEST MAIN">sip:1234567890@test.domain.com</identity></local>\r\n <remote><identity display="TEST CALLER ">sip:0987456321@test.domain.com</identity></remote>\r\n </dialog>\r\n </dialog-info>\r\n This is on a test v66.0.7
  3. Hi there, final update. Someone on my team helped me out and investigated the release notes for the Yealink phones and looks like starting from 84.0.90 they started supporting extra BLF functionalities for some of the phones. The BLF functions can be customized via the .cfg Spent some time on their forums looking for answers but the secrets were in the release notes instead Hope this helps anyone looking for this type of information
  4. Just to update. Decided to take a look at the wireshark data being sent for the DND status and the pbxsends the following: old version 57 <dialog-info xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:dialog-info" version="2" state="full" entity="sip:100@test.domain.com"><dialog id="dummy"><state>confirmed</state></dialog></dialog-info> new version 67 <dialog-info xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:dialog-info" version="80" state="full" entity="sip:100@test.domain.com"><dialog id="dnd"><state>confirmed</state><remote><identity display="Do Not Disturb"></identity></remote></dialog></dialog-info> So looks like the Yealinks may be interpreting the DND with a flashing light whereas the old status was "dummy" so it was solid red
  5. I think that's the current problem because the latest version i'm testing on does not render the BLF of an extension solid red light, it simply blinks. Like you said when the light is blinking it indicates a status where other users may pick-up the call, but you can't pick up a user that's on DND. I decided to test on an older version of the PBX and it does not seem this behaviour is replicated there. I must say that it would be easier for an administrator to manage the function of the BLF server side than to try and re-train clients on new BLF functionalities. To further test this i checked different Yealink models in case it was a one-off to the T43/46 and the T48+ models make it much more annoying because the buttons are displayed on one screen. If users go on DND it becomes very distracting as you can't hide away the buttons on a different page like the 42/43/46 model. Is the "hack" you mentioned, is that something available to the administrators. Might be helpful for those that stumble upon a similar situation.
  6. Hello, I've been testing the BLF options on the Yealink T43/46 on V 67. and i'm wondering if you could provide some insight into the BLF functionality. From what i remember in the previous versions there used to exist different BLF options (monitor, pickup, call) but now everything is under one button type. Here is a scenario issue, a user goes on DND, and you are monitoring them on a BLF, their button seems to start flashing. When they go on a call, their button starts flashing, the go-to BLF scenario function is flash the button in any situation. That seems a little bit regressive in terms of functionality because most standard setups will show the BLF states in different mode. For instance DND in most setups just have the user as on/ no flash, and flashing reserved for functions when you might be able to pick up a call. I wasn't able to find any documentation referencing these functionalities but i saw this blog post, https://blog.vodia.com/node/11. It mentions using :np with the "permission" setting though not sure where it would come up on a BLF. Is there an expanded list of commands you can attach to an extension BLF button? Thank you
  7. Hello, Thanks for your reply. I ended up playing around with it some more after my post and then read up on the new dial plan documentation. I did use the suggested 011* replacement pattern and setup the trunk with E.164 without leading + and it actually did resolve my issue with outbound calling. Testing it again I realized that I did not check for inbound calling. The inbound calls do show up and they do work, but PBX seems to add 011 to every incoming call in the CDR. So instead of seeing 416-xxx-xxxx, i now see 011416-xxx-xxxx. I mean it still works but this would mess with all the records for inbound calls. Two steps forward, but unfortunately one backwards
  8. Hello, I'm trying to test with a trunk that can do "everything" that means local calling and international calling. I've so far been very successful in creating the trunks for local calling but i'm having some difficulties with the international part. I'm testing this on the latest version and i don't remember it functioning this way but maybe I'm wrong in this regard. So i create a generic trunk with no global number replacements and the system uses area code 1 for local calling and DID representation. Dial Plan 1: This is to catch all calls that start with a 1 Pattern#1: 1xxxxxxxxxx Replacement: * This is to catch calls that did not start with a 1 and to add it afterwards Pattern#2: 2xxxxxxxxx|3xxxxxxxxx|4xxxxxxxxx|5xxxxxxxxx|6xxxxxxxxx|7xxxxxxxxx|8xxxxxxxxx|9xxxxxxxxx Replacement: 1* Last pattern is generic 011* with * replacement to remove the 011 This does seem to work but in some environments it doesn't look like the dial plan is adding the replacements patterns and the trunk takes precedence. What this means that if a switch expects to see a 1 in front of the number it will try to find a local route, otherwise everything goes international. When the trunk is setup for NANPA 11 digits, local calling works excellently, but international does not. Checking the logs it looks like the system matches the international prefix correctly but then the trunk takes over and adds a 1 to match the NANPA 11 digit rule i guess. So it starts to look like this: Dialplan "Test1": Match 011##telephone@pbx.system.com to sip:##telephone@;user=phone on trunk Trunk #1 replacement":"sip:##telephone@;user=phone", request-uri":"sip:1##telephone@;user=phone", Basically what i'm trying to accomplish is this. 1 Trunk solution. If users don't enter a 1 in front of their number, add it. If users enter a one in front of their number, leave it be. If users try to call international, remove the 011 AND not add a 1 in front of their number. Right now i'm able to do either one separately but not together.
  9. The T43U has the EXP43 unit, which is used on the T43U, T46U and T48U. I followed the instructions and you are correct, i am able to manually change the model of the phone but the problem is that the next up Yealink model that has button configuration is the T46 which is a little different from the T42. This is the button configuration for a default T43U that's on the PBX right now. This is the button config for a T46. So in order for the T43u to be able to use the EXT button configurations they would always need to be configured as a T46, the provisioning issues might be minor since the yealink config is just one common file but might cause administration issues.
  10. Hello, I've been testing the T43U unit and it does not have the possibility to edit the EXT/DSS key buttons on the button page even though the hardware can support it. I think the PBX may be tagging it as a T42 style unit after provisioning and prematurely removes the ability to edit those extra keys. While i don't actually have an EXP board plugged into the phone. I tested with some Snom phones and in the same scenario the pbx gave me the extra button options after provisioning.
  11. Not to try and resurrect an old thread but the posted picture of the beta application would be an excellent addition to the app.
  12. Hello, Yes I found that portion, but what it does not answer is if the auto-attendant has to be mapped *only* on the PBX or can the users utilize their own MS Teams Auto-Attendant. That's the part I wanted to confirm because looking at the MS Teams interface they do have an "Auto Attendant" page but i assume that since MS Teams does not have internal accounts like the PBX there wouldn't be a way to direct the calls to it.
  13. Hello, I recently watched your video on the Microsoft Teams integration and i just had a quick question about the inbound portion of the video. It's possible to assign the DID's to an extension and that'll ring on the MS Teams/ Desktop application, but my question is how does the PBX handle calls to an auto-attendant on MS Teams? The video and documentation wasn't very specific about these functionalities and i was just curious how far the integration goes. Thank you!
  14. Was testing the transcription on the latest build and it seems to break the transcription. From the logs I get the following error: [8] 13:04:00.086 Voicemail message is too long for transcription: 6s This error message appears even if the Maximum duration for transcription (s) under Notifications is set to a huge number, including leaving it blank. Downgrading to 66.0.4 doesn't produce this error message.
  15. The scenario I was looking at involves a user that works under appointments. For example in a bank (pre-COVID), you get your client to come in with you and you put yourself on DND so as to not be disturbed by calls or announcements. So in this particular case the user expects privacy but say management who has access to a paging group, decides to broadcast a message "Everyone, there's taco's and donuts in the staff room, feel free to take as many as you like". While it's not terribly inconvenient it could be seen as unprofessional in this type of environment. Looking at the Yealink forums it seems that people are trying to do the reverse of my scenario and to let pages through DND. I only thought to mention in case the implementation could be easily achieved, if it's not feasible then should be as is. Thank you for your time
  16. Hello, I came across this little quirk, the PBX seems to bypass Yealink's DND functionality in order to page it. I've tried using the several custom settings the Yealinks have such as the Emergency DND Bypass but the PBX pushes through no matter what. Since the phones get provisioned and the DND status should sync up with the PBX, it should make sense that the PBX is able to ignore those phones/devices. It would be worthwhile to add the setting under the Extension permissions or as a setting on the paging group that will ignore devices/phones in DND.
  17. Just to add to this. Can confirm the functionality across different platforms. It does not seem to be relevant to the PBX version but more-so the app/web version and i assume the latest PBX versions run the latest web version of the app. I installed the v1.xx app and tested the parking orbit feature and it worked identical as in the pictures above, but the latest release from the MS store deviates from v1.xx with the issues present.
  18. Hello, I was just wondering how the automatic blacklist operates on the latest version. I've had odd results in the testing environment. I have two test extensions i use to configure phones either through provisioning or manually to test features. Every now and then i may get the SIP password wrong and then i spend 20 minutes troubleshooting the phone trying to figure out why it won't provision, only to find out that it's been black listed, likely due to the wrong SIP password entry. The other test phone works fine since the blacklist seems to block individual ports and creates a listing for the extension and domain it was created so it's easy to find. I just want to understand the logic behind the extreme effectiveness of the blacklist. Just to provide an example i'm able to loop a phone into a provisioning cycle where i can force the PBX to regenerate the same config file 10,000 times and there's nothing in place that stops this. Is there a way to increase the amount of failed registrations attempts the PBX can accept before it ultimately blacklists the IP/device? Thank you
  19. Hello, There is a minor bug/oversight with how the call answer feature works on the app. Typically when a call comes in you'll see a notification pop out from windows, and you can see the pending call in your app. However once the notification goes away/times out, so does the ability to answer the call. So you have about 5 seconds to pick up the call. The app still rings the full duration but you just don't have the opportunity to pick up the call. I tested this by hovering over the notification from windows and the call inside the application stayed for as long as the notification was open. The easiest way to circumvent this bug is to disable the Windows notification alerts for the application, only drawback is you won't get a sliding notification of incoming calls. This was tested on the latest app 1.2.6 i think
  20. In this particular event i think it's better to restrict the device rather than the PBX since most don't support these types of actions by design. I did have a chance to try to test out the restrictive dial plan to not allow for extension/star code dialing but it doesn't have any effect because internal calls do not reach the dial plan for them to take effect. Since you're using Snom's they have an expression dial plan string page: http://wiki.snom.com/Features/Dial_Plan/Regular_Expressions The last one dictates on how to block dialing, since you only want outbound, you can substitute it with 1 instead of 9 as in the example. This way you can just send out all calls as 1xxx...etc. Since you're not stripping any digits, even if they were to dial an internal extension with a 1(xxx) it won't go anywhere since 1xxx is not a valid extension, same with starcodes. The example string from the help page: |^[^9]([0-9]{0,})$|sip:blocked\@\d
  21. Hello, Was testing some of the features for voicemails and while this is not critical or an issue per say, i felt like it should be brought up. So after listening to a voicemail you have various options, option 5 gives you the details of the calls. Before the new version it gave you the following information: Date of voicemail Time of voicemail The call From However with the new version the structure has changed: Date of voicemail Time of voicemail The call from The call To* Perhaps i haven't tested this in the correct environment it was designed for, but it seems redundant to let the user know that the voicemail left in their mailbox was left for their number. As an analogy imagine your personal cellphone voice tree announcing to you that "Voicemail 123 has been left for your number 456" Is there a way to modify this functionality or perhaps tweak it in some way.
  22. I'll attach an image to help better explain it. For the LDAP i tried with a Snom 745 and 725 ( ). The domain address book LDAP works perfectly fine on these phones and picks up entries as it should, but when editing an address book from the user level and reprovisioning a phone no extra contacts appear. I've changed the setting to personal address book only and didn't see any new entries appear. I could try with a Yealink phone model and see if there's any difference
  23. Thanks for your reply, Would you be able to clarify on Point 2? What does it mean to end that option from being selected? Selected from where? I refreshed the page with both settings and i haven't seen any difference. 4. What i meant here is that adding entries to the address book only stays within the user level address book. If you were to provision a phone it would pick up contacts from the domain address book which doesn't contain any user level entries. Though i see under Extensions -> Address Book, there is a setting for the following options: Default, Domain+personal, Domain only, Personal only. I've provisioned a phone with all variations of this setting and didn't notice any changes on the phone. P.S What is the default Address Book setting and where is it set from?
  24. Hello, I've been testing some of the features of the User level in the PBX and noticed some bugs and have a couple of questions. Q: Question B: Bug? 1.Q: When adding an address book entry in the Web Attendant console, this entry doesn't seem to reflect in the domain/user address book. Is this entry stored only on the User Level's page? 2.Q: The third symbol of the address book doesn't indicate what it does. First is delete entry, second is to edit the entry, third, i'm assuming, is to block/allow the contact? 3.B: This might be related to the 2nd question. When adding a contact and setting the contact on the "Black List", after saving the entry and refreshing the page it will turn into a Regular contact. 4. Q: Will the address book functionality of the user interface be expanded to allow for more control over the system? For example it would be nice to let users manage their address book without having to give them full PBX access or maintaining ticket queues to add/edit entries. This was all tested on the latest Vodia IO, reading the past patch notes i wasn't able to see any notes addressing these issues/questions. Thank you
  25. Hello, I have a quick question. When creating domains and editing it the voicemail transcription option will be enabled by default. When navigating to the E-mail -> Notification and setting the default option to "Off", it will still create new domains with the setting enabled. Which setting takes priority? Right now it looks like you still have to edit individual domains to disable the transcription each time a domain is created
  • Create New...