> +1 on both of these points. The power brick is cheap and nasty. POE would > be a huge plus. A 100mb bridge would make the phone a lot more attractive > in an office full of cables.
I specifically stated a wide POE range because let's face it, with the power requirements that phone has, a wide-input-range DC-DC converter is _peanuts_, especially if you've already got a tiny switchmode converter for line power. A very wide range on POE input makes it easy to mix and match phones too. Hell if you've got a switcher already, you can make it autosense polarity too. Don't pull a Cisco. Don't try and lock your users in to one brand of switches. As for the 100mbit switch -- again I was very specific here -- don't throw on one of those $0.25 "100 mbit" switch chips that can only sustain about 1MB/sec -- I put in a 100mbit switched network to achieve 11MB/sec sustained, not burst. A two-port switch capable of full sustained network speed shouldn't be expensive and can really be a big marketing feature. "We won't screw your network speeds" kind of thing. :-) > I'd also add my voice to the request for a better speakerphone. The > dialtone comes out loud and clear but everything else is too muted. If I > up the volume to hear calls, then the dialtone becomes deafening - as > does the handset when used. Speakerphone is a big deal with me too. > For central configuration, the cfg.txt file format would be nice, but is > still a pain. Ideally I'd like to be able to configure the phone via DHCP > extensions. That would be ideal as I can configure the lease time to > manage how frequently the phones update and I can centralise the > configuration with the IP details. Why not specify a TFTP server/config filename via DHCP? It's already standard and would work very well. Regards, Andrew _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
