Re: [GnomeMeeting-list] gatekeeper considerations

> Ill add this to the FAQ for next release.
> Thanks for your contribution :)

Thanks, might help other people :-)

> OK, so you mean I should remove ILS support from GM when GM is also
> registered to a gatekeeper, just like for NM?


On the one hand I believe (i.e. I don't really know) that it is correct
behavior, not to register to the ils if registered to a gk.

But on the other hand it still should remain in GM. So you can work
around incomplete GKs (which is not possible within NM).

If users know that they have a working GK that does proper registration,
they can simply switch off ILS. But all others can keep it switched on.

> > o placing calls to 'cn'@'sipaddress':'port' instead of
> >   'sipaddress':'port' when using ils

> I can easily do that, and I think you are right. That way we can also
> register a MCU to ILS, the cn is the room name in this case.

ok, sounds good to me and solves my problems, though I don't know what
MCUs are. :-)

> I can place that in the FAQ, but I can not put a warning to tell to the
> user because there are many cases where the user doesn't want to
> register his mail to the gk. I can also add the email automatically as
> GK alias #2, GK alias #1 being the one in the prefs.

To put it in the FAQ suits me perfectly well.

The point with the aliases sounds even better. I didn't know that it is
possible to have multiple aliases at the gk. That's because I haven't
read any specs so far (and I actually don't want to). All I said was
phenomenologically observed ;-)


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]