My guess is either RIS or DNS resolution is acting wonky for the gateway.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 17, 2017, at 2:45 PM, Scott Voll 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

sh ccm shows they resolve and are registered to the sub and backup to the pub.

That is the wierd thing.  as some voice ports show the sub and some the pub....

we are looking at restarting the RIS data collector........

Scott


On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Evgeny Izetov 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Can those VGs resolve the FQDNs? My guess they wouldn't even register if they 
couldn't but maybe they are keeping some sort of 'last known good' 
configuration.

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Jeffrey McHugh 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Sometimes restarting RIS data collector can clear registration anomalies

From: Scott Voll [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 1:58 PM
To: Brian Meade <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: Jeffrey McHugh <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] vg224 registered to two different Cm's

yup.... but did changed from IP to FQDN on the cluster..

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Brian Meade 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Same Device Pool on all the ports?

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:55 PM, Scott Voll 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
sorry, mgcp...... did a no mgcp and mgcp.  no change

reset from CM and all registered to cmsub reset but the once on the pub didn't.

CM shows good replication on the DB's.  it's the wierdest thing I've seen.

Scott


On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 10:17 AM, Brian Meade 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Try resetting all the ports from CUCM then maybe bounce SCCP on the VG if that 
still didn't work.

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Scott Voll 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
All are in the same DP.  we just changed from IP to FQDN over the weekend.  Any 
other thoughts?

Scott


On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Jeffrey McHugh 
<jmchugh<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Pretty sure you can assign device pools to the specific ports, different DP's 
may have diff. call mgr groups

From: cisco-voip 
[mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
 On Behalf Of Scott Voll
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 12:38 PM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: [cisco-voip] vg224 registered to two different Cm's

How can some ports on a VG register to the pub and some to the Sub on the same 
VG?

totally confused on this one.

CM 10.5.2 /  VG vg224-i6k9s-mz.151-4.M9.bi<http://vg224-i6k9s-mz.151-4.M9.bi>n

Scott




Jeffrey McHugh | Sr. Collaboration Consulting Engineer | VCP-DCV, CCNP 
Collaboration
[Company_Logo_Image]<http://www.fidelus.com/>
Fidelus Technologies, LLC
Named Best UC Provider in the 
USA<http://www.fidelus.com/fidelus-technologies-named-best-unified-communications-provider-in-the-usa/>
240 West 35th Street, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10001
+1-212-616-7801<tel:(212)%20616-7801> office | 
+1-212-616-7850<tel:(212)%20616-7850> fax | 
www.fidelus.com<http://www.fidelus.com/>
[LinkedIn]<http://www.linkedin.com/company/fidelus-technologies/products>[Twitter]<http://www.twitter.com/FidelusUCC>[Facebook]<http://www.facebook.com/FidelusUCC>[YouTube]<http://www.youtube.com/FidelusTraining>


Disclaimer - January 17, 2017

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended 
solely for Scott Voll,Brian 
Meade,[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>. If you are 
not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute, copy or alter 
this email. Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of 
the author and might not represent those of Fidelus Technologies, LLC. Warning: 
Although Fidelus Technologies, LLC has taken reasonable precautions to ensure 
no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility 
for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachments.

_______________________________________________
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



_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Reply via email to