Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > UK VOIP > Changing call forwarding without PC access

Reply
Thread Tools

Changing call forwarding without PC access

 
 
David Woodhouse
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-30-2012
On Sun, 2012-05-27 at 16:09 +0100, Anthony R. Gold wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2012 15:16:53 +0100, "R. Mark Clayton"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > If it's a VoIP service, you possibly don't even need "forwarding". You
> > can just have one handset registered to it, or another as you see fit.


No, *I* said that. I think Mark's message was entirely broken in its
citations. Mark, I'm sure I'm not the only person who would be grateful
if you would please fix your newsreader or use a non-broken alternative.

Mark said this bit:
> > Well not quite as simple as that. Multiple handsets can register, but where
> > do the calls go?


If one handset *or* another registers, as I suggested, then it *is* as
simple as that. The OP seemed to be suggesting that this was how they'd
use it.

If more than one handset is registered simultaneously, then the first to
pick up wins as Anthony says:

> To whichever of those registered handsets is the first to pick up so accept
> the call. Each handset operator must know of any schedule for when they are
> "up" to respond to the incoming calls.



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Anthony R. Gold
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-30-2012
On Wed, 30 May 2012 18:59:45 +0100, "R. Mark Clayton"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
> "David Woodhouse" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) d.org...
> On Sun, 2012-05-27 at 16:09 +0100, Anthony R. Gold wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 May 2012 15:16:53 +0100, "R. Mark Clayton"
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> If it's a VoIP service, you possibly don't even need "forwarding". You
>>> can just have one handset registered to it, or another as you see fit.

>
> No, *I* said that. I think Mark's message was entirely broken in its
> citations. Mark, I'm sure I'm not the only person who would be grateful
> if you would please fix your newsreader or use a non-broken alternative.
>
> Que?


The problem is that your newsreader is not adding quotation marks to material
you are quoting. I have heard of a product called Quotefix that may help with
this.

> Mark said this bit:
>>> Well not quite as simple as that. Multiple handsets can register, but
>>> where
>>> do the calls go?

>
> If one handset *or* another registers, as I suggested, then it *is* as
> simple as that. The OP seemed to be suggesting that this was how they'd
> use it.
>
> If more than one handset is registered simultaneously, then the first to
> pick up wins as Anthony says:
>
>> To whichever of those registered handsets is the first to pick up so
>> accept
>> the call. Each handset operator must know of any schedule for when they
>> are
>> "up" to respond to the incoming calls.

>
> Alas it does not quite work like that with mine the call tends to go to the
> last registered handset to call out.


If an incoming call goes to just one device that suggests its placing that
last call has caused all the other devices to become unregistered.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David Woodhouse
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-01-2012
On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 18:59 +0100, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
> "David Woodhouse" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) d.org...
> > No, *I* said that. I think Mark's message was entirely broken in its
> > citations. Mark, I'm sure I'm not the only person who would be
> > grateful if you would please fix your newsreader or use a non-broken
> > alternative.

>
> Que?


(I've fixed up the above citation, again).

Mark,

Have you ever tried reading back one of the messages that you have
posted to this newsgroup, as it actually appears to others? It's
impossible to tell what is *your* contribution, and what is simply a
repetition of what has gone before.

Perhaps you don't realise because your message editor isn't a "WYSIWYG"
editor, and it shows colours or formatting or something that isn't
really there in the message that actually gets sent?

Take a look at http://david.woodhou.se/mark-msg-1.png and
http://david.woodhou.se/mark-msg-2.png for example. Can you tell who
actually said what? You might *remember* which bits you typed
personally, I suppose. But what about someone else who's trying to make
sense of it? It's almost completely unreadable.

When replying to a news post or an email, you should cite only those
parts of the previous message which are absolutely necessary for
context, and make sure they are *clearly* marked as citations, usually
by adding '> ' at the beginning of each line.

At http://david.woodhou.se/mail-thread.html you can see an example
sequence of messages where this is done *correctly* — you can easily see
who said what, and there isn't a lot of pointless repeated cruft in each
message.

 
Reply With Quote
 
David Woodhouse
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2012
On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 13:15 +0100, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
>
> Usually my reader (MS Outlook Express) correctly handles replies and inserts
> ">" at the start of each line of the message being replied to.
>
> For some reason some messages (like yours deliberately left below) defy this
> and the ">" is not inserted. Affects about 5% of replies.


There is perfectly good software out there, which will manage to compose
a readable reply in 100% of cases, rather than only 95%.

For a piece of software whose sole purpose is communication, 95% isn't a
particularly good success rate, don't you think?

I take it you have no support for this broken software that you're
using, and don't have its source code, and hence have no prospect of
actually getting it *fixed*?

You'd be doing us all a favour, and almost certainly yourself too, if
you switched to one of the many non-broken alternatives.

 
Reply With Quote
 
David Woodhouse
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2012
On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 13:17 +0100, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
> >> Alas it does not quite work like that with mine the call tends to
> >> go to the last registered handset to call out.

> >
> > If an incoming call goes to just one device that suggests its
> > placing that last call has caused all the other devices to become
> > unregistered.

>
> No they are still registered and can call without re-registering.
> The server is choosing which registered handset to ring.


I have a vague recollection of seeing similar behaviour in the past.
I believe I reported it as a fault, and it doesn't happen any more.


 
Reply With Quote
 
tony sayer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-04-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Malcolm Loades
<(E-Mail Removed)> scribeth thus
>We require a single 'phone number which then forwards to another number
>(this must be a mobile). Problem is that the mobile number may need to
>be changed 2 or 3 times a day.
>
>It would be easy if we had access to a PC each time we need to change
>the number to receive the forwarded calls, but we don't Does anyone
>offer forwarding which can be controlled from a handset?
>
>Malcolm


Malcolm..

We've managed to do this on VoIPfone and perhaps it may well work with
others using a Linksys SPA3102.

You can enter a number of codes like *72 wait for the 2nd dialtone enter
the number to divert to then clear down. When you want to cancel divert
then *73 and divert off.

You can also use other * whatever numbers to do div on no answer and
after a number of rings which you can set its all in there and
works...


--
Tony Sayer



 
Reply With Quote
 
Graham.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2012
On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 13:15:18 +0100, "R. Mark Clayton"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Dear David,
>
>Usually my reader (MS Outlook Express) correctly handles replies and inserts
>">" at the start of each line of the message being replied to.
>
>For some reason some messages (like yours deliberately left below) defy this
>and the ">" is not inserted. Affects about 5% of replies.
>


This behaviour of Outlook Express in selectively not correctly quoting
messages sent by other newsreaders is will known (even if not well
understood, by me anyway).

It's inability to quote correctly when following up a post made via
Google Groups is particularly well known, although that is not the
case here.

This was the reason I abandoned Outlook Express some time ago, that,
and it's refusal to put a pre defined signature at the *foot* of the
post rather than the top.

--
Graham.
%Profound_observation%
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
forwarding Args&&... vs forwarding Args... Andrew Tomazos C++ 5 01-05-2012 11:15 PM
Changing style of the numbers in a CSS <ol> without changing the style of the <li> Aaron Beall HTML 2 09-14-2007 08:07 PM
SKYPE + VoSKY Call Centre - Call Forwarding Question. Mark UK VOIP 4 08-04-2006 10:15 PM
webapp forwarding without web.xml Henry Townsend Java 1 09-20-2005 11:20 AM
changing file extension without changing filename jamy Computer Support 4 03-04-2005 01:03 AM



Advertisments