今日已更新 133 条资讯 | 累计 37382 条内容
关于我们

标签:#sap

找到 23 篇相关文章

AI 资讯

The NetSapiens inter-domain calling quirk that keeps showing up

Quick share. Been running into this enough times across NetSapiens deployments that it's worth flagging. Scenario: Call gets placed or transferred between two domains on the same NetSapiens platform. The call connects fine. Audio works. But the caller ID showing up on the receiving side is wrong. It's showing the local extension or domain user instead of the actual originating caller. If you check the NetSapiens Known Issues page, this maps to NMS-2518. It shows up specifically when calls cross domain boundaries during hold or transfer. The fallout is mostly cosmetic but it matters for anyone running multi-tenant reseller deployments. Your customer sees the wrong name in their call history. Voicemail attribution gets weird. Inter-domain analytics show calls from the wrong source. A few patterns I've seen work around it: Configure SIP header rewriting at the SBC layer to preserve the original From URI across domain hops For softphones that pull call history from NetSapiens API directly, verify which field the client is actually displaying. Some pull from orig_user , others from local_user . The discrepancy shows up clearer than you'd expect. If you're running a mobile softphone client, check whether the client is caching contact info locally and overriding what NetSapiens returns. A lot of "wrong caller ID" reports turn out to be client-side caching bugs, not platform bugs. The deeper fix is platform-side and depends on what NetSapiens version you're running. The cleaner softphone integrations route call history through the NetSapiens API rather than building it locally on the device, which sidesteps the worst of this behavior. White-label softphones that integrate natively with NetSapiens handle this more consistently than generic SIP clients. Tragofone is one example where the call history syncs through the NetSapiens softphone integration layer directly, so inter-domain caller ID is consistent with what the platform actually has. Other native integrations handle t

2026-06-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

I Replaced Rive, GSAP, and Lottie with One Visual Runtime. Here's What Happened to Our React App.

Six months ago, our React app's animation stack looked like a dependency graveyard: Rive for interactive vector graphics GSAP for timeline-based UI animations Lottie for JSON animations imported from design Framer Motion for React-specific transitions Plus a few hand-rolled CSS animations for good measure Four tools. Four mental models. Four runtime dependencies. And a growing gap between what designers shipped and what developers could maintain. We consolidated everything into a single visual runtime. Here's what actually happened. The Problem Nobody Talks About Animation tools are great in isolation. The cracks appear when you need a single component to do multiple things: A button that plays a Rive animation on hover, transitions with Framer Motion on click, and shows a Lottie loading state A card that animates into view with GSAP , has hover states in Rive , and a pressed state in CSS A form that validates with Framer Motion shake animations, loads with Lottie spinners, and succeeds with a Rive celebration Each tool handles its piece. None of them talk to each other. You end up writing coordination code that's more complex than the animations themselves. What We Switched To We moved to ExodeUI — a visual runtime that combines state machines with vector rendering. Instead of four tools plus coordination code, we have: One editor where designers define visual states as nodes One file format that stores both appearance and behavior One export that generates production React components One runtime that renders everything natively The pitch sounds almost too clean. We were skeptical too. What We Actually Gained 1. Eliminated three runtime dependencies Removing Rive's .riv player, Lottie's JSON player, and GSAP's timeline engine from our bundle saved roughly 180KB gzipped. Not life-changing for desktop, but noticeable on mobile. 2. Design files became production code The biggest win wasn't technical — it was process. Our designer builds components in ExodeUI with stat

2026-06-04 原文 →