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: Monitoring SIP Trunks (Mark Holloway)
2. Re: UCS Sizing woes (Ki Wi)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 11:35:41 -0400
From: Mark Holloway <[email protected]>
To: Matthew Loraditch <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Monitoring SIP Trunks
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Acme Packet SBC for SIP Trunking
On May 18, 2013, at 9:54 AM, Matthew Loraditch
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Real time reporting, need to know if a carrier trunk is down
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch - CCVP, CCNA, CCDA
>
> 1965 Greenspring Drive
> Timonium, MD 21093
>
> voice. 410.252.8830
> fax. 410.252.9284
>
> Twitter | Facebook | Website | Email Support
> From: Chris Lee [[email protected]]
> Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 8:55 AM
> To: Matthew Loraditch
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Monitoring SIP Trunks
>
> Matthew,
>
> Can I ask...are you looking for real time monitoring or historical reporting?
> Sorry, I only can assist with historical reporting - attached examples...
> This historical reporting is gleaned from your CUCM CDR (hence, historical
> reporting), not from your GW's.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris
>
> Chris Lee
> Variphy, Inc.
> Austin, Texas USA
> Google Voice: +1-70-VARIPHY-4 [708-274-7494] (office)(US Central: GMT-5)
>
> As Leonardo da Vinci once said: ?Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.?
>
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Matthew Loraditch
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> How are people monitoring these? A brief search doesn?t yield an SNMP counter
> for registration status and my carrier?s (Paetec/Windstream) SBC is not
> pingable so I can?t use an IP SLA.
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch ? CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
>
> 1965 Greenspring Drive
> Timonium, MD 21093
>
> voice. 410.252.8830
> fax. 410.252.9284
>
> Twitter | Facebook | Website | Email Support
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130520/7da0bf31/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 23:46:30 +0800
From: Ki Wi <[email protected]>
To: Matthew Saskin <[email protected]>
Cc: "cisco-voip@puck. nether. net" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCS Sizing woes
Message-ID:
<CAMefa2pzrKmas9yXWQ2i=deayzribv3qzczzg+ejs-brahm...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
That's is really sad. It is really a waste of resources especially if we
purchased TRC servers. Hardly those tiny VMs even use near 24gb of memory :(
On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Matthew Saskin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Unfortunately, PCCE is a very special use case tested and approved by the
> CCBU. For all other applications, the rule of no CPU or memory
> oversubscription applies.
> On May 18, 2013 4:39 PM, "Ki Wi" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> All along each C220 server (based on TRC spec), i have sized can only
>> accomodate like 3 to 4 Cisco VM . Partly because C220 is only 8 CPU core.
>> If each VM actually takes up 2 vCPU , i can only squeeze 4 VM. If i have a
>> Unity connection VM, i am able to squeeze only 3 VM since CUC will takes up
>> additional CPU core.
>>
>> I discovered that I might be wrong all along after I have read the PCCE
>> sizing. Looks like if my UCS server have 4 cores , my largest VM needs only
>> 4vCPU for example. As long as the total CPU reservation and memory
>> reservation doesn't hit the limit, i could actually squeeze more VM in? Is
>> this true? I know it is true in VMware world (since i am vcp certified) but
>> I was somehow mislead to believe that each vCPU requirement actually maps
>> to 1 physical core.
>>
>>
>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/pcce/pcce_901/reference/guide/PCCE_BK_PBD08CF9_00_packaged-cce_chapter_00.html
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20130520/579daea7/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
------------------------------
End of cisco-voip Digest, Vol 115, Issue 19
*******************************************
