Thank you for your explanation.
Before I go further, please let me point out a simple fact of the world of computer. Just like society, we cannot converse without agreeing to the definitions of the words we use. When any person or organization co-ops a word for their own proprietary usage, we all lose.
In the case of the word domain, it must be clearly defined as to the usage intended. Whenever we speak within the category of anything having to do with computing, the word domain has a particular meaning. I found a good example of the possibilities from Wikipedia where it lists the following
likely candidates, all having to do with computing:
Administrative domain -
Probably not
Broadcast domain, in computer networking, a group of special-purpose addresses to receive network announcements -
No
Network domain, a named grouping of hosts and servers with managed login, access to resources, and permissions. -
Maybe
Domain name, a label that identifies a realm of administrative autonomy, authority, or control within the Internet -
Probably not
So within this, I would guess that number three is most likely within our context. However, your explanation seems to favor the last one, such as an FQDN which we use to identify locations on the Internet. But herein lies a problem.
As discussed elsewhere, there is no absolute need to use an FQDN to separate Tenants. We can use internal addressing instead of Internet names. Because of this, the usage is clearly confusing and needs to be updated to say what it means.
BTW, in client/server environments such as this one, we should not forget the common use of the word client.
In any case, the problem appears to stem from the concept of multi-tenancy. It is a good and highly-valuable feature, but it should not be allowed to override the basics of a PBX.
We must first understand the concept of a single phone number PBX which is used to direct calls to various extensions. Since a SIP trunk can handle many concurrent calls at the same time, a single phone number can serve many extensions. This is key, and I am sure the programmers meant such to be the foundational concept.
I place my vote for domain to be replaced with the word entity, or something similar. Further, there is no reason that the PBX software cannot keep them separate by a simply number or name, such as 1,2,3 or company A, B, C.
Again from Wikipedia, we see the following usages of device:
Device, a component of personal computer hardware
Device file, an interface of a device driver
Peripheral, any device attached to a computer that expands its functionality
There is also use as an electronic component.
The idea of a device being an endpoint is okay for you and I, but I do not like it for the reason that it is not in common English usage and so would tend to confused the Newbie.
To make it worse, a server is a device and a telephone is a device and a router is a device and a switch is a device; all of which may most likely be used in the PBX arena. So if we mean a telephone, then we should just say that. The use of nebulous terms confuses the issue, and once again we all lose.
I received this from our friend Barry in tech support:
A quick search for âDevicesâ in the documentation does appear to omit a definition unless a device other than telephonic device is discussed, for example, network âDeviceâ or Firewall âDeviceâ. I will discuss the omission with our Tech writer. At this point, you can assume âdeviceâ means telephonic (Desk or wireless phone, softphone, conference phone, etc.) unless otherwise specified. However, once inside the program, under the âAccountsâ drop-down menu then select âDevicesâ it explains, âDevices are endpoints that register one or more extensions. They are added to the list manually or automatically when the device requests the provisioning information over HTTP/HTTPS.â The Tech writer did not explicitly state "telephonic device" in the description, I assume because the software is used for controlling telephones.
It does clearly show the problem with the current documentation, and I will continue to offer my help in this regard. We will see how that comes out.
In any case, thanks again.
