Re: [BLISS] MLA with Floor Control

["Brett Tate" <brett at broadsoft.com>]

I basically agree with Paul.  Because there was a market need for the
functionality, various non standard mechanisms have been developed to
address the need until a standardized mechanism becomes available.

If the working group does not think there is need for a standardized
solution, so be it.  However vendors which don't like the non standard
mechanisms or haven't yet implemented the common ones would likely
desire the work to continue.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: bliss-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:bliss-bounces at ietf.org] 
> On Behalf Of Paul Kyzivat
> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 12:16 AM
> To: Francois Audet
> Cc: Rohan Mahy; bliss at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [BLISS] MLA with Floor Control
> 
> I'm not promoting one way or the other. Ultimately people 
> building products will build the functionality they think 
> they need to sell their products. If people feel this is 
> important then they will want a way to do it. If it isn't 
> standard then it will be nonstandard.
> 
> 	Paul
> 
> Francois Audet wrote:
> >  
> > 
> >> There is a tradeoff...
> >>
> >> If multiple extensions can place outgoing calls from the 
> same line, 
> >> then the line doesn't have "binary" status, so it can't be 
> indicated 
> >> as active or not with a light. And you can't "conference in" by 
> >> picking up on the same line.
> >>
> >> While I am not into it myself, I can see how someone can build a 
> >> "business process" around the specific way in which lines 
> are managed 
> >> by the phones, and then be very upset if they can't get that same 
> >> user experience.
> > 
> > Yeah, sure, it's doable. I do not believe that adding the 
> concept of a 
> > Line number to do this is required to do this, or even desireable.
> > 
> >> Now you can come up with some very nice UIs that provide 
> better user 
> >> experience, if you have a suitable display instead of just 
> a bunch of 
> >> lights. (E.g. an entry for the "number" (AOR that people 
> call), and a 
> >> variable length drop down list of active calls, showing 
> the callerid 
> >> of the caller, how long it has been active, and which 
> extensions are 
> >> currently connected to it.) But that is *different*, and 
> requires a 
> >> device with richer UI.
> > 
> > Agreed.
> > 
> > My point is that we shouldn't bastardize the protocol with all this 
> > complex extra protocol (Line numbers, BFCP, NOTIFY/PUBLISH-storms, 
> > etc.) just do do this.
> > 
> > The basic "single-lamp" based approach is doable without 
> any of this.
> > 
_______________________________________________
BLISS mailing list
BLISS at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss