[Serusers] Associating a contact address with a location

[Aisling]

Hi,

Sorry to resubmit on much the same topic as before (Portal for forking
call to preferred end device-sequential ringing) but I was wondering if
anyone had any further ideas on how to associate a particular contact
address with a location. i.e. a user can choose that their preferred
location is their desktop phone and I need to devise some way to know
that a particular contact address is associated with the desktop phone.

I was thinking the user must either enter the device ip addresses
manually so I can search the contact based on IP address (This sucks in
terms of NAT, scalability and losing mobility over networks) OR I could
perhaps stipulate that a user cannot have two of the same device e.g.
cant have two BT100 hardphones and I could search the location table
based on model. I think either of these options aren't great....Which is
why I was wondering if anyone had any better ideas?

Many Thanks,
Aisling.

p.s. I currently retrieve the users contact address and q value via a
web interface using the serctl fifo interface.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu [mailto:bogdan at voice-system.ro] 
Sent: 22 June 2005 12:45
To: Aisling
Cc: 'Greger V. Teigre'; jh at tutpro.com
Subject: Re: [Serusers]CPL - Portal for forking call to
preferredenddevice-sequential ringing

Hi Aisling,

There are many ways to implement serial forking - like using CPL, LCR or

AVPOPS.
But the main idea (if I getting right from your initial email) is to 
allow the user to order his contacts for the same account (like account 
userx that have contact_pda_x, contact_PC_x, contact_office_x, etc). So 
you have all this contacts in user location, you have several mechanism 
for serial forking, but you are missing the link - to get the contacts 
from user location and to feed any of the serial forking mechanism. This

is the big problem.

even if you use CPL, you need to place in each location node the 
contacts (and not the AOR) of the user, contacts which are dynamically 
stored only in user location.

what you are describing below can be possible only if you a user (as 
person) has different sip accounts (SIP users) for each of his devices. 
Other way I don't see how you can place in the CPL script the "phone1" 
and "phone2" addresses.

and just to answer you to the CPL- related questions (from 
implementation point of view):
- each user can have only one script - if you load a new script, the 
previous one will be lost (overwritten). If you can different services 
via CPL (like screening and no-answer), you need to mix them in the same

script during provisioning.
- if you want to delete a CPL script via FIFO, use the REMOVE_CPL
command:
       serctl fifo REMOVE_CPL user at domain


regards,
bogdan




Aisling wrote:

>Hello,
>
>Many thanks for the ideas so far.
>I looked at CPL Greger and I think that provides a very simple solution
>to this - a simple Call forward on no answer script.
>
>I have an included an example that I came across below. If a user wants
>to modify the order of the devices a call should be sent to, then I
>simply have to retrieve the information from the user via the web
>interface and provision a new cpl script. I think this solves the
>problem - Does anyone foresee any problems with this or think it has
>disadvantages?
>
>I do have two minor questions if I am to go ahead with this direction
>though:
>1) If a particular user already has a cpl script e.g. a call screening
>script uploaded to the database and they then upload this forward on no
>answer script, will it overwrite the original script? i.e. can there
>only be one cpl script per user?
>
>2)How can a cpl script be "undone" or deleted? Must it be overwritten
or
>is there a way of simply removing it(without using mysql commands)?
>
>Example CPL: Call Forward on No Answer
>
><?xml version="1.0">
>
><cpl>
>  <subaction id="phone2">
>    <location url="sip:2000 at phone2">
>      <proxy />
>    </location>
>  </subaction>
>
>  <incoming>
>    <location url="sip:2000 at phone1">
>      <proxy timeout="8">
>        <noanswer>
>          <sub ref="phone2"/>
>        </noanswer>
>      </proxy>
>    </location>
>  </incoming>
></cpl>
>
>Many Thanks,
>Aisling.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Greger V. Teigre [mailto:greger at teigre.com] 
>Sent: 22 June 2005 05:42
>To: Aisling O'Driscoll; jh at tutpro.com
>Cc: samuel.osorio at nl.thalesgroup.com; ashling.odriscoll at cit.ie;
>serusers at lists.iptel.org
>Subject: Re: [Serusers] Portal for forking call to
>preferredenddevice-sequential ringing
>
>Aisling O'Driscoll wrote:
>  
>
>>Ok, just to recap - cos Im getting a little bit confused ;)
>>
>>I have two choices(?)
>>
>>1. Somehow invoke sipsak to configure permanent addresses with a
>>particular q value.
>>2. Develop a FIFO method to change q value.
>>    
>>
>
>Yes. Except that I don't know if anybody verified that q value cannot
be
>
>changed with today's FIFO. I just asked the question...
>
>  
>
>>Am I correct in thinking directly modifying the usrloc table in the
>>database is out of the question because the changes cant be updated
>>except by SER itself in which case a reboot would required - Correct?
>>    
>>
>
>Correct. "SER itself" is here either serctl, sipsak or FIFO.
>
>  
>
>>Also lcr module (load_contacts() etc) isnt suitable for per user
>>configurable sequential forking?
>>    
>>
>
>I don't know about that. There is definitely a q-value based
>functionality 
>there.
>
>  
>
>>Have others tried to implement similar functionality or is it usually
>>a generic site wide sequential forking policy?
>>    
>>
>
>I think using CPL could be an option. Have you looked at CPL and the
cpl
>
>module?
>g-)
>
>  
>
>>Many thanks for the opinions and help so far.
>>Aisling.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>---- Original Message ----
>>>From: jh at tutpro.com
>>>To: greger at teigre.com
>>>Subject: Re: [Serusers] Portal for forking call to
>>>preferredenddevice-sequential ringing
>>>Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:41:54 +0300
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Greger V. Teigre writes:
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>>:-D Yes, that is true. But I didn't know that you could change
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>q-value in
>>>      
>>>
>>>>>FIFO?
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>if that is not possible, then you can always use sipsak to install
>>>>"permanent" registrations with a given q value.  sipsak has an
>>>>additional advantage over fifo in that you can apply permissions
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>check
>>>      
>>>
>>>>to sipsak registration, but not to fifo registration.
>>>>
>>>>-- juha
>>>>        
>>>>

-------------------Legal
Disclaimer---------------------------------------

The above electronic mail transmission is confidential and intended only
for the person to whom it is addressed. Its contents may be protected by
legal and/or professional privilege. Should it be received by you in
error please contact the sender at the above quoted email address. Any
unauthorised form of reproduction of this message is strictly
prohibited. The Institute does not guarantee the security of any
information electronically transmitted and is not liable if the
information contained in this communication is not a proper and complete
record of the message as transmitted by the sender nor for any delay in
its receipt.


-------------------Legal  Disclaimer---------------------------------------

The above electronic mail transmission is confidential and intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Its contents may be protected by legal and/or professional privilege. Should it be received by you in error please contact the sender at the above quoted email address. Any unauthorised form of reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited. The Institute does not guarantee the security of any information electronically transmitted and is not liable if the information contained in this communication is not a proper and complete record of the message as transmitted by the sender nor for any delay in its receipt.