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. Verizon and MCID (Lisa Notarianni)
2. Re: Verizon and MCID (Ryan Ratliff (rratliff))
3. Re: Verizon and MCID (Norton, Mike)
4. 6961 with Shared Lines, any way to tell if say Line 5 has
voicemail (Jason Aarons (AM))
5. 'interesting' EMCC behavior (Erick Wellnitz)
6. Re: 'interesting' EMCC behavior (Stephen Welsh)
7. Re: 'interesting' EMCC behavior (Jason Aarons (AM))
8. Re: 'interesting' EMCC behavior (Anthony Holloway)
9. Re: 6961 with Shared Lines, any way to tell if say Line 5 has
voicemail (Ryan Ratliff (rratliff))
10. Re: 'interesting' EMCC behavior (Jason Aarons (AM))
11. Re: 'interesting' EMCC behavior (Erick Wellnitz)
12. Re: 'interesting' EMCC behavior (Erick Wellnitz)
13. Re: 'interesting' EMCC behavior (Jason Aarons (AM))
14. Re: 'interesting' EMCC behavior (Brian Meade (brmeade))
15. Re: DTMF Method Stripped on reINVITE | CUCM 8.6.2
(Divin John (dijohn))
16. Xlite SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6 (vignesh sethuraman)
17. Bulk insert E164 DID (Pavan K)
18. Re: Xlite SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6 (vignesh sethuraman)
19. Re: Bulk insert E164 DID (Tim Smith)
20. Re: Xlite SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6 (Kenneth Hayes)
21. Re: Xlite SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6 (Mark Holloway)
22. Re: Bulk insert E164 DID (Tim Smith)
23. 7975 with single or double footstand to wall? (Jason Aarons (AM))
24. Re: Bulk insert E164 DID (Nate VanMaren)
25. Re: Bulk insert E164 DID (Anthony Holloway)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 16:29:48 +0000
From: Lisa Notarianni <[email protected]>
To: "cisco-voip ([email protected])"
<[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Verizon and MCID
Message-ID:
<b1d1594f698e684db83c15828d282dd8746e3...@sn2prd0310mb359.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
CUCM 8.6.6
We are planning on implementing the MCID feature on all phones in case of a
Malicious Call so we can then have a call tagged. Since there are 2 parts to
the tagging?
1. In CUCM
2. At Verizon (our PRI carrier)
- we have tried working with Verizon on enabling this feature and they
are having a hard time figuring it out.
Our questions is ? do we really need Verizon involved in a Malicious Call
anyway? Will our call data from CUCM that we report on hold up in a court of
law if there was an emergency such as a bomb threat or other type of serious
threat?
Has anyone else ever dealt with this situation?
Thanks.
[LisaNotarianniSignature]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/3f17f8e6/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 10828 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/3f17f8e6/attachment-0001.gif>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 17:38:55 +0000
From: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <[email protected]>
To: Lisa Notarianni <[email protected]>
Cc: "cisco-voip \([email protected]\)"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Verizon and MCID
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
You'll need the provider if the caller masks their caller id or you need to
trace the call beyond CUCM for any reason.
Have you tried talking to these folks at Verizon? It's a residential link but
they may know how to activate the feature for trunks.
http://www.verizon.com/Support/Residential/phone/homephone/general+support/support+tools/general/95622.htm
-Ryan
On Oct 3, 2013, at 12:29 PM, Lisa Notarianni
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
CUCM 8.6.6
We are planning on implementing the MCID feature on all phones in case of a
Malicious Call so we can then have a call tagged. Since there are 2 parts to
the tagging?
1. In CUCM
2. At Verizon (our PRI carrier)
- we have tried working with Verizon on enabling this feature and they
are having a hard time figuring it out.
Our questions is ? do we really need Verizon involved in a Malicious Call
anyway? Will our call data from CUCM that we report on hold up in a court of
law if there was an emergency such as a bomb threat or other type of serious
threat?
Has anyone else ever dealt with this situation?
Thanks.
<image001.gif>
_______________________________________________
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/20131003/69e3aff2/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 18:23:03 +0000
From: "Norton, Mike" <[email protected]>
To: Lisa Notarianni <[email protected]>, "cisco-voip
([email protected])" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Verizon and MCID
Message-ID:
<2c4107b204f8e74eb0a63ef59b0f970212c45...@pwsdexchange06.pwsb33.ab.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I am not a lawyer but everybody here ought to know that Caller ID is as easy to
fake as the return address on an envelope. It would probably only hold up in
court if the defense council doesn?t think of point this fact out to the court.
When you initiate an official trace with the carrier, they?re not just looking
at the Caller ID.
-mn
From: cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Lisa
Notarianni
Sent: October-03-13 10:30 AM
To: cisco-voip ([email protected])
Subject: [cisco-voip] Verizon and MCID
CUCM 8.6.6
We are planning on implementing the MCID feature on all phones in case of a
Malicious Call so we can then have a call tagged. Since there are 2 parts to
the tagging?
1. In CUCM
2. At Verizon (our PRI carrier)
- we have tried working with Verizon on enabling this feature and they
are having a hard time figuring it out.
Our questions is ? do we really need Verizon involved in a Malicious Call
anyway? Will our call data from CUCM that we report on hold up in a court of
law if there was an emergency such as a bomb threat or other type of serious
threat?
Has anyone else ever dealt with this situation?
Thanks.
[LisaNotarianniSignature]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/f872b670/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 10828 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/f872b670/attachment-0001.gif>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 14:34:13 -0400
From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>
To: "cisco-voip ([email protected])"
<[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] 6961 with Shared Lines, any way to tell if say
Line 5 has voicemail
Message-ID:
<4e38db0a1959b04c8c83edcf069b53ed0d3bc1b...@usispclexdb01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
CCM 9.1
I am a secretary and have a SIP 6961 with Shared lines down the right side
(this is the model phone with the white paper labels).
Is there any way I can see if say Line 5 has a voicemail? Normally a 7975
would have a voicemail icon.
Can I make the 6961 Line 5 flash or have another color, etc? Stutter dialtone
on that line?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/23d214cf/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 13:50:25 -0500
From: Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>
To: cisco-voip <[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
Message-ID:
<CAK0wOsDroWRED23j=kypxefd_vu9m7shwog_tcnvbyfwsao...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I have a strange situation.
3 Clusters. 2 on 9.1 and the other on 8.5 EMCC works except with users
configured on the 8.5 cluster. The profile logs in then immediately logs
out without an error message.
Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/6795c885/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 18:54:12 +0000
From: Stephen Welsh <[email protected]>
To: Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>
Cc: cisco-voip <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
You could make sure the bulk certificate export/import to/from the UCM 8.5
cluster is valid?
Obviously check the Extension Mobility Service logs on the 8.5 system.
Stephen
On 3 Oct 2013, at 19:50, Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have a strange situation.
>
> 3 Clusters. 2 on 9.1 and the other on 8.5 EMCC works except with users
> configured on the 8.5 cluster. The profile logs in then immediately logs out
> without an error message.
>
> Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 15:16:54 -0400
From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>
To: Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>, cisco-voip
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
Message-ID:
<4e38db0a1959b04c8c83edcf069b53ed0d3bc1b...@usispclexdb01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
The logs for that service collected via RTMT are extremely easy to read thur.
I'd pull the logs.
From: cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Erick
Wellnitz
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 2:50 PM
To: cisco-voip
Subject: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
I have a strange situation.
3 Clusters. 2 on 9.1 and the other on 8.5 EMCC works except with users
configured on the 8.5 cluster. The profile logs in then immediately logs out
without an error message.
Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!
itevomcid
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/10d2c535/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 14:38:45 -0500
From: Anthony Holloway <[email protected]>
To: Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>
Cc: cisco-voip <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
Message-ID:
<cacrcjohr6plu9xfwbcxbps5yd2psb0jmhhqntt_chtxdt7v...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I have one idea.
EMCC does not work very well in 8.5 because you cannot "home" a user to a
cluster. Therefore, if your LDAP integrations are the same for each
cluster, it would be impossible to know which cluster the user is homed
to. 9.1 on the other hand has this feature on the end user page, and thus
overcomes this limitation.
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>wrote:
> I have a strange situation.
>
> 3 Clusters. 2 on 9.1 and the other on 8.5 EMCC works except with users
> configured on the 8.5 cluster. The profile logs in then immediately logs
> out without an error message.
>
> Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131003/2c0173b7/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 19:48:28 +0000
From: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <[email protected]>
To: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>
Cc: "cisco-voip \([email protected]\)"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 6961 with Shared Lines, any way to tell if
say Line 5 has voicemail
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
6961 should have a stutter tone for the line(s) with voicemails and a text
message on the LCD.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cuipph/6921_6941_6961/8_0/english/user/guide/book/messages.html#wpmkr1006931
-Ryan
On Oct 3, 2013, at 2:34 PM, Jason Aarons (AM)
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
CCM 9.1
I am a secretary and have a SIP 6961 with Shared lines down the right side
(this is the model phone with the white paper labels).
Is there any way I can see if say Line 5 has a voicemail? Normally a 7975
would have a voicemail icon.
Can I make the 6961 Line 5 flash or have another color, etc? Stutter dialtone
on that line?
_______________________________________________
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/20131003/ff330d01/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 16:41:17 -0400
From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>
To: Anthony Holloway <[email protected]>, Erick Wellnitz
<[email protected]>
Cc: cisco-voip <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
Message-ID:
<4e38db0a1959b04c8c83edcf069b53ed0d3bc1b...@usispclexdb01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I was using 8.6 the first time I setup EMCC to another 8.6 box.
From: cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Anthony Holloway
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 3:39 PM
To: Erick Wellnitz
Cc: cisco-voip
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
I have one idea.
EMCC does not work very well in 8.5 because you cannot "home" a user to a
cluster. Therefore, if your LDAP integrations are the same for each cluster,
it would be impossible to know which cluster the user is homed to. 9.1 on the
other hand has this feature on the end user page, and thus overcomes this
limitation.
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Erick Wellnitz
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I have a strange situation.
3 Clusters. 2 on 9.1 and the other on 8.5 EMCC works except with users
configured on the 8.5 cluster. The profile logs in then immediately logs out
without an error message.
Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
itevomcid
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/4aa74692/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 15:08:45 -0500
From: Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>
To: Anthony Holloway <[email protected]>
Cc: cisco-voip <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
Message-ID:
<CAK0wOsCGu=uCfCMZnFQ=ekovwe6d0gi2uc3nksu2fd_qakx...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
This had crossed my mind. The EM traces don't show anything unusual.
Successful authentication, selected proper UDP, etc...Re-exported,
consolidated and imported bulk certs.
I think I may build a LDAP filter to get rid of the users from that cluster
and see what happens. I can always remove the filter to restore them to
the directory.
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Anthony Holloway <
[email protected]> wrote:
> I have one idea.
>
> EMCC does not work very well in 8.5 because you cannot "home" a user to a
> cluster. Therefore, if your LDAP integrations are the same for each
> cluster, it would be impossible to know which cluster the user is homed
> to. 9.1 on the other hand has this feature on the end user page, and thus
> overcomes this limitation.
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> I have a strange situation.
>>
>> 3 Clusters. 2 on 9.1 and the other on 8.5 EMCC works except with users
>> configured on the 8.5 cluster. The profile logs in then immediately logs
>> out without an error message.
>>
>> Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20131003/5ff8a2c1/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 16:00:33 -0500
From: Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>
To: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>
Cc: cisco-voip <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
Message-ID:
<cak0wosd-6c9_se3yzaduwskyayfsd-h03unef6--8_3iued...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
That's the odd thing. All of the traces look like it is successful but the
phone (7965) resets, logs the user out and displays a message that
extension mobility is not available without an error code. I get similar
behavior on the 8945 but without the message.
I've gon through the EMCC guide a number of times and nothing sticks out as
obvious.
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Jason Aarons (AM) <
[email protected]> wrote:
> I was using 8.6 the first time I setup EMCC to another 8.6 box.****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf
> Of *Anthony Holloway
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 03, 2013 3:39 PM
> *To:* Erick Wellnitz
> *Cc:* cisco-voip
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> I have one idea.****
>
> EMCC does not work very well in 8.5 because you cannot "home" a user to a
> cluster. Therefore, if your LDAP integrations are the same for each
> cluster, it would be impossible to know which cluster the user is homed
> to. 9.1 on the other hand has this feature on the end user page, and thus
> overcomes this limitation.****
>
> ** **
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>
> wrote:****
>
> I have a strange situation.****
>
> ****
>
> 3 Clusters. 2 on 9.1 and the other on 8.5 EMCC works except with users
> configured on the 8.5 cluster. The profile logs in then immediately logs
> out without an error message.****
>
> ****
>
> Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!****
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip****
>
> ** **
>
>
>
> itevomcid ****
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/0bf4030d/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 17:32:22 -0400
From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>
To: Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>
Cc: cisco-voip <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
Message-ID:
<4e38db0a1959b04c8c83edcf069b53ed0d3bc1b...@usispclexdb01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Does the phone's console log (http://phoneip) work?
From: Erick Wellnitz [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 5:01 PM
To: Jason Aarons (AM)
Cc: Anthony Holloway; cisco-voip
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
That's the odd thing. All of the traces look like it is successful but the
phone (7965) resets, logs the user out and displays a message that extension
mobility is not available without an error code. I get similar behavior on the
8945 but without the message.
I've gon through the EMCC guide a number of times and nothing sticks out as
obvious.
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Jason Aarons (AM)
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I was using 8.6 the first time I setup EMCC to another 8.6 box.
From: cisco-voip
[mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
On Behalf Of Anthony Holloway
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 3:39 PM
To: Erick Wellnitz
Cc: cisco-voip
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
I have one idea.
EMCC does not work very well in 8.5 because you cannot "home" a user to a
cluster. Therefore, if your LDAP integrations are the same for each cluster,
it would be impossible to know which cluster the user is homed to. 9.1 on the
other hand has this feature on the end user page, and thus overcomes this
limitation.
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Erick Wellnitz
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I have a strange situation.
3 Clusters. 2 on 9.1 and the other on 8.5 EMCC works except with users
configured on the 8.5 cluster. The profile logs in then immediately logs out
without an error message.
Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
itevomcid
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/d2c1a122/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 21:49:53 +0000
From: "Brian Meade (brmeade)" <[email protected]>
To: Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>, "Jason Aarons (AM)"
<[email protected]>
Cc: cisco-voip <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Erick,
Can you grab a packet capture from the phone trying to log in? The packet
captures seem to show the EMCC issues very clearly. You should see after the
login, the phone will download its mini-config with the new TFTP server info.
You'll then see it try to download its ITL from the other cluster. If you
don't see the phone request anything after that, most likely it didn't trust
the signer of the ITL and it will show the "Extension Mobility is unavailable"
error message.
Usually that means you need to do a Re-Export, Consolidate, Import of the
certificates.
Brian Meade
From: cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Erick
Wellnitz
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 5:01 PM
To: Jason Aarons (AM)
Cc: cisco-voip
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
That's the odd thing. All of the traces look like it is successful but the
phone (7965) resets, logs the user out and displays a message that extension
mobility is not available without an error code. I get similar behavior on the
8945 but without the message.
I've gon through the EMCC guide a number of times and nothing sticks out as
obvious.
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Jason Aarons (AM)
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I was using 8.6 the first time I setup EMCC to another 8.6 box.
From: cisco-voip
[mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
On Behalf Of Anthony Holloway
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 3:39 PM
To: Erick Wellnitz
Cc: cisco-voip
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
I have one idea.
EMCC does not work very well in 8.5 because you cannot "home" a user to a
cluster. Therefore, if your LDAP integrations are the same for each cluster,
it would be impossible to know which cluster the user is homed to. 9.1 on the
other hand has this feature on the end user page, and thus overcomes this
limitation.
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Erick Wellnitz
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I have a strange situation.
3 Clusters. 2 on 9.1 and the other on 8.5 EMCC works except with users
configured on the 8.5 cluster. The profile logs in then immediately logs out
without an error message.
Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
itevomcid
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/11d30f7c/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 23:06:54 +0000
From: "Divin John (dijohn)" <[email protected]>
To: Daniel Pagan <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] DTMF Method Stripped on reINVITE | CUCM
8.6.2
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Closing the loop on this one:
Defects on CUCM caused this.
CSCtr99004 , CSCtw91193 and CSCtr79913 is needed to fix this.
Regards,
Divin
From: Daniel Pagan <[email protected]>
Date: Thursday, 8 August 2013 8:55 PM
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] DTMF Method Stripped on reINVITE | CUCM 8.6.2
Folks:
I?m looking at an interesting issue where CUCM is stripping DTMF method from
a reINVITE and I?m wondering if you?ve seen this before. Topology is pretty
simple: CUCM ==SIPTrunk==VerizonSBC. CUBE is not involved in this scenario
for this particular environment (different issue, different story). Audio
cut-through is successful but no DTMF method is established.
The transaction flows is as follows (Call-ID header and IP addresses
omitted):
INVITE ?SBC ? Early Offer in use
..
?.
t=0 0
m=audio 27030 RTP/AVP 0 8 18 101
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
a=ptime:20
a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000
a=ptime:20
a=rtpmap:18 G729/8000
a=ptime:20
a=fmtp:18 annexb=no
a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
a=fmtp:101 0-15
==========================
200 ? SBC ? Containing SDP w/ reordered, preferred codecs
..
?..
v=0
o=BroadWorks 492305543 1 IN IP4 10.15.5.119
s=-
c=IN IP4 10.15.5.119
t=0 0
a=sqn: 0
a=cdsc: 1 image udptl t38
m=audio 41194 RTP/AVP 0 18 8 101
a=ptime:20
a=fmtp:18 annexb=no
a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
a=fmtp:101 0-15
==========================
CUCM ACK?s the 200 (omitted) to close the transaction and sends a reINVITE
with a single codec but no DTMF method:
v=0
o=CiscoSystemsCCM-SIP 962515 2 IN IP4 10.15.81.106
s=SIP Call
c=IN IP4 10.17.66.123
b=TIAS:64000
b=AS:64
t=0 0
m=audio 27030 RTP/AVP 0
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
a=ptime:20
=========================
The SIP trunk is configured for DTMF method of No Preference. I also see no
MTP allocation attempts from MediaManager in SDI traces which makes me think
we?re not dealing with a media negotiation failure. Other SBC?s in this
environment perform an early cut-through of audio via 183s to CUCM resulting
in no issues. It seems to me the solution would be to force the SBC to send
a 200 answer w/ only a single codec in its SDP, theoretically eliminating
the need for a reINVITE. But unfortunately this isn?t possible since the
provider is adhering to the Answer/Offer Model RFC:
?For streams marked as sendrecv in the answer,
the "m=" line MUST contain at least one codec the answerer is willing
to both send and receive, from amongst those listed in the offer.?
Any thoughts on why CUCM would be stripping the DTMF method from its
reINVITE? Again, I see no MTP allocation requests from MediaManager, so I
doubt it?s the result of a negotiation failure. Setting the SIP Trunk?s DTMF
method from No Preference to RFC2833 results in the same problem. Lastly, a
bug scrub didn?t come back with anything that matched the symptoms spot on.
CUCM is 8.6.2.
Thanks ahead of time!
Daniel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/f9b5f13c/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5533 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131003/f9b5f13c/attachment-0001.p7s>
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 20:31:44 +0800 (SGT)
From: vignesh sethuraman <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Xlite SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Dear All,
I was trying to register Xlite-4 SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6. I followed the blog
post?http://www.markholloway.com/blog/?p=1111.
I created a seperate Device Security Profile with "Digest Authentication"
enabled instead of SIP Trunk Security Profile as shown in the blog and selected
it as the Device Security Profile for the Xlite.
Xlite-4 SIP phone is not registering to the CUCM.?
Could you please help.
Thanks,
Vignesh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131004/f3f86dcc/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 07:47:56 -0500
From: Pavan K <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: [cisco-voip] Bulk insert E164 DID
Message-ID:
<cajdpbuvjyfgrcity9btj9awhtumcprwxpmuvsqmnq2yxym8...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Folks,
If i need to bulk insert 1000 sequential e164 directory numbers in ucm 9.1,
what's the best way to do that ?
I can't use the bulk insert on the directory number page as it rejects
numbers that start with +
I can't seem to use BAT as these numbers don't have phones associated with
them and consequently no Mac addresses for bulk insert of DN.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131004/36d99303/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 21:41:31 +0800 (SGT)
From: vignesh sethuraman <[email protected]>
To: Kenneth Hayes <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Xlite SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
yes kenneth...did that already.
I am getting an error stating "Account failed to enable".
Thanks,
Vignesh
________________________________
From: Kenneth Hayes <[email protected]>
To: vignesh sethuraman <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, 4 October 2013 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Xlite SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6
Have you assigned the user ID to the phone and the SIP realm config to the
phone as well?
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 4, 2013, at 8:32 AM, vignesh sethuraman <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear All,
>
>
>I was trying to register Xlite-4 SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6. I followed the blog
>post?http://www.markholloway.com/blog/?p=1111.
>
>
>I created a seperate Device Security Profile with "Digest Authentication"
>enabled instead of SIP Trunk Security Profile as shown in the blog and
>selected it as the Device Security Profile for the Xlite.
>
>
>Xlite-4 SIP phone is not registering to the CUCM.?
>
>
>
>Could you please help.
>
>
>Thanks,
>Vignesh
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
>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/20131004/eac54d0d/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 19
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 23:55:46 +1000
From: Tim Smith <[email protected]>
To: Pavan K <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk insert E164 DID
Message-ID:
<cafhhszdbvx1ajt0vyx6mzzmejk1yztqetnb-iw7ya+npqhr...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi there
Why not just insert dummy phones (use dummy macs) with bat. Delete the
phones after.
Curious, why have the dns without phones? Is it for pre provisioning?
Diversions? Or could these be translation patterns?
Cheers,
Tim
On Friday, 4 October 2013, Pavan K wrote:
> Folks,
> If i need to bulk insert 1000 sequential e164 directory numbers in ucm
> 9.1, what's the best way to do that ?
>
> I can't use the bulk insert on the directory number page as it rejects
> numbers that start with +
>
> I can't seem to use BAT as these numbers don't have phones associated with
> them and consequently no Mac addresses for bulk insert of DN.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131004/92a7e44a/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 20
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 08:37:44 -0400
From: Kenneth Hayes <[email protected]>
To: vignesh sethuraman <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Xlite SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6
Message-ID: <8309249781118118971@unknownmsgid>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Have you assigned the user ID to the phone and the SIP realm config to the
phone as well?
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 4, 2013, at 8:32 AM, vignesh sethuraman <[email protected]>
wrote:
Dear All,
I was trying to register Xlite-4 SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6. I followed the blog
post http://www.markholloway.com/blog/?p=1111.
I created a seperate Device Security Profile with "Digest Authentication"
enabled instead of SIP Trunk Security Profile as shown in the blog and
selected it as the Device Security Profile for the Xlite.
Xlite-4 SIP phone is not registering to the CUCM.
Could you please help.
Thanks,
Vignesh
_______________________________________________
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/20131004/8e1a2554/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 21
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 10:32:35 -0400
From: Mark Holloway <[email protected]>
To: vignesh sethuraman <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Xlite SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
You may have to go under Topology and click Use Local IP, and disable STUN,
ICE, etc.. I also recommend going to Advanced and turn off SIP Keepalive. Use
Wireshark to capture SIP registration attempts.
On Oct 4, 2013, at 9:41 AM, vignesh sethuraman <[email protected]> wrote:
> yes kenneth...did that already.
>
> I am getting an error stating "Account failed to enable".
>
> Thanks,
> Vignesh
>
> From: Kenneth Hayes <[email protected]>
> To: vignesh sethuraman <[email protected]>
> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, 4 October 2013 2:37 PM
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Xlite SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6
>
> Have you assigned the user ID to the phone and the SIP realm config to the
> phone as well?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 4, 2013, at 8:32 AM, vignesh sethuraman <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I was trying to register Xlite-4 SIP Phone to CUCM 8.6. I followed the blog
>> post http://www.markholloway.com/blog/?p=1111.
>>
>> I created a seperate Device Security Profile with "Digest Authentication"
>> enabled instead of SIP Trunk Security Profile as shown in the blog and
>> selected it as the Device Security Profile for the Xlite.
>>
>> Xlite-4 SIP phone is not registering to the CUCM.
>>
>> Could you please help.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Vignesh
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20131004/89518916/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 22
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 23:56:55 +1000
From: Tim Smith <[email protected]>
To: Pavan K <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk insert E164 DID
Message-ID:
<CAFHHszdg17QQ8xmeSyJcF4hMCKUeOgHih=9sn=osz6rz4tm...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Oh also, can you escape the + in bulk insert?
I.e. \+
Cheers,
Tim
On Friday, 4 October 2013, Pavan K wrote:
> Folks,
> If i need to bulk insert 1000 sequential e164 directory numbers in ucm
> 9.1, what's the best way to do that ?
>
> I can't use the bulk insert on the directory number page as it rejects
> numbers that start with +
>
> I can't seem to use BAT as these numbers don't have phones associated with
> them and consequently no Mac addresses for bulk insert of DN.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131004/70ecbaac/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 23
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 11:08:08 -0400
From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <[email protected]>
To: "cisco-voip ([email protected])"
<[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] 7975 with single or double footstand to wall?
Message-ID:
<4e38db0a1959b04c8c83edcf069b53ed0d3bc1b...@usispclexdb01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Any third-party solutions to put a 7975 with double sidecars (7916) on a wall??
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131004/4799ed01/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 24
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 13:56:57 +0000
From: Nate VanMaren <[email protected]>
To: Pavan K <[email protected]>, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk insert E164 DID
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Are you doing the \ in front of the +?
From: cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Pavan
K
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2013 6:48 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [cisco-voip] Bulk insert E164 DID
Folks,
If i need to bulk insert 1000 sequential e164 directory numbers in ucm 9.1,
what's the best way to do that ?
I can't use the bulk insert on the directory number page as it rejects numbers
that start with +
I can't seem to use BAT as these numbers don't have phones associated with them
and consequently no Mac addresses for bulk insert of DN.
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/20131004/f013add4/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 25
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 10:17:44 -0500
From: Anthony Holloway <[email protected]>
To: Tim Smith <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk insert E164 DID
Message-ID:
<CACRCJOguFM+HiXaGua_b=3s_ljswwcvbtuw4gngjozla0te...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hi Tim, I know you are asking Pavan, but that is exactly how I tested, and
it still failed with my previously documented error message.
Starting DN number can only contain digits when performing bulk insert.
Here is the source code which performs the validation on DN bulk insert.
You should notice that the parseInt() function creates a number from a
string, and therefore, "\+16125551212" would not pass this check. Possible
feature enhancement? Maybe.
var startNum = parseInt(elStart.value);
var endNum = parseInt(elEnd.value);
if (isNaN(startNum))
{
showValidationError(elStart, 'Starting DN number can only
contain digits when performing bulk insert.', 1);
return false;
}
if (isNaN(endNum))
{
showValidationError(elEnd, 'Ending DN number can only
contain digits when performing bulk insert.', 1);
return false;
}
// make sure start and end range is valid
if (startNum > endNum)
{
showValidationError(elStart, 'Invalid DN Range.', 1);
return false;
}
// make sure no more than 500 DNs max can be inserted
var totaldn = endNum - startNum + 1;
if (totaldn > 500)
{
var msg = 'Invalid DN Range.';
msg += 'Only 500 directory numbers can be inserted at one time.';
showValidationError(elStart, msg, 1);
return false;
}
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Tim Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> Oh also, can you escape the + in bulk insert?
> I.e. \+
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tim
>
> On Friday, 4 October 2013, Pavan K wrote:
>
>> Folks,
>> If i need to bulk insert 1000 sequential e164 directory numbers in ucm
>> 9.1, what's the best way to do that ?
>>
>> I can't use the bulk insert on the directory number page as it rejects
>> numbers that start with +
>>
>> I can't seem to use BAT as these numbers don't have phones associated
>> with them and consequently no Mac addresses for bulk insert of DN.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131004/fd5dc165/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 120, Issue 4
******************************************
