In article ,
geoweston@NOSPAMgooglemail.com (George Weston) wrote:

> The problem with blocking withheld calls is that this will stop 
> calls from most large organisations who call you from a PBX 
> extension.

Only if the PABX is misconfigured...

-- 
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981

"Paul Cummins" <usethebl@stedphone.invalid> wrote in message 
news:memo.20091101145841.1568A@cix.co.uk...
> In article ,
> geoweston@NOSPAMgooglemail.com (George Weston) wrote:
>
>> The problem with blocking withheld calls is that this will stop
>> calls from most large organisations who call you from a PBX
>> extension.
>
> Only if the PABX is misconfigured...

How can you configure a large PBX with DDI facilities in a way that direct 
outgoing calls from extensions don't come up as "anonymous" calls?
If this is possible, I'd like to know, so I can tell my IT department!

George

"Bob Eager"  wrote in message 
news:7l5ohaF3cao27U7@mid.individual.net...
> On Sun, 01 Nov 2009 15:30:01 +0000, George Weston wrote:
>
>> "Paul Cummins" <usethebl@stedphone.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:memo.20091101145841.1568A@cix.co.uk...
>>> In article ,
>>> geoweston@NOSPAMgooglemail.com (George Weston) wrote:
>>>
>>>> The problem with blocking withheld calls is that this will stop calls
>>>> from most large organisations who call you from a PBX extension.
>>>
>>> Only if the PABX is misconfigured...
>>
>> How can you configure a large PBX with DDI facilities in a way that
>> direct outgoing calls from extensions don't come up as "anonymous"
>> calls? If this is possible, I'd like to know, so I can tell my IT
>> department!
>
> You can present *some* number. Either the switchboard, or a recording
> that explains what has happened.
>
> Now, this isn't a good solution, I agree. Difficult for people to phone
> back unless they are given an extension. But it's probably a better
> configuration in that the calls aren't anonymous so at least outgoing
> ones work.

Our council clearly doesn't want all calls coming into its main switchboard, 
which although manned (but by only one person) and published in the phone 
book, would doubtless be swamped if all callers contacted them in that way.
Every member of staff is instructed to show their DDI number in all 
correspondence and emails, so that callers get straight through to the right 
person.

It's perhaps preferable to a system operated by a neighbouring council, 
where all calls are initially answered by a call-centre, staffed by droids, 
who invariably either put calls through to the wrong department or (worse) 
send an internal email asking the (quite possibly wrong) person to ring the 
caller back, when they could have put them straight through anyway!

George

On Nov 1, 3:30 pm, "George Weston" 
wrote:
> "Paul Cummins" <useth...@stedphone.invalid> wrote in message
>
> news:memo.20091101145841.1568A@cix.co.uk...
>
> > In article ,
> > geowes...@NOSPAMgooglemail.com (George Weston) wrote:
>
> >> The problem with blocking withheld calls is that this will stop
> >> calls from most large organisations who call you from a PBX
> >> extension.
>
> > Only if the PABX is misconfigured...
>
> How can you configure a large PBX with DDI facilities in a way that direct
> outgoing calls from extensions don't come up as "anonymous" calls?
> If this is possible, I'd like to know, so I can tell my IT department!
>
> George

What system have you got?

PeterG

"Graham Murray"  wrote in message 
news:87bpjl6wee.fsf@newton.gmurray.org.uk...
> "George Weston"  writes:
>
>> How can you configure a large PBX with DDI facilities in a way that 
>> direct
>> outgoing calls from extensions don't come up as "anonymous" calls?
>> If this is possible, I'd like to know, so I can tell my IT department!
>
> As it is a large PBX, I am assuming that it is connected via ISDN not
> multiple analogue lines. What you have to do is put the DDI number of
> the calling extension in the 'Calling Party Number' Information Element
> in the CONNECT message sent by the PBX to the exchange.

Thanks for that - I'll start bothering the IT dept!

George