Public Service Announcement -- 10.1.2 Breaks 56xx and 54xx phones 12

[twitchy087]

10.1.2 will break the feature buttons on 56xx and 54xx phones. The phones can make/take calls but no feature buttons will work. So far we have 2 systems that we have proven this on. Downgrading to 10.1.1 will resolve the problem.

Avoid 10.1.2 like the plague...

 

[karlzre]

i think 56xx, 54xx are not support since R10

ACIS - ACSS

 

[Pepp77]

Not supported and not working are two very different things in the world of Avaya!!

| ACSS SME |

 

[twitchy087]

My thoughts exactly Pepp.

 

[critchey]

Colleague just ran a test confirmed not only 54XX and 56XX but also 44XX as well.

The truth is just an excuse for lack of imagination.

 

[Okkie26]

What about the 64xx extensions?

 

[critchey]

He just tested 64XX same thing buttons do not work.

The truth is just an excuse for lack of imagination.

 

[IamaSherpa]

Has anyone raised the issue to Avaya ?

 

[twitchy087]

One of our guys has brought it to Avaya. We have acknowledgement and are awaiting official word. I will pass it along once I have it.

 

[gntsfan8690]

we have a customer who is just starting out a Server Edition project with us and plan on re-using their 2400's (migrating off of a CM). We held off deploying the OVA for the Primary and Secondary servers knowing SP2 was coming at some point. Makes me wonder if SP1 will be the way to go and hope none of the issues fixed by SP2 rare their ugly heads. I'm betting Avaya is going to say, sorry but these are no longer supported sets, especially in the case of 4400 and 6400's.

 

[twitchy087]

A summary of what was provided by our sources:

The break was unintentional. They are looking at it but are not promising anything given the lack of support.

 

[Okkie26]

I think it's a stupid thing to do.

Now when a customer want's to upgrade, he might as well be looking at another system, since he has to replace the extensions anyway..

Avaya better fix the issue, and do it fast.. So customers can keep their extensions and stay with Avaya...

 

[Westi]

I don't believe that it was unintentional.
Someone thought it would be a great way to make more sales but breaking them. Smart move for a one-time sales. These customers will then go somewhere else next time.

Joe W.

FHandw, just expired ACSS (SME)


"This is the end of the world, make sure to buy your T-shirt before it is too late"
Original expression of my daughter

 

[Okkie26]

Like I said.

People will walk away from Avaya...

Or that is what I should do if you force me to buy other extensions.

 

[VoIP Numpty]

Anyone tried with 2400 series phones? - they are still supported and nearly identical to the 5400 series - that will tell you if it was intentional or a mistake...

BUT if you are relying on officially unsupported devices you are taking a risk, no point cooking up conspiracy theories when Occam's razor will tell you cock-up is much more likely than conspiracy

 

[critchey]

I am not sure that Occam's razor would say that a simple screw up just so happens to break all the unsupported phones at the exact same time while not breaking any supported phones... that sure seems intentional.

The truth is just an excuse for lack of imagination.

 

[twitchy087]

2400 phones are in fact also broken.

 

[VoIP Numpty]

Nice one twitchy087 - have a star, I don't have any to hand to test myself.
So I think it looks like cock-up...
But will the fix for them also re-enable the unsupported 5400, 6400, 4400 series? Well I guess we have to wait!

 

[gntsfan8690]

Thanks for advising that the 2400's are screwed up too. That brings me to the next question. I have the 10.1 Product Matrix, that big excel workbook Avaya puts out, and it's specifically saying "The following additional DS port phones are only supported in IP Office standard modes" and it listed the 2400's, while 9500 and 1400 show "supported by all IP Office modes". Obviously digital sets need a 500 and digit ports to function in a server edition environment, but the fact it is specifically stating "standard modes" has me wondering if the 2400 will work without an issue (in 10.1 SP1, of course). Can anyone verify from any recent deployments?

 

[IamaSherpa]

I think this is just an error, the R10.1 SP2 doc lists all the old fashion's phone firmware included in Manager, even if not supported, I believe they would reported into a doc if that behaviour was a "design intent".