Confirming a Call Flow Suspicion 1

[jasonjthomas]

After describing this process for the umpteenth time for management, I am looking for an independent confirmation of my logic from the knowledgeable folks in this forum.

I have some firm VIPs whose extensions have Coverage Appearances setup. These VIPs also have a Forward on No Answer set. Thus, the phone call flow is as follows.

1.) Call comes into VIP extension.
2.) If the VIP does not answer, the user designated with Coverage Appearance rings with the call.
3.) If the user with Coverage Appearance does not answer, the call then rings a huntgroup. This huntgroup is our main phone's overflow group. In theory, this is the final "line of defense" to prevent a call from being unanswered.

If the call goes unanswered, the original user's voicemail then gets the call. Is that correct? I want to make sure I have this correct.

Thanks,
Jason

Jason J. Thomas
Director, Technology Risk Management
SB & Company, LLC

 

[IPGuru]

I certainly sounds correct to me
the important thing here is that by default the call will end up in the mailbox of the original destination
(this can be changed by customising the leave entry porompt in VM pro or with some sneaky diversion with VM Lite)

 

[legendinmylunchtime]

can you please elaborate on the sneaky diversion, ie call to user 1, fwd na/busy to reception, na there goto user1's vm

 

[IPGuru]

That is standard operation no programming necessary

VM will always go to the mailbox of the 1st destination
it is when you require the vm to go to a different destination you need to get sneaky,



eg to send VM to reception mailbox instead

SC: 666
TN: #<MailboxName>
Feature: VM collect.

creat dummy user, set forward uncontitional to 666 & enable forward hunt group calls

Make this the last member of the reception group (must be linnier/Hunt to work)

 

[jasonjthomas]

IPGuru: Thanks for confirming this. I thought this was in fact the case, but I was at wit's end after being asked to explain this for the umpteenth time. Somedays, I think I need a bigger hammer to use when speaking to my users. ;-)