In a message dated 9/27/2004 5:17:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, lilo@nullpointer.de writes:
> [MAP] Anyway, here again, the desire is to prevent an answering
> machine/voicemail system from answering, which I understand. It is
> not to prevent forwarding. If I am one of the intended recipients of
> such as service, I may activate Call Forwarding Unconditional or Busy
> because I want such calls forwarded to where I am or to another phone
> on my desk.
Certainly, in this case we'd like to prevent the call from going to a
voicemail system. In my book however, I think that's what "Call
Forwarding" really is: When I, as the intended recipient of the call,
fail to pick up my phone in time, the call somehow is "diverted" or
"forwarded" to my voicemail. This may happen by just about any
mechanism -- be it H.450.3 or a routing GK playing tricks -- I still
think we could call that "Call Forwarding".
[MAP] No, call forwarding and voice mail are two different services. It just happens that switching systems that do not implement voice mail internally have to use Call Forwarding to send the call to another piece of equipment (like another line) which is the voice mail system. A system can provide voice mail (on no answer or immediately, without calling it "Call Forwarding") just like a system can provide Call Forwarding which is not to voice mail