tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2158853543793456735.post7329570443538342218..comments2023-10-02T04:50:01.667-07:00Comments on VoIPNorm's Collaboration Blog: VoIPNorm PondersChris Normanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07200178774058910421noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2158853543793456735.post-72812815710260700202010-06-02T08:19:17.442-07:002010-06-02T08:19:17.442-07:00Thanks for pointing out that article. It sounds li...Thanks for pointing out that article. It sounds like they are looking for excuses not to join. Just because they weren’t invited to the party early enough they don’t want to take part is a pretty lame excuse. It’s only natural that partner companies would start something then invite everyone else to join just so it can get off the ground. I hope they change their mind but I have my doubts that Cisco will. Avaya on the other hand may be a little different. It makes sense for them to join especially if Cisco doesn’t. It would certainly look good in the eyes of their customers to take part when Cisco abstains.Chris Normanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07200178774058910421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2158853543793456735.post-9061076812663698652010-06-02T07:55:46.715-07:002010-06-02T07:55:46.715-07:00Found this article which seems to give some reason...Found this article which seems to give some reasons behind why some major vendors are missing. The part I find most interesting is in one vendors response, 'The UCIF structure and board leadership were formed before membership was offered to Cisco.' Which, if I was a major vendor looking to join, I would be looking at underlying motives as well. Hopefully they will get this worked out, as it could become a great beginning in interoperability.<br /><br />http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/cisco-avaya-abstain-uc-interoperability-forumMatt Snoreply@blogger.com