Vector usage 4

[MasterRacker]

I recently hit my licensing ceiling for stations. I've found some unused stations to remove but I may have an opportunity to get back some more.

I have a group of stations that are x-ports, that cover directly into associated voice mailboxes. They're set up this way simply to give the mailboxes DID access.

Once I figure out the syntax can I replace the x-ports with VDNs that vector right into the mailboxes? If so, what are the pro/cons of the two methods? Also, do VDNs count against station count?

Jeff
[small][purple]It's never too early to begin preparing for [/purple]International Talk Like a Pirate Day
"The software I buy sucks, The software I write sucks. It's time to give up and have a beer..." - Me[/small]

 

[dmthames]

you can convert your exported stations to set type "virtual" and that will save the station rtu for you.

 

[MasterRacker]

Cool. I like that. I'm going to be using vectors for other thing but for this instance that's perfect.

Jeff
[small][purple]It's never too early to begin preparing for [/purple]International Talk Like a Pirate Day
"The software I buy sucks, The software I write sucks. It's time to give up and have a beer..." - Me[/small]

 

[PDHall]

either that or you could modify your dialplan to route the numbers directly to the mailboxes

 

[avayastrongman79]

MasterRacker...

Depending on your CM load, you could use VDN/vectors. In your vector it would show as goto messaging skill xxx for extension x. Depending on the quantity of x-port stations though it may not be efficient.

Messaging skill would be hunt group for voicemail, and extension is the formerly x-ported extension.

 

[Trav4620]

If you aren't going to use Virtual stations and woud prefer the VDN/Vector approach, you can setup 1 vector that says 'messaging skill x for extension active' instead of 'messaging skill x for extension x"

Point all the DID-VDN's to that vector. The "active" VDN will be whichever one the call comes in on. This way you will only need 1 vector (thus making it more efficient) but can still have the ability to run CMS reports on each DID you have pointed to it if you need/want that option.