Agreed :)
Sincerely, Ryan Burtch On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Norton, Mike <[email protected]> wrote: > The thing people always seem to forget about Wi-Fi deployments is this: > > > > “This device complies with part 15 of the FCC Rules. Operation is subject > to the following two conditions: (1) This device may not cause harmful > interference, and (2) this device must accept any interference received, > including interference that may cause undesired operation.” > > > > You have NO CONTROL over the Layer 1 medium and you share it with > everybody. Pretending otherwise is futile. > > > > -mn > > > > *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf > Of *Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) > *Sent:* May-12-16 1:27 PM > *To:* Anthony Holloway <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Cisco VoIP Group <[email protected]> > > *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] [cisco-VoIP] UCCE agents on wireless IP > Communicator? > > > > I’m sure nothing in wireless is as simple as my tiny brain can comprehend > :) > > > > -Ryan > > > > On May 12, 2016, at 2:58 PM, Anthony Holloway < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > I don't think it's that simple Ryan. > > > > The first and most important document is the Enterprise Mobility Design > Guide > > > > Reference Link: > > > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/controller/8-1/Enterprise-Mobility-8-1-Design-Guide/Enterprise_Mobility_8-1_Deployment_Guide.html > > > > However, that document is really big and covers a lot more than just > Jabber. When you get down to the topic at hand, a more manageable and bite > sized version of that document can be read here: > > > > > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/wireless/controller/technotes/8-1/Jabber_in_WLAN/b_Jabber_in_WLAN.html > > > > As a contrast, Jabber on a wired connection, is simply a matter of > matching traffic flows from the client device (PC, Mac, mobile, etc.), and > marking the packets. This allows us to maintain our trust boundary, but > provide an exception for the traffic flows matching Jabber. > > > > Reference Link: > > > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/jabber/10_6/CJAB_BK_C56DE1AB_00_cisco-jabber-106-deployment-and-installation-guide/CJAB_BK_C56DE1AB_00_cisco-jabber-106-deployment-and-installation-guide_appendix_01111.html#CJAB_TK_DD601B77_00 > > > > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) < > [email protected]> wrote: > > The difference between computers and 7925s primarily being that one walks > down the hall and the other sits on a desk. > > If you can keep the PC from roaming then it’s just a matter of proper QOS > and available bandwidth, yes? > > > > -Ryan > > > > On May 12, 2016, at 2:18 PM, NateCCIE <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > But I have yet to see a 7925 deployment that the end users are happy with. > It is seemingly impossible for the wireless guys to get it perfect. > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On May 12, 2016, at 10:29 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I’ll take a slight issue with the original response about CIPC not being > stable over wireless. > > > > I believe the intent of the response is that realtime voice and video over > wireless can be a challenge for a wifi environment that isn’t designed > specifically to handle it. > > > > Personally I’ve used CIPC and now Jabber (as a softphone) for voice and > video calls on my laptop both in the Cisco office and at home with very > little issue. > > The apps themselves can handle the transport just fine, it’s the network > that sometimes can’t handle the apps. > > > > -Ryan > > > > On May 12, 2016, at 7:23 AM, Thomas LeMay <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi, Ryan, > > > > Thank you for the information. > > > > Tom > > > > *From:* Ryan Huff [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 11, 2016 11:15 PM > *To:* Thomas LeMay; 'Ryan Burtch'; 'Nick Barnett' > *Cc:* 'Cisco VoIP Group' > *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] [cisco-VoIP] UCCE agents on wireless IP > Communicator? > > > > Many moons ago in a land called Ohio, I rescued a small agent base from > doing this ... > > > > Aside from the obvious QOS and reliable connection issues; in that > client's case the agents would also occasionally want to use the > speakerphone function without a headset (PC Speaker / Mic) and without an > HD/noise canceling mic this will usually inject audio artifacts from the > speaker into the audio stream. The net effect is duplicated/mis understood > DTMF (when using rtp-nte). > > > > If this is unavoidable though, and your client is going to travel this > path despite all your warnings otherwise; I would recommend the agent's PC > on a separate SSID / Interface from the Corporate SSID / Interface and put > all the agent's PC traffic in the EF queue (or at least trust/mark the CIPC > traffic) and make sure there is adequate radio coverage by each agent. > > > > If the client is looking at this as a telecommute option for employees, > the issues are further exacerbated by the nature of having heterogeneous > wireless connectivity (unless the business standardizes and issues wireless > devices to employees). > > > > Thanks, > > > > = Ryan = > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* cisco-voip <[email protected]> on behalf of > Thomas LeMay <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 11, 2016 10:42 PM > *To:* 'Ryan Burtch'; 'Nick Barnett' > *Cc:* 'Cisco VoIP Group' > *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] [cisco-VoIP] UCCE agents on wireless IP > Communicator? > > > > How about Jabber? Is Jabber stable enough even though it does not support > multiple lines? My thought would be no based on the same reason for CIPC. > > > > Tom > > > > *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] *On Behalf Of *Ryan Burtch > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 11, 2016 2:58 PM > *To:* Nick Barnett > *Cc:* Cisco VoIP Group > *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] UCCE agents on wireless IP Communicator? > > > > This is a terrible idea. CIPC not stable enough on wireless. Introduce VPN > and this is a disaster waiting to happen. > > > > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Ryan Burtch > > > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Nick Barnett <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Does anyone have any experiences running CIPC on wireless for UCCE agents? > It sounds like a...um, bad idea to me. One of my customers is moving to > this "design." > > > > A cursory look at the 10.0 SRND didn't show any hits for "wired" or > "wireless". > > > > thanks, > > Nick > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
