Can anyone suggest any reasons why a zap (PRI) b channel should not be a member of multiple zap trunk group definitions? For example; Group 1 = Channels 1 to 23 Group 2 = channels 1 to 12 Group 3 = channels 13 to 23 The purpose is to restrict the number of channels a particular extensions can use, but use the entire span for other extensions. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20061031/6cd5430c/attachment.htm
Eric "ManxPower" Wieling
2006-Oct-31 12:39 UTC
[asterisk-users] overlap of zap trunk groups
Damon Estep wrote:> Can anyone suggest any reasons why a zap (PRI) b channel should not be a > member of multiple zap trunk group definitions? > > > > For example; > > > > Group 1 = Channels 1 to 23 > > Group 2 = channels 1 to 12 > > Group 3 = channels 13 to 23 > > > > The purpose is to restrict the number of channels a particular > extensions can use, but use the entire span for other extensions.Part of a production /etc/asterisk/zaptel.conf: group=1 channel => 1-6 group=1,2 channel => 7-12 group=0 channel => 13-16
> > Damon Estep wrote: > > Can anyone suggest any reasons why a zap (PRI) b channel should notbe a> > member of multiple zap trunk group definitions? > > > > > > > > For example; > > > > > > > > Group 1 = Channels 1 to 23 > > > > Group 2 = channels 1 to 12 > > > > Group 3 = channels 13 to 23 > > > > > > > > The purpose is to restrict the number of channels a particular > > extensions can use, but use the entire span for other extensions. > > Part of a production /etc/asterisk/zaptel.conf: > > group=1 > channel => 1-6 > group=1,2 > channel => 7-12 > group=0 > channel => 13-16 >So the correct solution is to define the channel only once, but the group= parameter can contain many groups delimited by a comma, correct?
Eric "ManxPower" Wieling
2006-Oct-31 15:41 UTC
[asterisk-users] overlap of zap trunk groups
Damon Estep wrote:>> Damon Estep wrote: >>> Can anyone suggest any reasons why a zap (PRI) b channel should not > be a >>> member of multiple zap trunk group definitions? >>> >>> >>> >>> For example; >>> >>> >>> >>> Group 1 = Channels 1 to 23 >>> >>> Group 2 = channels 1 to 12 >>> >>> Group 3 = channels 13 to 23 >>> >>> >>> >>> The purpose is to restrict the number of channels a particular >>> extensions can use, but use the entire span for other extensions. >> Part of a production /etc/asterisk/zaptel.conf: >> >> group=1 >> channel => 1-6 >> group=1,2 >> channel => 7-12 >> group=0 >> channel => 13-16 >> > > So the correct solution is to define the channel only once, but the > group= parameter can contain many groups delimited by a comma, correct?Correct.