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.
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?
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.
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?
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].
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!
Sorry for the confusion. SPA300 and SPA500 compatible with UC320W are SPA301, SPA303, SPA501G, SPA502G, SPA504G, SPA508G, SPA509G, SPA512G, SPA514G and SPA525G/G2.
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?
I had a pre-sales conversation on April 22, 2013 and was assured that the SPA232D and the SPA302D were comaptible (could be registered) with my UC320W (verified serial number with technician) and he again assured me that they were compatible even after I pointed out the above web page. He also stated that all SPA300 and SPA500 series phones are compatible with the UC320W. That said i have 1 SPA232D and 4 SPA302Ds sitting on my desk as I'm wirtting this...
I guess what I'm hearing is that I'm out of luck registereing the SPA232D with my UC320W?
If so, this is frustrating to say the least...
Why would you design, sell, and market a phone system in a product line that is not compatible with the core phone systems it's product line is built to work with?
Relying on the advice I recieved from Cisco technicians (about Cisco products) has made me look like an idiot within my place of employment and to customers.
To whom ever is managing this product line please help...
On work around I have used is to setup the SPA232D connecting to the UC320W using the SPA232D analog port and then connect it to the UC320W analog Port. Program the SPA232D to ring incoming calls to the DECT handset. This will enable the calling in and out of the port for 1x cordless phone or multiple cordless sharing only 1x port.
Hope this helps.
Wow I fully agree this is very misleading...I just received my spa302D with the specific intention of hooking it to my UC320w since the UC320w states is compatible with cisco SPA 300 phones. This was a huge was in time and shipping expense.
All, I agree about the misleading factor, I have been installing Cisco Voice for 10 years, and ordered for a small customer a UC320W with the SPA302D phone kits and have come to the same issue. The website for cisco plainly says SPA300 and SPA500 model phones are compatible with the UC320W.
Models & DescriptionNumber of Employees
So how do I go back to my customer and say sorry what we sold you is not going to work now. This is ridiculous.
Months have passed and yet this issue is still misleading. I asked Cisco's online chat if there was a wireless handdset to use with the UC320W. I was recommended the SPA302D. Here's a copy of the transcript (private/irrelevant information omitted)
info: Thank you for choosing Cisco. We will be with you shortly.
info: You are now chatting with Kaye.
Kaye: Thank you for choosing Cisco Systems. How may I assist you today?
David: Hello Kaye, I am looking at the UC 320W for small businesses.
David: I wanted to know if there were wireless handset options for this model instead of the SPA300 and SPA500 IP phones.
Kaye: I am happy to assist you. May I ask what prompted you to look into this information?
David: I am looking to deploy a phone system for one of our affiliate offices.
Kaye: This will be for how many users?
Kaye: I have not heard from you for some time. Would you like me to keep this chat open for you?
David: about 5-10
Kaye: Thank you.
Kaye: While I am checking here, so that I can provide you a more holistic recommendation, do you have any other project within the next 12 months that I may help you with like routers or switches?
David: not at the moment.
Kaye: Anyway, are you currently working with a Cisco Partner?
David: but will probably need a matching switch for the UC320.
David: No, not now.
Kaye: I will take note of that.
Kaye: And if I understand you correctly, you are looking for a phone that will work with UC320W and it should be Bluetooth supported, correct?
David: No, not bluetooth. I believe it should be a wifi model.
Kaye: So you are looking for a wireless phone, am I right?
Kaye: Let me check.
Kaye: One moment please.
Kaye: And please bear with me.
Kaye: I will be sending you a link for our recommendation. This may help you. And since this is the business department, can you please verify if the following information is correct :
Kaye: Thank you for that information. Please do not end this chat session. I will be sending you a link in a moment on this window, and once you have received the link, just spare me at least 2-3 minutes of your time so that I will be able to properly update your account and provide you additional help or options, would that be okay?
David: um, I think it would be much better if you could recommend a model, if available. This is becoming complicated.
Kaye: • Ability to make high-quality feature-rich business-quality VoIP calls with cordless handset convenience
Kaye: • High-resolution color display with hands-free speakerphone and four-way menu navigation button
Kaye: • Superior performance and range along with highly efficient battery power usage based on DECT technology
Kaye: • Essential telephony feature support such as caller ID, call transfer, call waiting, call forwarding, three-way conferencing, call history, and private and shared phonebooks
Kaye: I assure you all information will be strictly confidential and will be for internal use and documentation only.
Kaye: While checking on that, may I ask when do you plan to have this solution in place?
David: if requirements are met, in about a month or maybe earlier.
Kaye: Great! And since you're the one looking for this solution, I assume you're the one who's deciding for this need, right?
David: for the particular model, yes.
Kaye: Perfect! And I believe that this project will have funds once considered feasible, correct?
David: yes.. so this model will work with the UC320, correct?
Kaye: Yes. And good thing about that phone is that is one of the newest model that we have. So no need to worry about the EoL (End-Of-Life).
Kaye: I will also send you a link for your switch.
Kaye: • Secure desktop connectivity
Kaye: • High performance and reliability
Kaye: • IP telephony support
Kaye: • Fast, easy setup and configuration
Kaye: This is what I‘m going to do: I will have a Cisco Partner call you back within 4-5 business days. They will provide you more options and detailed information about this recommendation, okay?
Kaye: You also have an option to get a transcript of this chat session at the exit survey.
Kaye: I suggest you also add SmartNet Service Contract on each lined item, for you to have anytime access to Cisco engineers, the Technical Assistance Center (TAC), and an extensive range of online resources. You will receive as well fast, expert technical support, flexible hardware coverage, and smart, personalized capabilities to help you resolve critical network issues.
Kaye: Just to wrap this up, can I have the number of employees in your company and the line of industry your company is in? Please include your job title as well.
Kaye: Thank you. And for your reference, here’s the part numbers:
Kaye: UC320W - UC320W-FXO-K9
Kaye: Phone - SPA302D-G1
Kaye: Switch - SRW2008MP-K9-NA
Kaye: I sure hope I was able to resolve your reason for chatting with us today. Is there anything else I can help you with today?
David: that'll be it for now. I will look into this further. Thank you for your help.
Kaye: You are welcome. You may receive a survey through email. Please take the time to answer so we can improve our service. You may end the chat now.
I appreciate the sales person for recommending the model but the incorrect information is misleading and disappointing. I wouldn't blame her though, as you wouldn't be able to tell until you actually purchased the product and failed to get it registered to the UC320 in front of you. It's the Cisco product line mangers and engineers who should be pointing this out and fixing it.
I'd just like to point out that while the SPA302D IS newer and may not be going EoS/EoL any time soon the UC320W is going EoS next year. Did the Cisco rep not point that out during your conversation?