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. Re: cucm rel 8.6 (Wes Sisk)
2. Re: Check constraint error adding home/mobile phone to
personal address book (Erick B)
3. Diversion Headers (Heim, Dennis)
4. Re: Diversion Headers (Nate VanMaren)
5. Re: Cisco phones vulnerable to hack / remote access?
(Adam Frankel)
6. Re: Diversion Headers (Mark Holloway)
7. Re: Diversion Headers (Joel Perez)
8. Re: Diversion Headers (Heim, Dennis)
9. Re: Diversion Headers (Mark Holloway)
10. 7936 and corporate directory (Scott Voll)
11. Re: Diversion Headers (Chris Ward (chrward))
12. Re: 7936 and corporate directory (Erick B.)
13. Re: 7936 and corporate directory (Ryan Ratliff)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 13:38:21 -0500
From: Wes Sisk <[email protected]>
To: "Bellerose, Robert" <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] cucm rel 8.6
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Nothing offhand.
Change notification being completely down/offline/lost during the bulk insert
would cause what you describe. If it was indeed change notification then a one
time restart of ccm service should bring realtime memory in line with
configuration in the database.
/wes
On Jan 9, 2013, at 8:00 AM, Bellerose, Robert wrote:
Anyone ever see issues with Phones 7965 not registering using Taps on this
release.
Found out you have to apply config then save for the phones to register. TAC is
looking to this..
_______________________________________________
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/20130109/362ed0d7/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 12:51:36 -0600
From: Erick B <[email protected]>
To: Wes Sisk <[email protected]>
Cc: voip puck <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Check constraint error adding home/mobile
phone to personal address book
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Thanks Wes.
Yes, I've asked them to reduce number of entries. The user id also has a hyphen
in it. I was able to add entries with another user fine but that user only had
a dozen entries and the problem user has 163. It updates via phone service on
phone.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 9, 2013, at 10:59 AM, Wes Sisk <[email protected]> wrote:
> Cryptic but looks resolved by CSCso80710. Something about constraints on the
> number of entries enforced both in PAB java code and the database.
>
> on casual inspection it looks like use fewer entries or upgrade.
>
> I had to update the bug so it will take 24 hours to appear in Bug Toolkit.
>
> /wes
>
> On Jan 7, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Erick B. wrote:
>
> Anyone seen this before?
>
> Not finding any bug for this at moment.
>
> When a user tries to add a home/mobile to their personal address book via web
> page they get the following error. They can do this fine on the phone itself.
> This user has over 100 entries in their PAB, any limitation on that?
>
> Update failed. Check constraint
> (informix.cc_personalphonebook_personalfastdialindex) failed
>
> Version is 6.1.2.1000-13 (I know its old and needs upgrading).
>
> Thanks,
> Erick
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130109/9b48c9c6/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 12:54:53 -0600
From: "Heim, Dennis" <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
We have Verizon sip trunks and require unique codes based on the spoke site
that is calling. For example if we dial cisco it should be sent as
777-1-800-553-2447 for site 1 and 888-1-800-553-2447 for site 2. We were
looking at setting the diversion in cube as Verizon requires. How are other
accomplishing this? One thought was to set the diversion header based on the
subnet of the calling device.
Thanks,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20130109/0cad99ff/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 19:25:41 +0000
From: Nate VanMaren <[email protected]>
To: "Heim, Dennis" <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I would assume it would be better to set the header based upon the number being
called, if you were wanting virtual TEHO. That could be done by matching
different dial-peers?
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Heim, Dennis
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 11:55 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers
We have Verizon sip trunks and require unique codes based on the spoke site
that is calling. For example if we dial cisco it should be sent as
777-1-800-553-2447 for site 1 and 888-1-800-553-2447 for site 2. We were
looking at setting the diversion in cube as Verizon requires. How are other
accomplishing this? One thought was to set the diversion header based on the
subnet of the calling device.
Thanks,
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all
copies of the original message.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20130109/7bf69077/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 14:49:29 -0500
From: Adam Frankel <[email protected]>
To: Cisco VOIP <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco phones vulnerable to hack / remote
access?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
A public security advisory posted:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/csa/cisco-sa-20130109-uipphone.html
HTH,
Adam
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Adam Frankel <[email protected]>
*Sent:* Fri, Jan 04, 2013 2:24:57 PM
*To:* Cisco VOIP <[email protected]>
*CC:*
*Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco phones vulnerable to hack / remote access?
> PSIRT will be including all updated information related to this on the
> defect, CSCuc83860.
>
> Adam
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Ed Leatherman <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Fri, Jan 04, 2013 2:11:24 PM
> *To:* Scott Voll <[email protected]>
> *CC:* Cisco VOIP <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco phones vulnerable to hack / remote
> access?
>
>> I completely missed the video at the top of the IEEE article the
>> first time i read it.. i think my brain saw it as an advertisement
>> and just ignored it.
>>
>> The researchers full presentation is here also:
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3zUOZcewtA&feature=youtu.be
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Scott Voll <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> Lelio sent this out a week or two ago.
>>
>> http://m.spectrum.ieee.org/computing/embedded-systems/cisco-ip-phones-vulnerable
>> Check out the video.
>>
>> We are a closed facility, so the attacker would have to either be
>> inside, or take a phone off the wall in a reception area AND have
>> SSH access.
>>
>> I talked to my SE and he said:
>> Workaround = Restrict SSH and CLI access to trusted users only.
>> Administrators may consider leveraging 802.1x device
>> authentication to prevent unauthorized devices or systems from
>> accessing the voice network.
>>
>> Ang accomplished this by first gaining access to the device via
>> SSH and utilizing TFTP to pull down a malicious binary that is
>> designed to exploit the insufficient validation issue of the
>> affected System Calls. He ran this from the user context on the
>> device which performed the exploit. The caveats of this
>> particular issue are that an attacker would need to have
>> Authenticated Access either via SSH (Which would need to be
>> enabled, it is not enabled by default), or local access via the
>> Serial port. The attacker would also need to be able to point the
>> device at an attacker-controlled TFTP server to retrieve the payload.
>>
>> YMMV
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Robert Kulagowski
>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> Since no one who knows anything for real is probably going to say
>> anything for now, are there any mitigating factors that I can
>> start
>> thinking about once management sees the following article?
>>
>>
>> http://redtape.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/04/16328998-popular-office-phones-vulnerable-to-eavesdropping-hack-researchers-say?lite
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ed Leatherman
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130109/776091b7/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 14:57:07 -0500
From: Mark Holloway <[email protected]>
To: "Heim, Dennis" <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Do you need the number in the diversion header to be the same as the CUCM
calling party or can it be any valid number that belongs to the SIP trunk (ie.
like a Pilot Number) to authenticate the call? A SIP Profile can easily add a
diversion header.
On Jan 9, 2013, at 1:54 PM, "Heim, Dennis" <[email protected]> wrote:
> We have Verizon sip trunks and require unique codes based on the spoke site
> that is calling. For example if we dial cisco it should be sent as
> 777-1-800-553-2447 for site 1 and 888-1-800-553-2447 for site 2. We were
> looking at setting the diversion in cube as Verizon requires. How are other
> accomplishing this? One thought was to set the diversion header based on the
> subnet of the calling device.
>
> Thanks,
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130109/a7998dd7/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 15:02:51 -0500
From: Joel Perez <[email protected]>
To: Nate VanMaren <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers
Message-ID:
<CABdWoUHaEKSw72u4Mqo1YGMLE5xK14+6DSkSQSd=atmyvpp...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi Dennis,
What I have done in the past with Verizon is to use a prefix on the CM RL
and then match that prefix on the dialpeer in the CUBE and use
diversion-header manipulation based on the prefix that matched.
However I have never had to actually add unique codes to outbound dialed
numbers into VZ SIP trunks, i only had to make sure the outbound DID was in
the range that was specified for that spoke site.
Joel P
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Nate VanMaren <[email protected]>wrote:
> I would assume it would be better to set the header based upon the
> number being called, if you were wanting virtual TEHO. That could be done
> by matching different dial-peers?****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Heim, Dennis
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 09, 2013 11:55 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers****
>
> ** **
>
> We have Verizon sip trunks and require unique codes based on the spoke
> site that is calling. For example if we dial cisco it should be sent as
> 777-1-800-553-2447 for site 1 and 888-1-800-553-2447 for site 2. We were
> looking at setting the diversion in cube as Verizon requires. How are other
> accomplishing this? One thought was to set the diversion header based on
> the subnet of the calling device.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks,****
>
>
>
> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
> recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any
> unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you
> are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email
> and destroy all copies of the original message.****
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130109/19b964ff/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 14:17:35 -0600
From: "Heim, Dennis" <[email protected]>
To: Mark Holloway <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I need to prefix certain digits to the diversion header.
Dennis Heim | Sr. Unified Collaboration Team Lead
World Wide Technology | 314.212.1814 |
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
"Creating Impact, Ignition & Scalability"
From: Mark Holloway [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 2:57 PM
To: Heim, Dennis
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers
Do you need the number in the diversion header to be the same as the CUCM
calling party or can it be any valid number that belongs to the SIP trunk (ie.
like a Pilot Number) to authenticate the call? A SIP Profile can easily add a
diversion header.
On Jan 9, 2013, at 1:54 PM, "Heim, Dennis"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
We have Verizon sip trunks and require unique codes based on the spoke site
that is calling. For example if we dial cisco it should be sent as
777-1-800-553-2447 for site 1 and 888-1-800-553-2447 for site 2. We were
looking at setting the diversion in cube as Verizon requires. How are other
accomplishing this? One thought was to set the diversion header based on the
subnet of the calling device.
Thanks,
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[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/20130109/8dd628a7/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 15:21:45 -0500
From: Mark Holloway <[email protected]>
To: "Heim, Dennis" <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Could you match the Calling party (CUCM) number to a dial peer? Then you could
assign a SIP Profile to that dial peer to prepend the digits.
On Jan 9, 2013, at 3:17 PM, "Heim, Dennis" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I need to prefix certain digits to the diversion header.
>
> Dennis Heim | Sr. Unified Collaboration Team Lead
> World Wide Technology | 314.212.1814 | [email protected]
> ?Creating Impact, Ignition & Scalability?
>
> From: Mark Holloway [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 2:57 PM
> To: Heim, Dennis
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers
>
> Do you need the number in the diversion header to be the same as the CUCM
> calling party or can it be any valid number that belongs to the SIP trunk
> (ie. like a Pilot Number) to authenticate the call? A SIP Profile can easily
> add a diversion header.
>
>
> On Jan 9, 2013, at 1:54 PM, "Heim, Dennis" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> We have Verizon sip trunks and require unique codes based on the spoke site
> that is calling. For example if we dial cisco it should be sent as
> 777-1-800-553-2447 for site 1 and 888-1-800-553-2447 for site 2. We were
> looking at setting the diversion in cube as Verizon requires. How are other
> accomplishing this? One thought was to set the diversion header based on the
> subnet of the calling device.
>
> Thanks,
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130109/ec3e42d1/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 12:47:45 -0800
From: Scott Voll <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] 7936 and corporate directory
Message-ID:
<CAHgd+39TCB7o3vTe_9Sf_HC4DCzy1fm=4m9objh1hp+exol...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
All of my 7936 conference phones, when you press the corporate directory,
come up with error condition.
they are running: cmterm_7936.3-3-21-0 and my CM is version 8.6.2.22900-9.
I'm not finding a bug when I search. Maybe my searching is bad.
Anyone know how to fix it? all my 796x and 7970 work fine with the
corporate directory.
TIA
Scott
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20130109/40caa1a0/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 20:56:07 +0000
From: "Chris Ward (chrward)" <[email protected]>
To: "Heim, Dennis" <[email protected]>, Mark Holloway
<[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
In CUCM, this would probably be a good use of a SIP Normalization script. I
suspect CUBE could do it do, but I know less about that.
+Chris
Unity Connection TME
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Heim, Dennis
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 3:18 PM
To: Mark Holloway
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers
I need to prefix certain digits to the diversion header.
Dennis Heim | Sr. Unified Collaboration Team Lead
World Wide Technology | 314.212.1814 |
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
"Creating Impact, Ignition & Scalability"
From: Mark Holloway [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 2:57 PM
To: Heim, Dennis
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Diversion Headers
Do you need the number in the diversion header to be the same as the CUCM
calling party or can it be any valid number that belongs to the SIP trunk (ie.
like a Pilot Number) to authenticate the call? A SIP Profile can easily add a
diversion header.
On Jan 9, 2013, at 1:54 PM, "Heim, Dennis"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
We have Verizon sip trunks and require unique codes based on the spoke site
that is calling. For example if we dial cisco it should be sent as
777-1-800-553-2447 for site 1 and 888-1-800-553-2447 for site 2. We were
looking at setting the diversion in cube as Verizon requires. How are other
accomplishing this? One thought was to set the diversion header based on the
subnet of the calling device.
Thanks,
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[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/20130109/c184ec2a/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 17:04:56 -0600
From: "Erick B." <[email protected]>
To: Scott Voll <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 7936 and corporate directory
Message-ID:
<cahsnbqwdbwwqnidshp1amdnbwlraqwh8qfwyfsgdtwnxf49...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
What is the error message?
I had similar issue with 7935 (host not found error) and 8.5 but 7935 EOL
and had worked with TAC and these 2 bug id's were provided to us.
CSCtb89353 & CSCtb96601
TAC had told us to get a 7936 and use at least 3-3-21 version firmware.
This was in Jan 2012. I don't believe the client got 7936s yet...
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Scott Voll <[email protected]> wrote:
> All of my 7936 conference phones, when you press the corporate directory,
> come up with error condition.
>
> they are running: cmterm_7936.3-3-21-0 and my CM is version 8.6.2.22900-9.
>
> I'm not finding a bug when I search. Maybe my searching is bad.
>
> Anyone know how to fix it? all my 796x and 7970 work fine with the
> corporate directory.
>
> TIA
>
> Scott
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130109/e0d74744/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 10:32:35 -0500
From: Ryan Ratliff <[email protected]>
To: Scott Voll <[email protected]>
Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 7936 and corporate directory
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
What's a packet capture show the phone trying to do, and what is it configured
to use for the directory URL? Unfortunately that error can cover anything from
a simple DNS resolution problem to misconfigured URLs, to HTTPS cert exchange
issues. You really need to see what the phone is trying to do (or see that it
isn't actually sending anything) to get a better clue.
-Ryan
On Jan 9, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Erick B. <[email protected]> wrote:
What is the error message?
I had similar issue with 7935 (host not found error) and 8.5 but 7935 EOL and
had worked with TAC and these 2 bug id's were provided to us.
CSCtb89353 & CSCtb96601
TAC had told us to get a 7936 and use at least 3-3-21 version firmware. This
was in Jan 2012. I don't believe the client got 7936s yet...
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Scott Voll <[email protected]> wrote:
All of my 7936 conference phones, when you press the corporate directory, come
up with error condition.
they are running: cmterm_7936.3-3-21-0 and my CM is version 8.6.2.22900-9.
I'm not finding a bug when I search. Maybe my searching is bad.
Anyone know how to fix it? all my 796x and 7970 work fine with the corporate
directory.
TIA
Scott
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
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/20130110/33114e4c/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
End of cisco-voip Digest, Vol 111, Issue 9
******************************************
