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: 'interesting' EMCC behavior (Erick Wellnitz)
2. CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID (Tim Smith)
3. Re: CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID (Joe Martini)
4. Re: CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID (Tim Smith)
5. Re: CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID (Ryan Ratliff (rratliff))
6. Re: Cheap Router for 911 (David Zhars)
7. Re: CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID (Tim Smith)
8. Re: CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID (Ryan Ratliff (rratliff))
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 10:48:18 -0500
From: Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>
To: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <[email protected]>
Cc: cisco-voip <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 'interesting' EMCC behavior
Message-ID:
<CAK0wOsC+H=0ajqM_NHsjpsBGS1oH8jxJo987P0SUC=4h0f5...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
The only 'abnormal' thing I see is this:
7739: WRN 09:00:37.178303 SECD: WARN:getTLInfoFromFile: TL signer's issuer
name too big, may truncate
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)
<[email protected]>wrote:
> I it's easier get the console logs there will likely be something there
> to go off.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 4, 2013, at 5:10 PM, "Erick Wellnitz" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> The profile logs in, phone resets, profile gets logged out, phone
> resets and displays 'extension mobility unavailable.
>
> We believe it is somehow related to DNS because when we register a phone
> to one of the 9.1 clusters in the other location login works as expected.
> I haven't had a chance to do a packet capture yet.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> By the way what's the error code that the phone displays? EM has been
>> better than most about having useful errors, even if they are subject to
>> the secret decoder ring.
>>
>> -Ryan
>>
>> On Oct 4, 2013, at 4:10 PM, Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, it is also the primary tftp server.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> System->Server values don't impact certificates. They will impact what
>>> the phone gets in config files so if you aren't using DNS this will be an
>>> issue. Is that pub also the TFTP server that is going to show up in the
>>> mini-config?
>>>
>>> -Ryan
>>>
>>> On Oct 4, 2013, at 1:13 PM, Erick Wellnitz <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I always forget about doing a packet capture on the phone.
>>>
>>> I'm thinking it is cert related because on this one cluster the
>>> Publisher is set up under servers using it's hostname instead of IP while
>>> all the others are using IP.
>>>
>>> We're going to change this once we get approval then re-export,
>>> consolidate and import.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Brian Meade (brmeade) <[email protected]
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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]> 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 ****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20131007/b4ad3395/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 22:00:08 +0000
From: Tim Smith <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID
Message-ID:
<aff7cd64d6b64c1d9f3b41b2a7384...@hknpr04mb051.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi guys,
I've seen some discussion on this already
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/cisco/voip/172472?search_string=owner%20cuwl;#172472
Most clients do not assign owner ID as they use extension mobility.
(I will admit it is true that a lot of mobility users actually stay logged into
the same phone and we could technically assign them as the owner)
Either way, I keep ending up with my licensing in ELM being out of balance due
to having phones and CSF's.
The TAC answer to me was that I should assign an owner ID.
Am I missing something here? Is there another solution?
Cheers,
Tim.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131007/885a0dfd/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 19:08:06 -0400
From: Joe Martini <[email protected]>
To: Tim Smith <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Versions of CUCM that contain the fix for CSCue14471 no longer have this issue.
http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCue14471
Joe
On Oct 7, 2013, at 6:00 PM, Tim Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi guys,
I?ve seen some discussion on this already
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/cisco/voip/172472?search_string=owner%20cuwl;#172472
Most clients do not assign owner ID as they use extension mobility.
(I will admit it is true that a lot of mobility users actually stay logged into
the same phone and we could technically assign them as the owner)
Either way, I keep ending up with my licensing in ELM being out of balance due
to having phones and CSF?s.
The TAC answer to me was that I should assign an owner ID.
Am I missing something here? Is there another solution?
Cheers,
Tim.
_______________________________________________
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/20131007/577710fa/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 23:33:33 +0000
From: Tim Smith <[email protected]>
To: Joe Martini <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID
Message-ID:
<7ecd34e9db2a4b6c9e82f9a614d42...@hknpr04mb051.apcprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Thanks Joe,
I have seen that one before, I'm not sure that is the same issue.
This is in regard to the physical phones not been allocated to a user. (i.e.
assigning phones owner ID's)
This seems to cause a double up for me when I create CSF profiles.
Cheers,
Tim
From: Joe Martini [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, 8 October 2013 10:08 AM
To: Tim Smith
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID
Versions of CUCM that contain the fix for CSCue14471 no longer have this issue.
http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCue14471
Joe
On Oct 7, 2013, at 6:00 PM, Tim Smith
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi guys,
I've seen some discussion on this already
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/cisco/voip/172472?search_string=owner%20cuwl;#172472
Most clients do not assign owner ID as they use extension mobility.
(I will admit it is true that a lot of mobility users actually stay logged into
the same phone and we could technically assign them as the owner)
Either way, I keep ending up with my licensing in ELM being out of balance due
to having phones and CSF's.
The TAC answer to me was that I should assign an owner ID.
Am I missing something here? Is there another solution?
Cheers,
Tim.
_______________________________________________
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/20131007/8beb47a9/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 14:08:50 +0000
From: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <[email protected]>
To: Tim Smith <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
As soon as you add SNR or a soft client to those users you have to double up on
licenses to account for the public space phones.
Today that is the solution and when doing your DLU to ELM conversion you need
to plan accordingly.
-Ryan
On Oct 7, 2013, at 7:33 PM, Tim Smith
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Thanks Joe,
I have seen that one before, I?m not sure that is the same issue.
This is in regard to the physical phones not been allocated to a user. (i.e.
assigning phones owner ID?s)
This seems to cause a double up for me when I create CSF profiles.
Cheers,
Tim
From: Joe Martini [mailto:[email protected]<http://cisco.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, 8 October 2013 10:08 AM
To: Tim Smith
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID
Versions of CUCM that contain the fix for CSCue14471 no longer have this issue.
http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCue14471
Joe
On Oct 7, 2013, at 6:00 PM, Tim Smith
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi guys,
I?ve seen some discussion on this already
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/cisco/voip/172472?search_string=owner%20cuwl;#172472
Most clients do not assign owner ID as they use extension mobility.
(I will admit it is true that a lot of mobility users actually stay logged into
the same phone and we could technically assign them as the owner)
Either way, I keep ending up with my licensing in ELM being out of balance due
to having phones and CSF?s.
The TAC answer to me was that I should assign an owner ID.
Am I missing something here? Is there another solution?
Cheers,
Tim.
_______________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131008/da0ffbe2/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 10:13:47 -0400
From: David Zhars <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Cheap Router for 911
Message-ID:
<CADe=jTHKWdd7j2oqaoFgmQ0OkSOSsofQDCDAQ7=kp45qvrd...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Thanks everyone!
I'll go with the 881 router. Looks good for cost.
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Eric Pedersen
<[email protected]>wrote:
> We use the 881V in a couple of locations and it is quite good. It has 4
> FXS ports for fax lines too.****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf
> Of *Nick Matthews
> *Sent:* 28 September 2013 9:03 PM
> *To:* Norton, Mike
>
> *Cc:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cheap Router for 911****
>
> ** **
>
> There are also options like the 881V that can handle PSTN (and SRST
> connections) that may be a good fit. Otherwise like others mentioned there
> are E-911 and assorted other options.
>
> -nick****
>
> ** **
>
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Norton, Mike <[email protected]>
> wrote:****
>
> Whether or not you can do this may depend on the terms of service with the
> provider. I know with PS-ALI service from Telus, simply forwarding the DIDs
> to ?someone? is not sufficient. Their tariff document for PS-ALI service
> specifically states that the DID must ring to the station that placed the
> 911 call.****
>
> ****
>
> -- ****
>
> Mike Norton****
>
> I.T. Specialist****
>
> Peace Wapiti School Division No. 76****
>
> ****
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf
> Of *Lelio Fulgenzi
> *Sent:* September-27-13 8:20 AM****
>
>
> *To:* David Zhars
> *Cc:* [email protected]****
>
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cheap Router for 911****
>
> ****
>
>
> ok, from what I understand, you don't have to _physically_ send the 911
> call over that line for things to work. you just need and address attached
> to the number you're marking the calls with. here's how we do it.****
>
> - signed a waiver with our PSTN provider so they lift the filter and
> allow us to mark outbound calls with ANY number****
> - signed up for a PS-ALI service with another provider so we can enter
> any address for any DID****
> - DIDs are configured to ring through to our campus security****
>
> you can probably do the same with a 1FL installed at each building, and
> then forward the calls to a DID that is answered by someone. ****
>
> ****
>
> not perfect, but it might buy you some time.****
>
> ****
>
> not the answer you're looking for, but a different perspective.****
>
> ****
>
> Lelio****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst, Data Centre and Communications Facilities
> Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
> University of Guelph
>
> 519?824?4120 Ext 56354
> [email protected]
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
> Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
> Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1****
>
> ****
> ------------------------------
>
> *From: *"David Zhars" <[email protected]>
> *To: *[email protected]
> *Sent: *Friday, September 27, 2013 9:10:04 AM
> *Subject: *[cisco-voip] Cheap Router for 911****
>
> Have a site with a 8 port 3560 router. Wired via fiber to another
> building with UCM 8.0.****
>
> What's a cheap little router I can add to this site for 911? Not worried
> about SRST, but proper address reporting for 911 would be nice!
>
> My VAR is recommending the 2901 which looks like total overkill.****
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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****
>
> ** **
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131008/1ee288a7/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 14:25:53 +0000
From: Tim Smith <[email protected]>
To: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Thanks Ryan
Does that mean we should ask licensing for a public space lic per em phone?
We don't actually need to buy more licenses right?
Cheers,
Tim
On 9 Oct 2013, at 1:09 am, "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
As soon as you add SNR or a soft client to those users you have to double up on
licenses to account for the public space phones.
Today that is the solution and when doing your DLU to ELM conversion you need
to plan accordingly.
-Ryan
On Oct 7, 2013, at 7:33 PM, Tim Smith
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Thanks Joe,
I have seen that one before, I'm not sure that is the same issue.
This is in regard to the physical phones not been allocated to a user. (i.e.
assigning phones owner ID's)
This seems to cause a double up for me when I create CSF profiles.
Cheers,
Tim
From: Joe Martini [mailto:[email protected]<http://cisco.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, 8 October 2013 10:08 AM
To: Tim Smith
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID
Versions of CUCM that contain the fix for CSCue14471 no longer have this issue.
http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCue14471
Joe
On Oct 7, 2013, at 6:00 PM, Tim Smith
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi guys,
I've seen some discussion on this already
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/cisco/voip/172472?search_string=owner%20cuwl;#172472
Most clients do not assign owner ID as they use extension mobility.
(I will admit it is true that a lot of mobility users actually stay logged into
the same phone and we could technically assign them as the owner)
Either way, I keep ending up with my licensing in ELM being out of balance due
to having phones and CSF's.
The TAC answer to me was that I should assign an owner ID.
Am I missing something here? Is there another solution?
Cheers,
Tim.
_______________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131008/c38889ee/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2013 14:41:25 +0000
From: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <[email protected]>
To: Tim Smith <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
I recommend when looking at the User Count Tool or whatever tool you are using
to do your license migration (before the upgrade) you should count your public
space phones as a separate user that will require a license.
I understand Licensing is being very generous for current migrations however I
would pay careful attention to what you ask for and what you get as compared to
what you currently pay for so there are no big surprises at your next renewal.
-Ryan
On Oct 8, 2013, at 10:25 AM, Tim Smith
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Thanks Ryan
Does that mean we should ask licensing for a public space lic per em phone?
We don't actually need to buy more licenses right?
Cheers,
Tim
On 9 Oct 2013, at 1:09 am, "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
As soon as you add SNR or a soft client to those users you have to double up on
licenses to account for the public space phones.
Today that is the solution and when doing your DLU to ELM conversion you need
to plan accordingly.
-Ryan
On Oct 7, 2013, at 7:33 PM, Tim Smith
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Thanks Joe,
I have seen that one before, I?m not sure that is the same issue.
This is in regard to the physical phones not been allocated to a user. (i.e.
assigning phones owner ID?s)
This seems to cause a double up for me when I create CSF profiles.
Cheers,
Tim
From: Joe Martini [mailto:[email protected]<http://cisco.com/>]
Sent: Tuesday, 8 October 2013 10:08 AM
To: Tim Smith
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 9.x ELM and Owner ID
Versions of CUCM that contain the fix for CSCue14471 no longer have this issue.
http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCue14471
Joe
On Oct 7, 2013, at 6:00 PM, Tim Smith
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi guys,
I?ve seen some discussion on this already
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/cisco/voip/172472?search_string=owner%20cuwl;#172472
Most clients do not assign owner ID as they use extension mobility.
(I will admit it is true that a lot of mobility users actually stay logged into
the same phone and we could technically assign them as the owner)
Either way, I keep ending up with my licensing in ELM being out of balance due
to having phones and CSF?s.
The TAC answer to me was that I should assign an owner ID.
Am I missing something here? Is there another solution?
Cheers,
Tim.
_______________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20131008/791e8eaf/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 8
******************************************
