similar to: RC1 - callparking

HI ALL; Anybody can explain the difference between "call parking " vs "call transfer" Regards mohammad -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20040720/2975991b/attachment.htm

Hi List; [incoming] include => parkedcalls exten=103,1,Dial(SIP/Bob,,tT) exten=104,1,Dial(SIP/Charlie,,tT) When we use tT and when we use t alone or T alone, I know this for call parking, but I do not know what the tT does? Regards Bilal ____________________________________________________________________________________ Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. Try the free

Hello everybody, I'm playing with the stable version of * and face a problem with musiconhold. I want to use 2 class (one for parking, another for transfer) only the default one is working. If I put in this default the path to my classes it's ok. But if I want to use SetMusicOnHold(myclass), or default class is played, or nothing if default class is commented in musiconhold.conf. I

The Asterisk Development Team is pleased to announce the first release candidate of Asterisk 1.4.24, tagged as version 1.4.24-rc1. Release candidate 1.4.24-rc1 is available for immediate download at http://downloads.digium.com/ In addition to other bug fixes, this release candidate fixes several crash issues, and resolved some remaining issues related to call pickup and call parking that were

The Asterisk Development Team would like to announce the release of Asterisk 18.0.0. This release is available for immediate download at https://downloads.asterisk.org/pub/telephony/asterisk The release of Asterisk 18.0.0 resolves several issues reported by the community and would have not been possible without your participation. Thank you! The following issues are resolved in this release:

That is how many old PBX phone systems work and it is that way our users are used to working with the phone system. Another issue with the way Asterisk callparking currently works is that there is only one call-park orbit, you cannot use a different set of numbers for a different call park instance(i.e. 700 goes to 701-720 AND 740 goes to 741-750). We also have several Grandstream phones which

> -----Original Message----- > From: Renato Golin [mailto:renato.golin at linaro.org] > Sent: 15 May 2015 14:15 > To: Daniel Sanders > Cc: Tom Stellard; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu; cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] 3.6.1 -rc1 has been tagged. Testing begins. > > On 15 May 2015 at 13:34, Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com> > wrote: > > Not

Hi, I have 2 servers: one is running 2 B410P cards with 8 euroisdn lines (mISDN) connected on it, everything runs fine. I prepare a new server - HP 360 G8- with 2 HA8 cards each of them 1 module of 4 lines. Already had with this machine an RMA on both cards as they was faulty and crashed the server. What happends is that when I connect cables on the HA8 modules (those cables are unpluged

> I've disassembled the failing MultiSource/Benchmarks/tramp3d-v4/tramp3d-v4 and compared it to > the one from the LLVM 3.6.0 test runs. There's nothing obvious. We've removed some useless > 'addiu $sp,$sp,0', eliminated two (seemingly redundant) sign extends, and the addresses of > functions+data has changed slightly. I've investigated further and I'm

Hello Dovecot users, Here's the Pigeonhole RC that goes with the Dovecot RC. There is a conflict with the t_str_trim() function. To be able to quickly release Dovecot, Timo has reverted the involved change so that 0.4.9 will still compile with the final Dovecot v2.2.20 release. This Pigeonhole RC will therefore not compile against the final Dovecot release (only against v2.2.20.rc1), which I

Hello Dovecot users, Here's the Pigeonhole RC that goes with the Dovecot RC. There is a conflict with the t_str_trim() function. To be able to quickly release Dovecot, Timo has reverted the involved change so that 0.4.9 will still compile with the final Dovecot v2.2.20 release. This Pigeonhole RC will therefore not compile against the final Dovecot release (only against v2.2.20.rc1), which I

> -----Original Message----- > From: Renato Golin [mailto:renato.golin at linaro.org] > Sent: 15 May 2015 12:51 > To: Daniel Sanders > Cc: Tom Stellard; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu; cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] 3.6.1 -rc1 has been tagged. Testing begins. > > On 14 May 2015 at 21:39, Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com> > wrote: > >

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 2:26 AM, Daniel Sanders <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com> wrote: > Here's the current status for the Mips packages. [..] > clang+llvm-3.7.0-rc1-mips-linux-gnu.tar.xz The root directory in this file is "clang+llvm-3.7.0-rc1-mipsel-linux-gnu". Is it just the name that's wrong, or does it actually have files for the wrong target?

> -----Original Message----- > From: hwennborg at google.com [mailto:hwennborg at google.com] On Behalf > Of Hans Wennborg > Sent: 21 January 2015 22:25 > To: Daniel Sanders > Cc: Renato Golin; llvmdev; cfe-dev; Ben Pope; Sylvestre Ledru; Dimitry > Andric; Sebastian Dreßler; Nikola Smiljanić; Kostya Serebryany; > vonosmas at gmail.com > Subject: Re: [3.6 Release] RC1 has

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 2:26 AM, Daniel Sanders > <Daniel.Sanders at imgtec.com> wrote: >> Here's the current status for the Mips packages. > [..] >> clang+llvm-3.7.0-rc1-mips-linux-gnu.tar.xz > > The root directory in this file is >

> On April 7, 2017 at 6:48 PM "Daniel J. Luke" <dluke at geeklair.net> wrote: > > > On Apr 7, 2017, at 11:17 AM, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: > >> On April 7, 2017 at 6:00 PM "Daniel J. Luke" <dluke at geeklair.net> wrote: > >> On Apr 7, 2017, at 3:01 AM, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: >

> On April 7, 2017 at 6:00 PM "Daniel J. Luke" <dluke at geeklair.net> wrote: > > > On Apr 7, 2017, at 3:01 AM, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi at dovecot.fi> wrote: > >> On April 7, 2017 at 9:38 AM Timo Sirainen <tss at iki.fi> wrote: > >> On 7 Apr 2017, at 2.25, Daniel J. Luke <dluke at geeklair.net> wrote: > >>> >

> -----Original Message----- > From: hwennborg at google.com [mailto:hwennborg at google.com] On Behalf > Of Hans Wennborg > Sent: 22 July 2015 17:42 > To: Daniel Sanders > Cc: llvmdev; cfe-dev; lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu; Ben Pope; Ed Maste; Sebastian > Dreßler > Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] [3.7 Release] RC1 has been tagged, Testing Phase I > begins > > On Wed, Jul 22,

Hello, Is there any way to park a call on a specific park number? If this is not possible, is there any way to create multiple park orbits? Also, is there any way to invoke call parking of an active call coming through a Zap channel from the manager interface? MATT---

Hi: I want to make parking calls easier for my hard-working users. Is there a way to make the Polycom call park feature work with Asterisk? In case it just works out of the box, I haven't tried it yet; but the "call park" feature isn't enabled on the Polycom phones by default. -Stephen-