Send cisco-voip mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cisco-voip digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Cisco IM and Presence Deployment Guide 9.0(1) (Jason Aarons (AM))
2. Re: Cisco IM and Presence Deployment Guide 9.0(1) (JP Senior)
3. What is cmterm-csf-dialrule-wizard-0.1.cop.sgn under on
Cisco.com downloads (Jason Aarons (AM))
4. Re: What is cmterm-csf-dialrule-wizard-0.1.cop.sgn under on
Cisco.com downloads (Jason Aarons (AM))
5. Re: Cisco IM and Presence Deployment Guide 9.0(1)
(Jason Aarons (AM))
6. 9971 Load sip9971.9-3-1-33 and voice vlan (Jason Aarons (AM))
7. Re: Very odd call routing issue. (Robin Clayton)
8. Re: Very odd call routing issue. (Heim, Dennis)
9. Re: Very odd call routing issue. (Robin Clayton)
10. Re: Very odd call routing issue. (Nick Matthews)
11. Delete all VM? UC 8.5 (Scott Voll)
12. Re: Delete all VM? UC 8.5 (Lelio Fulgenzi)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 16:10:02 -0400
From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>
To: "cisco-voip ([email protected])"
<[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Cisco IM and Presence Deployment Guide 9.0(1)
Message-ID:
<4e38db0a1959b04c8c83edcf069b53ed0d2a0de...@usispclexdb01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Anything available to read up on this?
Page not found
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/im_presence/deployment/9_0_1/CUP0_BK_
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120927/8ccde21c/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 20:15:08 +0000
From: JP Senior <[email protected]>
To: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>, "cisco-voip
([email protected])" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco IM and Presence Deployment Guide
9.0(1)
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Somehow you only got the partial URL. This is the document you are looking for
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/im_presence/deployment/9_0_1/CUP0_BK_D41159BD_00_deployment-guide-for-cup_chapter_0101.html
-JP Senior
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jason Aarons (AM)
Sent: 27 September 2012 2:10 PM
To: cisco-voip ([email protected])
Subject: [cisco-voip] Cisco IM and Presence Deployment Guide 9.0(1)
Anything available to read up on this?
Page not found
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/im_presence/deployment/9_0_1/CUP0_BK_
The contents of this message may contain confidential and/or privileged
subject matter. If this message has been received in error, please contact
the sender and delete all copies. Like other forms of communication,
e-mail communications may be vulnerable to interception by unauthorized
parties. If you do not wish us to communicate with you by e-mail, please
notify us at your earliest convenience. In the absence of such
notification, your consent is assumed. Should you choose to allow us to
communicate by e-mail, we will not take any additional security measures
(such as encryption) unless specifically requested.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120927/14aeb7d0/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 16:17:35 -0400
From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>
To: "cisco-voip ([email protected])"
<[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] What is cmterm-csf-dialrule-wizard-0.1.cop.sgn
under on Cisco.com downloads
Message-ID:
<4e38db0a1959b04c8c83edcf069b53ed0d2a0de...@usispclexdb01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
I can seem to find cmterm-csf-dialrule-wizard-0.1.cop.sgn
I looked under CallManager/CUPS.
This is per the Jabber for Windows Administration Guide.
Running CallManager 9.0(1)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120927/8b52baf2/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 16:22:23 -0400
From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>
To: "cisco-voip ([email protected])"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] What is
cmterm-csf-dialrule-wizard-0.1.cop.sgn under on Cisco.com downloads
Message-ID:
<4e38db0a1959b04c8c83edcf069b53ed0d2a0de...@usispclexdb01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/jabber/Windows/9_0_1/b_jabber_win_icg_chapter_01010.html
Before You Begin
Create your dial rules in Cisco Unified Communications Manager.
Download the Cisco Jabber for Windows administration package from Cisco.com.
Copy cmterm-csf-dialrule-wizard-0.1.cop.sgn from the Cisco Jabber for Windows
administration package to your file system.
>>>>>>>>Jason The file inside the admin zip file is named
>>>>>>>>cmterm-cupc-dialrule-wizard-0.1.cop.sgn not
>>>>>>>>cmterm-csf-dialrule-wizard-0.1.cop.sgn per the above documentation.
From: Jason Aarons (AM)
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 4:18 PM
To: cisco-voip ([email protected])
Subject: What is cmterm-csf-dialrule-wizard-0.1.cop.sgn under on Cisco.com
downloads
I can seem to find cmterm-csf-dialrule-wizard-0.1.cop.sgn
I looked under CallManager/CUPS.
This is per the Jabber for Windows Administration Guide.
Running CallManager 9.0(1)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120927/e5eaa741/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 16:23:38 -0400
From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>
To: JP Senior <[email protected]>, "cisco-voip
([email protected])" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco IM and Presence Deployment Guide
9.0(1)
Message-ID:
<4e38db0a1959b04c8c83edcf069b53ed0d2a0de...@usispclexdb01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
So Cisco.com is busted. I clicked in the Documentation for CallManager 9.0(1)
From: JP Senior [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 4:15 PM
To: Jason Aarons (AM); cisco-voip ([email protected])
Subject: RE: Cisco IM and Presence Deployment Guide 9.0(1)
Somehow you only got the partial URL. This is the document you are looking for
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/im_presence/deployment/9_0_1/CUP0_BK_D41159BD_00_deployment-guide-for-cup_chapter_0101.html
-JP Senior
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jason Aarons (AM)
Sent: 27 September 2012 2:10 PM
To: cisco-voip ([email protected])
Subject: [cisco-voip] Cisco IM and Presence Deployment Guide 9.0(1)
Anything available to read up on this?
Page not found
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/im_presence/deployment/9_0_1/CUP0_BK_
itevomcid
The contents of this message may contain confidential and/or privileged
subject matter. If this message has been received in error, please contact
the sender and delete all copies. Like other forms of communication,
e-mail communications may be vulnerable to interception by unauthorized
parties. If you do not wish us to communicate with you by e-mail, please
notify us at your earliest convenience. In the absence of such
notification, your consent is assumed. Should you choose to allow us to
communicate by e-mail, we will not take any additional security measures
(such as encryption) unless specifically requested.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120927/748ad8c8/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 17:56:19 -0400
From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>
To: "cisco-voip ([email protected])"
<[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] 9971 Load sip9971.9-3-1-33 and voice vlan
Message-ID:
<4e38db0a1959b04c8c83edcf069b53ed0d2a0de...@usispclexdb01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
So, we discovered that if you power up a 9971 with external power (injector)
and connect it to the switching, it doesn't honor the Cisco voice VLAN, and
jumps on the "access vlan" of the port instead. Meaning, it does a DHCP and
gets our standard user data network of 10.20.164.0/23 instead of the endpoint
segment of 10.20.170.0/24
The switch still identifies the phone as a Cisco IP Phone:
Sep 27 14:54:36 MDT: %SWITCH_QOS_TB-5-TRUST_DEVICE_DETECTED: cisco-phone
detected on port Gi1/0/9, port's configured trust state is now operational.
However, if you let it draw PoE, it boots normally and places the phone on the
voice VLAN and the PC on the data VLAN.
Is there something misconfigured in the switching? Why would the phone not
jump on the voice VLAN regardless of power source?
Phone load is sip9971.9-3-1-33
-jason
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120927/a45707a4/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 09:41:20 +0000
From: Robin Clayton <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
Message-ID:
<883574BD6A83B04EAA11A5B54F4DFFE3B59321@SV-C-EXCHMB-01.richardrose.internal>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I have determined that the route filter seems to be the cause of the issue.
If I specify a route pattern as
901768@
and have the route filter set the call fails.
Without the route filter it connects.
Very very odd.
Rob
=========================
Robin Clayton
Network Transition Manager
Richard Rose Federation
Richard Rose Central Academy
Victoria Place
Carlisle
Cumbria
CA1 1LY
Tel: 01228 822075
www: www.rrfa.org.uk
From: Pavan [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 27 September 2012 14:04
To: Robin Clayton
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
How about asking the carrier.
Can they answer why one works and the other fails ?
-Pavan
On Sep 27, 2012, at 6:57, Robin Clayton
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
TON?
It works for 99% of UK Numbers as far as I can tell, just a sub set from one
exchange seems to be being strange?
Rob
=========================
Robin Clayton
Network Transition Manager
Richard Rose Federation
Richard Rose Central Academy
Victoria Place
Carlisle
Cumbria
CA1 1LY
Tel: 01228 822075
www: www.rrfa.org.uk
From: Paul [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 27 September 2012 12:52
To: Robin Clayton
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
Perhaps ToN is required and you haven't configured that on the RL/RP?
________________________________
From: Robin Clayton
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 6:02 AM
Subject: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
CCM 7.x
2811 Voice gateway.
A few weeks ago a member of staff alerted me to the fact that they could not
call a supplier, I checked the number and sure enough the phone system dialled
and we got a recorded message from the carrier ( BT UK ) of number not
recognised.
After a bunch of tests with our line provider we could not find a fault with
their call routing ( at least so far )
What I have noticed is something that seems very bazar
With no special routing implemented on the call manager the voice gateway tries
to dial and gets the number not recognised. The output of ?show voice call?
shows the following with the correct number.
==============================================================
0/0/0:15 13
vtsp level 0 state = S_SETUP_PROGRESS
callid 0xBAEE B13 state S_TSP_OUTCALL_PROG clld 01768776000 cllg 6563
==============================================================
If I add a CCM route pattern for 901768776000, the line rings and the progress
display shows the correct number.
==============================================================
0/0/0:15 13
vtsp level 0 state = S_SETUP_REQ_PROC
callid 0xBAEE B13 state S_TSP_OUTCALL_PROG clld 01768776000 cllg 6563
============================================================
in both instances ?Show Call? show the right number , but one fails?
This is driving me crazy, anybody have any bright ideas other than sticking in
a route pattern for the whole number set?
Rob
=========================
Robin Clayton
Network Transition Manager
Richard Rose Federation
Richard Rose Central Academy
Victoria Place
Carlisle
Cumbria
CA1 1LY
Tel: 01228 822075
www: www.rrfa.org.uk<http://www.rrfa.org.uk>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice:
This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
any attachments permanently from your system.
The Richard Rose Federation<http://www.rrfa.org.uk/>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice:
This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
any attachments permanently from your system.
The Richard Rose Federation<http://www.rrfa.org.uk>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice:
This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
any attachments permanently from your system.
The Richard Rose Federation<http://www.rrfa.org.uk>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120928/f437058e/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 07:50:00 -0500
From: "Heim, Dennis" <[email protected]>
To: Robin Clayton <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Have you tried rebooting? Prior to 8.x there were numerous dial-forest
corruption issues related to route filters, where the only fix was a cluster
reboot.
Dennis Heim
Sr. UC Engineer
World Wide Technology
Office: 314.212.1814
Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
www.wwt.com<http://www.wwt.com/>
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robin Clayton
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:41 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
I have determined that the route filter seems to be the cause of the issue.
If I specify a route pattern as
901768@
and have the route filter set the call fails.
Without the route filter it connects.
Very very odd.
Rob
=========================
Robin Clayton
Network Transition Manager
Richard Rose Federation
Richard Rose Central Academy
Victoria Place
Carlisle
Cumbria
CA1 1LY
Tel: 01228 822075
www: www.rrfa.org.uk
From: Pavan [mailto:[email protected]]<mailto:[mailto:[email protected]]>
Sent: 27 September 2012 14:04
To: Robin Clayton
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
How about asking the carrier.
Can they answer why one works and the other fails ?
-Pavan
On Sep 27, 2012, at 6:57, Robin Clayton
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
TON?
It works for 99% of UK Numbers as far as I can tell, just a sub set from one
exchange seems to be being strange?
Rob
=========================
Robin Clayton
Network Transition Manager
Richard Rose Federation
Richard Rose Central Academy
Victoria Place
Carlisle
Cumbria
CA1 1LY
Tel: 01228 822075
www: www.rrfa.org.uk
From: Paul [mailto:[email protected]]<mailto:[mailto:[email protected]]>
Sent: 27 September 2012 12:52
To: Robin Clayton
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
Perhaps ToN is required and you haven't configured that on the RL/RP?
________________________________
From: Robin Clayton
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 6:02 AM
Subject: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
CCM 7.x
2811 Voice gateway.
A few weeks ago a member of staff alerted me to the fact that they could not
call a supplier, I checked the number and sure enough the phone system dialled
and we got a recorded message from the carrier ( BT UK ) of number not
recognised.
After a bunch of tests with our line provider we could not find a fault with
their call routing ( at least so far )
What I have noticed is something that seems very bazar
With no special routing implemented on the call manager the voice gateway tries
to dial and gets the number not recognised. The output of ?show voice call?
shows the following with the correct number.
==============================================================
0/0/0:15 13
vtsp level 0 state = S_SETUP_PROGRESS
callid 0xBAEE B13 state S_TSP_OUTCALL_PROG clld 01768776000 cllg 6563
==============================================================
If I add a CCM route pattern for 901768776000, the line rings and the progress
display shows the correct number.
==============================================================
0/0/0:15 13
vtsp level 0 state = S_SETUP_REQ_PROC
callid 0xBAEE B13 state S_TSP_OUTCALL_PROG clld 01768776000 cllg 6563
============================================================
in both instances ?Show Call? show the right number , but one fails?
This is driving me crazy, anybody have any bright ideas other than sticking in
a route pattern for the whole number set?
Rob
=========================
Robin Clayton
Network Transition Manager
Richard Rose Federation
Richard Rose Central Academy
Victoria Place
Carlisle
Cumbria
CA1 1LY
Tel: 01228 822075
www: www.rrfa.org.uk<http://www.rrfa.org.uk>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice:
This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
any attachments permanently from your system.
The Richard Rose Federation<http://www.rrfa.org.uk/>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice:
This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
any attachments permanently from your system.
The Richard Rose Federation<http://www.rrfa.org.uk>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice:
This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
any attachments permanently from your system.
The Richard Rose Federation<http://www.rrfa.org.uk>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120928/ff135820/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 13:02:06 +0000
From: Robin Clayton <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
Message-ID:
<883574BD6A83B04EAA11A5B54F4DFFE3B59705@SV-C-EXCHMB-01.richardrose.internal>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Not done a re-boot as yet.
I just find it increasingly odd that the number presented on the 2811 looks
identical.
Rob
=========================
Robin Clayton
Network Transition Manager
Richard Rose Federation
Richard Rose Central Academy
Victoria Place
Carlisle
Cumbria
CA1 1LY
Tel: 01228 822075
www: www.rrfa.org.uk
From: Heim, Dennis [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 28 September 2012 13:50
To: Robin Clayton; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
Have you tried rebooting? Prior to 8.x there were numerous dial-forest
corruption issues related to route filters, where the only fix was a cluster
reboot.
Dennis Heim
Sr. UC Engineer
World Wide Technology
Office: 314.212.1814
Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
www.wwt.com<http://www.wwt.com/>
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robin Clayton
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:41 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
I have determined that the route filter seems to be the cause of the issue.
If I specify a route pattern as
901768@
and have the route filter set the call fails.
Without the route filter it connects.
Very very odd.
Rob
=========================
Robin Clayton
Network Transition Manager
Richard Rose Federation
Richard Rose Central Academy
Victoria Place
Carlisle
Cumbria
CA1 1LY
Tel: 01228 822075
www: www.rrfa.org.uk
From: Pavan [mailto:[email protected]]<mailto:[mailto:[email protected]]>
Sent: 27 September 2012 14:04
To: Robin Clayton
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
How about asking the carrier.
Can they answer why one works and the other fails ?
-Pavan
On Sep 27, 2012, at 6:57, Robin Clayton
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
TON?
It works for 99% of UK Numbers as far as I can tell, just a sub set from one
exchange seems to be being strange?
Rob
=========================
Robin Clayton
Network Transition Manager
Richard Rose Federation
Richard Rose Central Academy
Victoria Place
Carlisle
Cumbria
CA1 1LY
Tel: 01228 822075
www: www.rrfa.org.uk
From: Paul [mailto:[email protected]]<mailto:[mailto:[email protected]]>
Sent: 27 September 2012 12:52
To: Robin Clayton
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
Perhaps ToN is required and you haven't configured that on the RL/RP?
________________________________
From: Robin Clayton
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 6:02 AM
Subject: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
CCM 7.x
2811 Voice gateway.
A few weeks ago a member of staff alerted me to the fact that they could not
call a supplier, I checked the number and sure enough the phone system dialled
and we got a recorded message from the carrier ( BT UK ) of number not
recognised.
After a bunch of tests with our line provider we could not find a fault with
their call routing ( at least so far )
What I have noticed is something that seems very bazar
With no special routing implemented on the call manager the voice gateway tries
to dial and gets the number not recognised. The output of ?show voice call?
shows the following with the correct number.
==============================================================
0/0/0:15 13
vtsp level 0 state = S_SETUP_PROGRESS
callid 0xBAEE B13 state S_TSP_OUTCALL_PROG clld 01768776000 cllg 6563
==============================================================
If I add a CCM route pattern for 901768776000, the line rings and the progress
display shows the correct number.
==============================================================
0/0/0:15 13
vtsp level 0 state = S_SETUP_REQ_PROC
callid 0xBAEE B13 state S_TSP_OUTCALL_PROG clld 01768776000 cllg 6563
============================================================
in both instances ?Show Call? show the right number , but one fails?
This is driving me crazy, anybody have any bright ideas other than sticking in
a route pattern for the whole number set?
Rob
=========================
Robin Clayton
Network Transition Manager
Richard Rose Federation
Richard Rose Central Academy
Victoria Place
Carlisle
Cumbria
CA1 1LY
Tel: 01228 822075
www: www.rrfa.org.uk<http://www.rrfa.org.uk>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice:
This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
any attachments permanently from your system.
The Richard Rose Federation<http://www.rrfa.org.uk/>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice:
This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
any attachments permanently from your system.
The Richard Rose Federation<http://www.rrfa.org.uk>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice:
This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
any attachments permanently from your system.
The Richard Rose Federation<http://www.rrfa.org.uk>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice:
This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
any attachments permanently from your system.
The Richard Rose Federation<http://www.rrfa.org.uk>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120928/7d6cb7a8/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 09:51:58 -0400
From: Nick Matthews <[email protected]>
To: "Heim, Dennis" <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.
Message-ID:
<CAM-K-NppouwQjD648JmtOMaGGUX4eC=bneh4v9r2qyg2mya...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
debug isdn q931 would be more interesting, though the circuit protocol (nor
IP) were stated.
My first guess is the called party type (International, national, etc).
Default is for callmanager to choose.
Check the difference in messaging between working and not working.
-nick
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Heim, Dennis <[email protected]> wrote:
> Have you tried rebooting? Prior to 8.x there were numerous dial-forest
> corruption issues related to route filters, where the only fix was a
> cluster reboot.****
>
> ** **
>
> Dennis Heim****
>
> Sr. UC Engineer****
>
> World Wide Technology****
>
> Office: 314.212.1814****
>
> Email: [email protected]****
>
> www.wwt.com****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Robin Clayton
> *Sent:* Friday, September 28, 2012 5:41 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
>
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.****
>
> ** **
>
> I have determined that the route filter seems to be the cause of the issue.
> ****
>
> ****
>
> If I specify a route pattern as ****
>
> ****
>
> 901768@****
>
> ****
>
> and have the route filter set the call fails.****
>
> ****
>
> Without the route filter it connects.****
>
> ****
>
> Very very odd.****
>
> ****
>
> Rob****
>
> ****
>
> *=========================*****
>
> *Robin Clayton*****
>
> * *****
>
> *Network Transition Manager*****
>
> *Richard Rose Federation*****
>
> *Richard Rose Central Academy*****
>
> *Victoria Place*****
>
> *Carlisle*****
>
> *Cumbria*****
>
> *CA1 1LY*****
>
> * *****
>
> *Tel: 01228 822075*****
>
> *www: www.rrfa.org.uk*****
>
> * *****
>
> ****
>
> *From:* Pavan [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* 27 September 2012 14:04
> *To:* Robin Clayton
> *Cc:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.****
>
> ****
>
> How about asking the carrier.****
>
> Can they answer why one works and the other fails ?
>
> -Pavan****
>
>
> On Sep 27, 2012, at 6:57, Robin Clayton <[email protected]> wrote:
> ****
>
> TON?****
>
> ****
>
> It works for 99% of UK Numbers as far as I can tell, just a sub set from
> one exchange seems to be being strange?****
>
> ****
>
> Rob****
>
> ****
>
> *=========================*****
>
> *Robin Clayton*****
>
> * *****
>
> *Network Transition Manager*****
>
> *Richard Rose Federation*****
>
> *Richard Rose Central Academy*****
>
> *Victoria Place*****
>
> *Carlisle*****
>
> *Cumbria*****
>
> *CA1 1LY*****
>
> * *****
>
> *Tel: 01228 822075*****
>
> *www: www.rrfa.org.uk*****
>
> * *****
>
> ****
>
> *From:* Paul [mailto:[email protected]]
> *Sent:* 27 September 2012 12:52
> *To:* Robin Clayton
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.****
>
> ****
>
> Perhaps ToN is required and you haven't configured that on the RL/RP?****
>
> ****
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Robin Clayton <[email protected]>
> *To:* "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 27, 2012 6:02 AM
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Very odd call routing issue.****
>
> ****
>
> CCM 7.x****
>
> 2811 Voice gateway.****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> A few weeks ago a member of staff alerted me to the fact that they could
> not call a supplier, I checked the number and sure enough the phone system
> dialled and we got a recorded message from the carrier ( BT UK ) of number
> not recognised.****
>
> ****
>
> After a bunch of tests with our line provider we could not find a fault
> with their call routing ( at least so far )****
>
> ****
>
> What I have noticed is something that seems very bazar****
>
> ****
>
> With no special routing implemented on the call manager the voice gateway
> tries to dial and gets the number not recognised. The output of ?show voice
> call? shows the following with the correct number.****
>
> ****
>
> ==============================================================****
>
> 0/0/0:15 13****
>
> vtsp level 0 state = S_SETUP_PROGRESS****
>
> callid 0xBAEE B13 state S_TSP_OUTCALL_PROG clld 01768776000 cllg 6563****
>
> ==============================================================****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> If I add a CCM route pattern for 901768776000, the line rings and the
> progress display shows the correct number.****
>
> ****
>
> ==============================================================****
>
> 0/0/0:15 13****
>
> vtsp level 0 state = S_SETUP_REQ_PROC****
>
> callid 0xBAEE B13 state S_TSP_OUTCALL_PROG clld 01768776000 cllg 6563****
>
> ============================================================****
>
> ****
>
> in both instances ?Show Call? show the right number , but one fails? ****
>
> ****
>
> This is driving me crazy, anybody have any bright ideas other than
> sticking in a route pattern for the whole number set?****
>
> ****
>
> Rob****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> *=========================*****
>
> *Robin Clayton*****
>
> * *****
>
> *Network Transition Manager*****
>
> *Richard Rose Federation*****
>
> *Richard Rose Central Academy*****
>
> *Victoria Place*****
>
> *Carlisle*****
>
> *Cumbria*****
>
> *CA1 1LY*****
>
> * *****
>
> *Tel: 01228 822075*****
>
> *www: **www.rrfa.org.uk*****
>
> * *****
>
> ****
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ****
>
> *Important Notice:*****
>
> This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
> or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
> person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
> reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
> e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
> an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
> replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
> any attachments permanently from your system. ****
>
> *The Richard Rose Federation <http://www.rrfa.org.uk/>* ****
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip****
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ****
>
> *Important Notice:*****
>
> This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
> or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
> person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
> reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
> e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
> an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
> replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
> any attachments permanently from your system. ****
>
> *The Richard Rose Federation <http://www.rrfa.org.uk>* ****
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip****
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ****
>
> *Important Notice:*****
>
> This e-mail and any attachment are confidentialand may be privileged
> or otherwise protected from disclosure. It is solely intended for the
> person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any
> reading, use, disclosure, copying or distribution of all or parts of this
> e-mail or associated attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
> an intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by
> replying to this message or by telephone and delete this e-mail and
> any attachments permanently from your system. ****
>
> *The Richard Rose Federation <http://www.rrfa.org.uk>* ****
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120928/0b63c520/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 08:09:10 -0700
From: Scott Voll <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: [cisco-voip] Delete all VM? UC 8.5
Message-ID:
<CAHgd+3_4=ehuetqz3dpmas6bziegrmu57nydplq_tniyl+p...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Is there any way in UC 8.5 that a user can delete all VM at one time? Is
the only easy way to delete the VM box and then recreate it? Lelio, don't
you deal with this every term?
Thanks
Scott
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120928/0f5709b7/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 11:30:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: Lelio Fulgenzi <[email protected]>
To: Scott Voll <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Delete all VM? UC 8.5
Message-ID:
<1420861455.1390362.1348846245000.javamail.r...@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
the easiest way is to delete the mailbox and recreate. that's if it's for just
one person. but then you have to recreate the configuration, etc. if this is
for a person transitioning into an existing role, it could be the better
option.
if the person just wants to clean things up, then another option is to have
them log into PCA. select all and delete.
another option is to use bulk user delete (reset option). it's available on
ciscounitytools.com it works like a charm and can be used on one user or many.
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (ANNU)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
- LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Voll" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 11:09:10 AM
Subject: Delete all VM? UC 8.5
Is there any way in UC 8.5 that a user can delete all VM at one time? Is the
only easy way to delete the VM box and then recreate it? Lelio, don't you deal
with this every term?
Thanks
Scott
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120928/d741f1b2/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
End of cisco-voip Digest, Vol 107, Issue 25
*******************************************
