Im seeing a generic error saying I cant upload scripts. I saw a bug for 8.x but rezipping the file or rebuilding still wont work. Server need a reboot?
Dan Mason -----Original Message----- From: cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 12:00 PM To: [email protected] Subject: cisco-voip Digest, Vol 160, Issue 13 Send cisco-voip mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_mailman_listinfo_cisco-2Dvoip&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=OOCZoy5ttXI6Zd_bov0vjo8CSK_D9qFKtxCuAE2etaY&e= 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: Teleconferencing question (Ben Amick) 2. Upgrade knowledge (Terry Oakley) 3. Re: Upgrade knowledge (Matthew Loraditch) 4. CUCM 10.5.1 to 10.5.2SU4a confusion. (Mike O) 5. Re: Teleconferencing question (NateCCIE) 6. Re: Upgrade knowledge (Abhiram Kramadhati (akramadh)) 7. Expressway MRA design question. (Nick) 8. Re: Expressway MRA design question. (Lelio Fulgenzi) 9. Re: Expressway MRA design question. ([email protected]) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:37:19 +0000 From: Ben Amick <[email protected]> To: Terry Oakley <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Teleconferencing question Message-ID: <820c24bfe55f434c97807c60d4647ace2fe99...@e2k10-mb-ht1.humanarc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Read below for my initial thoughts, but I just did a google since I went to a cisco facility the other day and saw the new cisco Telepresence ceiling mics, which are 4-pin mini jack and are compatible with even the low end video solutions such as the SX10/20, which lowers the price point of your possible video solution, and the audioscience I mention below is now EoL. (link for those curious: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cisco.com_c_en_us_products_collateral_collaboration-2Dendpoints_telepresence-2Dmicrophones_datasheet-2Dc78-2D736073.html&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=cenQeeLKMz3lt-mgtlIFycK9wUakJuUHKCBlCLNShcc&e= ) If it wasn't for the malleability of the tables, I'd suggest getting a daisy chain unit to extend out both the speaker and the microphones across a longer distance. However, if you're going to look at teleconferencing with the possibility of video, I'd look for an C-series telepresence codec with the XLR based Audioscience ceiling microphones. The configuration of those would allow you to suspend them around the room. This would also enable you to gain much better audio quality around the room, as well as be able to properly integrate wall-mounted displays and the such and multiple video inputs. Short of that, an MX 7/800 series (or SX series if you already have displays) unit could enable you for videoconferencing with less facility tie-in, and the higher end units also support the XLR based audioscience mics. Ben Amick Telecom Analyst From: cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Terry Oakley Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 11:55 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [cisco-voip] Teleconferencing question We have a board room 25' by 40', that we currently have an 8831 conferencing unit in with the two external mics. The unit works well but with only the two mics does not adequately cover the room. Do any of you have suggestions as to how we can add the necessary mic coverage into the room but at the same time keep it neat and tidy? The room is often use for our College's Board meeting and will have 18 to 30 guests invited to the meeting. The setup is 12 tables on castors, that are arranged in an oval but can be separated or arranged differently for other events. We do have WebEx, IM&Presence available if something there would allow us to provide a better teleconferencing solution. I am think we should just do a full blown conferencing suite, video and tele but want to know if there are other solutions that I have not seen or more likely thought of. Thanks Terry Terry Oakley Telecommunications Coordinator | Information Technology Services Red Deer College |100 College Blvd. | Box 5005 | Red Deer | Alberta | T4N 5H5 work (403) 342-3521 | FAX (403) 343-4034 Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. Thank you -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_pipermail_cisco-2Dvoip_attachments_20170213_fa1a7fbc_attachment-2D0001.html&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=huYOKV8BPCbR_JOKkcRf0S5HiqCr-8yXLseujdivFiY&e= > ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 12:14:30 -0700 From: Terry Oakley <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: [cisco-voip] Upgrade knowledge Message-ID: <c53f9d4da50c854f90c655dbbc63d40c1cad0a9...@rdcexmail1.rdcsrvcs.ads> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Currently we are CUCM 10.5.2.11900-3 and UCCX 10.6.1.10000-39. We would like to upgrade to CUCM 11.x but for now stay at UCCX 10.6.1 as we want to keep CAD going for a while yet before we have to move to Finesse. Possible? We also have IM&P in our environment along with WebEx. Thoughts and got ya's.... Thanks Terry Terry Oakley Telecommunications Coordinator | Information Technology Services Red Deer College |100 College Blvd. | Box 5005 | Red Deer | Alberta | T4N 5H5 work (403) 342-3521 | FAX (403) 343-4034 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_pipermail_cisco-2Dvoip_attachments_20170213_4dc326f6_attachment-2D0001.html&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=1IcAS6aFwVddWfT6iCj-Ownx01Xq8VrgyHkBqOP8u0o&e= > ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 19:32:53 +0000 From: Matthew Loraditch <[email protected]> To: Terry Oakley <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Upgrade knowledge Message-ID: <bn3pr08mb19084c77397b39a570623c92b3...@bn3pr08mb1908.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__docwiki.cisco.com_wiki_Unified-5FCCX-5FSoftware-5FCompatibility-5FMatrix-5Ffor-5F10.6-281-29&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=pGFMftoHICy1tTsYf23r0zwkmWmdwRaApYAdlrhwSHk&e= There is a cop required or upgrade to SU2 but it will work up to the latest CUCM release. Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA Network Engineer Direct Voice: 443.541.1518 Facebook<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_heliontech-3Fref-3Dhl&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=Hwr__yOYGo-majsS4x6T8v3X5-n-awBujcGEepiBAY8&e= > | Twitter<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_HelionTech&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=Kwb6K-RGaQQGf32k6f87CvIpsJ09PfRdin8aUJ7oORI&e= > | LinkedIn<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_helion-2Dtechnologies-3Ftrk-3Dtop-5Fnav-5Fhome&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=g7lHYyAeQOhUUEoOv1TxR4fgyEbQ43YQPsMEHuGN5o0&e= > | G+<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__plus.google.com_-2BHeli ontechnologies_posts&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=RCAxWmwGpZ8PCKYfq-wI7-eoJgzVrGeMp1VHj2h8UT8&e= > From: cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Terry Oakley Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 2:15 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [cisco-voip] Upgrade knowledge Currently we are CUCM 10.5.2.11900-3 and UCCX 10.6.1.10000-39. We would like to upgrade to CUCM 11.x but for now stay at UCCX 10.6.1 as we want to keep CAD going for a while yet before we have to move to Finesse. Possible? We also have IM&P in our environment along with WebEx. Thoughts and got ya's.... Thanks Terry Terry Oakley Telecommunications Coordinator | Information Technology Services Red Deer College |100 College Blvd. | Box 5005 | Red Deer | Alberta | T4N 5H5 work (403) 342-3521 | FAX (403) 343-4034 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_pipermail_cisco-2Dvoip_attachments_20170213_05d4201d_attachment-2D0001.html&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=Y576-KttwoD-FvVRulhRHbSrB20Jj-XpspJSgDNKwSM&e= > ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 21:04:14 +0000 From: Mike O <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM 10.5.1 to 10.5.2SU4a confusion. Message-ID: <bn6pr18mb096173c0df702f9abcca1906c5...@bn6pr18mb0961.namprd18.prod.outlook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I'm a little confused on the release notes. Is this considered an L2 upgrade or a refresh? I took a snippet from the notes: Refresh Upgrades to Cisco Unified Communications Manager Release 10.5(2)SU2+ Currently, the Upgrade Guide for Cisco Unified Communications Manager and IM and Presence Service instructs administrators performing a refresh upgrade of Cisco Unified Communications Manager nodes that they must both upgrade and switch versions on the publisher node before they begin to upgrade subscriber nodes. As of Cisco Unified Communications Manager Release 10.5(2)SU2 and higher, administrators have the option of holding off switching versions until after all cluster nodes are upgraded. For this case, the revised order would be: 1. Upgrade the Unified Communications Manager publisher node. 2. Upgrade the Unified Communications Manager subscriber nodes. 3. Switch the publisher node to the upgraded partition. 4. Switch the subscriber nodes to the upgraded partition. Note ________________________________ You can switch the subscriber nodes to the upgraded partition either all at once, or one at a time, depending on your site requirements. ________________________________ For Cisco Unified Communications Manager Release 10.5(2)SU2 and higher, administrators can apply this optional version switching sequence to the Refresh Upgrade task lists in the "Upgrades Overview" chapter of the Upgrade Guide for Cisco Unified Communications Manager and IM and Presence Service. Thanks, Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_pipermail_cisco-2Dvoip_attachments_20170213_33599895_attachment-2D0001.html&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=si6FTBQbbpxf4cWSctc3Iee_ktCSTltm_PoKnIq3m0w&e= > ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:16:09 -0700 From: NateCCIE <[email protected]> To: Ben Amick <[email protected]> Cc: Terry Oakley <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Teleconferencing question Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Look at the shire micro flex advance ceiling mount. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.shure.com_americas_microflex-2Dadvance&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=vRoxAb-6O-RnfX6r0ed_IrVaeNAsPibbmJl-fSbPuVs&e= Watch the demo videos and be amazed. Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 13, 2017, at 10:37 AM, Ben Amick <[email protected]> wrote: > > Read below for my initial thoughts, but I just did a google since I > went to a cisco facility the other day and saw the new cisco > Telepresence ceiling mics, which are 4-pin mini jack and are > compatible with even the low end video solutions such as the SX10/20, > which lowers the price point of your possible video solution, and the > audioscience I mention below is now EoL. (link for those curious: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.cisco.com_c_en > _us_products_collateral_collaboration-2Dendpoints_telepresence-2Dmicro > phones_datasheet-2Dc78-2D736073.html&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jX > rwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m= > CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=cenQeeLKMz3lt-mgtlIFycK9 > wUakJuUHKCBlCLNShcc&e= ) > > If it wasn?t for the malleability of the tables, I?d suggest getting a daisy > chain unit to extend out both the speaker and the microphones across a longer > distance. > > However, if you?re going to look at teleconferencing with the possibility of > video, I?d look for an C-series telepresence codec with the XLR based > Audioscience ceiling microphones. The configuration of those would allow you > to suspend them around the room. This would also enable you to gain much > better audio quality around the room, as well as be able to properly > integrate wall-mounted displays and the such and multiple video inputs. > > Short of that, an MX 7/800 series (or SX series if you already have displays) > unit could enable you for videoconferencing with less facility tie-in, and > the higher end units also support the XLR based audioscience mics. > > Ben Amick > Telecom Analyst > > From: cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Terry Oakley > Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 11:55 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [cisco-voip] Teleconferencing question > > We have a board room 25? by 40?, that we currently have an 8831 conferencing > unit in with the two external mics. The unit works well but with only the > two mics does not adequately cover the room. Do any of you have suggestions > as to how we can add the necessary mic coverage into the room but at the same > time keep it neat and tidy? The room is often use for our College?s Board > meeting and will have 18 to 30 guests invited to the meeting. The setup is > 12 tables on castors, that are arranged in an oval but can be separated or > arranged differently for other events. > > We do have WebEx, IM&Presence available if something there would allow us to > provide a better teleconferencing solution. I am think we should just do a > full blown conferencing suite, video and tele but want to know if there are > other solutions that I have not seen or more likely thought of. > > Thanks > > Terry > > Terry Oakley > Telecommunications Coordinator | Information Technology Services Red > Deer College |100 College Blvd. | Box 5005 | Red Deer | Alberta | T4N 5H5 > work (403) 342-3521 | FAX (403) 343-4034 > > > Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the > individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain > information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from > disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not > the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for > delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby > notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this > communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this > communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and > destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. > Thank you _______________________________________________ > cisco-voip mailing list > [email protected] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_m > ailman_listinfo_cisco-2Dvoip&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5 > A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L > 9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=OOCZoy5ttXI6Zd_bov0vjo8CSK_D9qFK > txCuAE2etaY&e= -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_pipermail_cisco-2Dvoip_attachments_20170213_3d9578ea_attachment-2D0001.html&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=AifYbLI03T8nbMJAJA58uxfZyPPYx3atwX01iRjMGUA&e= > ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 01:10:14 +0000 From: "Abhiram Kramadhati (akramadh)" <[email protected]> To: Matthew Loraditch <[email protected]>, Terry Oakley <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Upgrade knowledge Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Would recommend going to SU2 since mixed mode is available by default, no cop for CUCM compatbility and also to ensure that any new defect fixes from the BU is available since defects fixes will only go into 10.6(1)SU2 (latest SU). Regards, Abhiram Kramadhati Technical Solutions Manager, CCBU CCIE Collaboration # 40065 From: cisco-voip <[email protected]> on behalf of Matthew Loraditch <[email protected]> Date: Tuesday, 14 February 2017 at 6:32 AM To: Terry Oakley <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Upgrade knowledge https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__docwiki.cisco.com_wiki_Unified-5FCCX-5FSoftware-5FCompatibility-5FMatrix-5Ffor-5F10.6-281-29&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=pGFMftoHICy1tTsYf23r0zwkmWmdwRaApYAdlrhwSHk&e= There is a cop required or upgrade to SU2 but it will work up to the latest CUCM release. Matthew G. Loraditch ? CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA Network Engineer Direct Voice: 443.541.1518 Facebook<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_heliontech-3Fref-3Dhl&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=Hwr__yOYGo-majsS4x6T8v3X5-n-awBujcGEepiBAY8&e= > | Twitter<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_HelionTech&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=Kwb6K-RGaQQGf32k6f87CvIpsJ09PfRdin8aUJ7oORI&e= > | LinkedIn<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_helion-2Dtechnologies-3Ftrk-3Dtop-5Fnav-5Fhome&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=g7lHYyAeQOhUUEoOv1TxR4fgyEbQ43YQPsMEHuGN5o0&e= > | G+<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__plus.google.com_-2BHeli ontechnologies_posts&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=RCAxWmwGpZ8PCKYfq-wI7-eoJgzVrGeMp1VHj2h8UT8&e= > From: cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Terry Oakley Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 2:15 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [cisco-voip] Upgrade knowledge Currently we are CUCM 10.5.2.11900-3 and UCCX 10.6.1.10000-39. We would like to upgrade to CUCM 11.x but for now stay at UCCX 10.6.1 as we want to keep CAD going for a while yet before we have to move to Finesse. Possible? We also have IM&P in our environment along with WebEx. Thoughts and got ya?s?. Thanks Terry Terry Oakley Telecommunications Coordinator | Information Technology Services Red Deer College |100 College Blvd. | Box 5005 | Red Deer | Alberta | T4N 5H5 work (403) 342-3521 | FAX (403) 343-4034 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_pipermail_cisco-2Dvoip_attachments_20170214_33b907e0_attachment-2D0001.html&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=QTh1kOE9gHxrtsY6JVubMkSFPN7c5F8uBayQYkq85uQ&e= > ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:10:06 +0000 From: Nick <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: [cisco-voip] Expressway MRA design question. Message-ID: <CAGJstUJrtV8sRJRb9A2==3OF4tiRD=yqmmfmnqwe40vdcqz...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" I have a customer who doesn't want the Expressway E FQDN to be put into the public DNS SRV record and wants to use an alias such as an a record in the collab-edge SRV which points to the public IP, I cant seem to find if this is supported or not can anyone confirm if this is supported? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_pipermail_cisco-2Dvoip_attachments_20170214_6ccf2515_attachment-2D0001.html&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=HbTfYu0QFaaACakezyo_rQw-fr0t_tQ8LFbpDrIH9sM&e= > ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:27:21 +0000 From: Lelio Fulgenzi <[email protected]> To: "voyp list, cisco-voip" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Expressway MRA design question. Message-ID: <ytopr01mb025126f21b3179841e637538ac...@ytopr01mb0251.canprd01.prod.outlook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" we tried this and it didn't work out so well. we didn't try to fix things because we were on a limited time frame. we also ran into an issue where the hostname has to match the outside name/certificate details as well as matching the service discovery domain). so, where we initially had https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__hostname.dept.acme.com&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=YPOdbXhhZ7ub_DDPfWFO22yh3oBmFWsYXeBRyx47N54&e= we had to modify it to https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__servicename.servicedomain.acme.com&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=eiG9YeKpxBEa08csIC1refuQlh36WsYs9m40C9JEa1U&e= . then, in the split view dns, you resolve https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__servicename.servicedomain.acme.com&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=eiG9YeKpxBEa08csIC1refuQlh36WsYs9m40C9JEa1U&e= to the internal address for admin, and external for connectivity from off-prem. you _might_ be able to configure the hostname as the alias and configure the certificates accordingly, but like you said, it's not the standard approach. --- Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure Computing and Communications Services (CCS) University of Guelph 519-824-4120 Ext 56354 [email protected] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.uoguelph.ca_ccs&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=dT0cBVr2g7NJmVYHcvx2w4vy4mvvXnxaRVqRfNhbAps&e= Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 ________________________________ From: cisco-voip <[email protected]> on behalf of Nick via cisco-voip <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 11:10 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [cisco-voip] Expressway MRA design question. I have a customer who doesn't want the Expressway E FQDN to be put into the public DNS SRV record and wants to use an alias such as an a record in the collab-edge SRV which points to the public IP, I cant seem to find if this is supported or not can anyone confirm if this is supported? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_pipermail_cisco-2Dvoip_attachments_20170214_2eedd865_attachment-2D0001.html&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=Tl9ht5734EzzO3fVnHfgcs8msDJzLrxp45A_Iqj5FoU&e= > ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:46:13 GMT From: <[email protected]> To: Lelio Fulgenzi <[email protected]>, Cc: "voyp list, cisco-voip" <[email protected]>, Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Expressway MRA design question. Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" u might want to try to get a girlfriend ----- Original Message ----- From: Lelio Fulgenzi Date: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 11:27 am Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Expressway MRA design question. To: "voyp list, cisco-voip" > we tried this and it didn't work out so well. we didn't try to > fix things because we were on a limited time frame. we also ran > into an issue where the hostname has to match the outside > name/certificate details as well as matching the service > discovery domain). > > > so, where we initially had > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__hostname.dept.acme.com&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=YPOdbXhhZ7ub_DDPfWFO22yh3oBmFWsYXeBRyx47N54&e= > we had to > modify it to > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__servicename.servicedomain.acme.com&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=eiG9YeKpxBEa08csIC1refuQlh36WsYs9m40C9JEa1U&e= > . > > > then, in the split view dns, you resolve > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__servicename.servicedomain.acme.com&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=eiG9YeKpxBEa08csIC1refuQlh36WsYs9m40C9JEa1U&e= > to the internal address for > admin, and external for connectivity from off-prem. > > > you _might_ be able to configure the hostname as the alias and > configure the certificates accordingly, but like you said, it's > not the standard approach. > > > --- > Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. > Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure > Computing and Communications Services (CCS) > University of Guelph > > 519-824-4120 Ext 56354 > [email protected] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.uoguelph.ca_ccs&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=dT0cBVr2g7NJmVYHcvx2w4vy4mvvXnxaRVqRfNhbAps&e= > Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building > Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 > > > ________________________________ > From: cisco-voip on behalf > of Nick via cisco-voip > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 11:10 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [cisco-voip] Expressway MRA design question. > > I have a customer who doesn't want the Expressway E FQDN to be > put into the public DNS SRV record and wants to use an alias > such as an a record in the collab-edge SRV which points to the > public IP, I cant seem to find if this is supported or not can > anyone confirm if this is supported? > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_pipermail_cisco-2Dvoip_attachments_20170214_c6d23819_attachment-2D0001.html&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=zOP9ZPLOcPxu98lmmCfc1mjxPpJjaDCcFeUBfYNevGI&e= > ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list [email protected] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_mailman_listinfo_cisco-2Dvoip&d=DQICAg&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=__J_mRWed6v-NS1wLqgaOEJvgtKOvHgszu8ypqZazE4&m=CP9U3t6L9c-PNA20PaKy4y_9kXyMPWu-CMVY8k4mTzs&s=OOCZoy5ttXI6Zd_bov0vjo8CSK_D9qFKtxCuAE2etaY&e= ------------------------------ End of cisco-voip Digest, Vol 160, Issue 13 ******************************************* ________________________________ This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Winxnet, Inc. proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Winxnet, Inc.. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout. _______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
