Cordless SPA302D

[donald.janke]

Does the SPA302D work with the uc320?

[wenyang]

Hi Donald,

UC320W doesn't support SPA302D.

Regards,

Wendy

[csill]

Hello Donald,

Yeah they are pretty much designed to work with the SPA232D ATA DECT

Thanks,

Clayton Sill

[donald.janke]

So far a yes and no, maybe someone from Cisco can let me know if this is cordelss system design to work and intergrate with the UC320, possibly the cordless solution they mentioned was in the works for the UC320.

[wenyang]

Hi Donald,

I am Cisco UC320W escalation engineer. UC320W does NOT support cordless SPA302D.

Best regards,

Wendy

[sylvain]

Hello,

Does the SPA232D works with the UC320W?

Thanks

[wenyang]

Hi Sylvain,

UC320W does NOT support SPA232D.

Best regards,

Wendy

[sylvain]

Thanks for your quick reply !

But there is no cordless phone for the UC320W.

Dou you think it will be possible that the SPA232D works with the UC320W?

Thanks

[wenyang]

Hi Sylvain,

You can connect an analog cordless phone to FXS port of UC320W. If you need more than one, you may want to consider SPA8800 which provides 4 FXS ports.

Best regards,

Wendy

[Philip Denton]

Wendy, I couldn't help but notice the SPA232D has both an analog FXS and analog FXO port available.  Is there a way to use the SPA232 as an analog device attached to the UC320W?

[pg_cisco_voip]

Phil,

I tried that route - but walked away as you end up using an expensive set of kit for a function that can be done by a sub £40/$50 DECT phone set.  The inter connectivity and subsequent capability is poorly documented by Cicso, so you end up running around - disapointing.

A point I've raised to Cisco on the SPA302D, which ironically is/was linked from the SPA340W Cisco web material - implying interconnectivity working capability [a bit of a mouth full].

PG

[wenyang]

Hi Phil,

UC320W doesn't support SPA302D. You may want to use SPA8800 which provide 4 FXS ports and 4 FXO ports.

Best regards,

Wendy Yang

[Philip Denton]

Wendy, while your answer is disappointing I do appreciate your prompt reply.  Becuase the SPA302D and corresponding base station are not compatible with the UC320W or SBCS, I *strongly* suggest Cisco re-number the product, perhaps to SPA402D or something similar.

As Peter mentioned, there's lots of marketing material out there that says the SPA300- and SPA500-series phones are compatible with both the UC320W and UC500 series appliances but that's just not true for the SPA302D, which is clearly marketed as part of the SPA300 family.  Very misleading!

Thanks,

Phil

[wenyang]

Hi Phil,

Sorry for the confusion. SPA300 and SPA500 compatible with UC320W are SPA301, SPA303, SPA501G, SPA502G, SPA504G, SPA508G, SPA509G, SPA512G, SPA514G and SPA525G/G2.

Best regards,

Wendy Yang

[Philip Denton]

Wendy, again, I appreciate the reply but Cisco.com needs to be fixed/updated.  If you go to the UC320W homepage you see this:

Then if you click on Cisco SPA Series IP Phones you see a picture of a SPA302D (which is not supported):

Then worst of all, if you continue to scroll down the pretty graphic very strongly implies that all phones in the SPA300 family are supported on Cisco Small Business (read: UC320, SBCS) platforms.

If you go to the SPA300 homepage you see the following:

It *plainly* says the SPA300 IP phones are supported with the SBCS, even if it makes no mention of the UC320W.  Can you at least put in a ticket to your internal helpdesk system or something to update these texts to reflect that the SPA302D is not supported on ANY Cisco Small Business phone systems?

Thanks,

Phil