Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Phone service doesn't show

[Baktha Muralidharan]

That was it!
yes, had checked Enterprise subscription!.
deleted that phone service and added another one WITHOUT the Enterprise
subscription.. now, I see the EM in the pull down menu.

thanks much,
/Baktha

On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 8:51 PM, Roger Carpio  wrote:

> Did you check the option "Enterprise Subscription" when you created the
> service?
>
> Regards,
> Roger Carpio.
>
>   On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Baktha Muralidharan <
> muralic...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>   Hello,
>>
>>
>>
>> As part of lab 9A, I configured phone service for extension mobility, with
>> service URL etc. I then restarted the EM service under “CM Servicability”
>> page.
>>
>> However, when I go into the Subscribe/Unsubscribe services page for a
>> phone or device profile,  I don’t see the [EM] service in the pull-down
>> menu.
>>
>> All I see for “Select a service” is “Intercomm calls”
>>
>>
>>
>> Any hints on what I am missing will be much appreciated.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> /Baktha
>>
>> ___
>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
>> visit www.ipexpert.com
>>
>>
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Voice Service doesn't show

[Stern, Larry]

I believe once you make EM an Enterprise service it will no longer be a 
individually subscribed service, in orher words every device will be subscribed 
to it and you then just check the enable EM check box on the 
Phone Device Page.

Best Regards
Larry

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 9, 2011, at 9:30 PM, "ccie_voice-requ...@onlinestudylist.com" 
 wrote:

> Send CCIE_Voice mailing list submissions to
>ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_voice
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>ccie_voice-requ...@onlinestudylist.com
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>ccie_voice-ow...@onlinestudylist.com
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of CCIE_Voice digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: why is vad bad? (CCIE)
>   2. Re: Barge/CBarge (matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com)
>   3. Re: Barge/CBarge (rsmail...@solcon.nl)
>   4. Re: Barge/CBarge (givemeccievoice2...@gmail.com)
>   5. Re: Barge/CBarge (givemeccievoice2...@gmail.com)
>   6. Phone service doesn't show (Baktha Muralidharan)
>   7. Re: Phone service doesn't show (cciefo...@hotmail.com)
>   8. Re: Phone service doesn't show (Baktha Muralidharan)
>   9. Re: Phone service doesn't show (Roger Carpio)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 09:22:44 -0800
> From: CCIE 
> To: "wormh...@sch.hu" 
> Cc: "ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com" 
> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?
> Message-ID: <01e6efe7-7edc-4c33-8a9a-9080f9064...@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8
> 
> You can see clipping at the beginning of people speaking after silence. 
> 
> On Feb 9, 2011, at 8:44 AM, "Farkas P?ter"  wrote:
> 
>> Also can source voice quality issues like hissing.
>> 
>> Peter
>> 
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com" 
>> Date: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 5:16 pm
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?
>> To: "Stutz, Bernhard" 
>> Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
>> 
>> 
>>> I've always understood that VAD results in a higher CPU utilization.  For a 
>>> site of 10 phones 
>>> running a 2921 it wouldn't be an issue.  However, if you're running several 
>>> hundred (or 
>>> thousand) users running off the same pool of devices then you'd run into a 
>>> significant impact 
>>> on CPU performance.
>>> 
>>> Matthew Berry, CCIE #26721
>>> 
>>> Email: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
>>> Twitter: 
>>> Blog: 
>>> 
>>> On Feb 9, 2011, at 9:38 AM, Stutz, Bernhard wrote:
>>> 
 Hi,
 
 i am just wondering why vad is bad and we all learn as a rule of thumb to 
 disable vad on all 
>>> voip dial peers?
 
 When you have a look for what vad has been designed for it looks to me as 
 a valuable 
>>> algorithm (
 
 Whats the reason we disable it all the time?
 Is Cisco not able to support vad correctly or is it user experience that 
 they want to hear a 
>>> noise otherwise they think of that the connection has been lost? But 
>>> therefore you have 
>>> comfort-noise isn?t it?
 
 Kindly regards,
 Bernhard
 
 ___
 For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
 visit www.ipexpert.com
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
>>> visit www.ipexpert.com 
>> ___
>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
>> visit www.ipexpert.com
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 12:33:42 -0500
> From: "matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com" 
> To: "rsmail...@solcon.nl" 
> Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Barge/CBarge
> Message-ID: <1168b11c-df44-42ac-a207-e2413f8bc...@ciscovoiceguru.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> While on the barged call, hit privacy and you'll see that second "call" go 
> away.
> Matthew Berry, CCIE #26721
> 
> Email: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/CiscoVoiceGuru
> Blog: http://ciscovoiceguru.com
> 
> On Feb 9, 2011, at 12:07 PM, rsmail...@solcon.nl wrote:
> 
>> hello matthew,
>> 
>> privacy is off, because if it's on i can not barge in.
>> 
>> take a look at the picture, you see what i mean with two call lines.
>> 
>> Ron
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 19:33:08 +0100 (CET)
> From: "rsmail...@solcon.nl" 
> To: "matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com" 
> Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Barge/CBarge
> Message-ID:
><14057.87.195.242.64.1297276388.squir...@webmail.solcon.nl>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
> 
> hmmm?
> 

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?

[Brian Valentine]

Users complain.  It feels like you are using a walkie talkie.  Hard to have
a conversation that

On Feb 9, 2011 1:34 PM, "CCIE"  wrote:
> You can see clipping at the beginning of people speaking after silence.
>
> On Feb 9, 2011, at 8:44 AM, "Farkas Péter"  wrote:
>
>> Also can source voice quality issues like hissing.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com" 
>> Date: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 5:16 pm
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?
>> To: "Stutz, Bernhard" 
>> Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
>>
>>
>>> I've always understood that VAD results in a higher CPU utilization. For
a site of 10 phones
>>> running a 2921 it wouldn't be an issue. However, if you're running
several hundred (or
>>> thousand) users running off the same pool of devices then you'd run into
a significant impact
>>> on CPU performance.
>>>
>>> Matthew Berry, CCIE #26721
>>>
>>> Email: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
>>> Twitter:
>>> Blog:
>>>
>>> On Feb 9, 2011, at 9:38 AM, Stutz, Bernhard wrote:
>>>
 Hi,

 i am just wondering why vad is bad and we all learn as a rule of thumb
to disable vad on all
>>> voip dial peers?

 When you have a look for what vad has been designed for it looks to me
as a valuable
>>> algorithm (

 Whats the reason we disable it all the time?
 Is Cisco not able to support vad correctly or is it user experience
that they want to hear a
>>> noise otherwise they think of that the connection has been lost? But
therefore you have
>>> comfort-noise isn’t it?

 Kindly regards,
 Bernhard

 ___
 For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
please visit www.ipexpert.com
>>>
>>> ___
>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
please visit www.ipexpert.com
>> ___
>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
visit www.ipexpert.com
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
visit www.ipexpert.com
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Phone service doesn't show

[Roger Carpio]

Did you check the option "Enterprise Subscription" when you created the
service?

Regards,
Roger Carpio.

On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Baktha Muralidharan wrote:

> Hello,
>
>
>
> As part of lab 9A, I configured phone service for extension mobility, with
> service URL etc. I then restarted the EM service under “CM Servicability”
> page.
>
> However, when I go into the Subscribe/Unsubscribe services page for a phone
> or device profile,  I don’t see the [EM] service in the pull-down menu.
>
> All I see for “Select a service” is “Intercomm calls”
>
>
>
> Any hints on what I am missing will be much appreciated.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> /Baktha
>
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
> visit www.ipexpert.com
>
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Phone service doesn't show

[Baktha Muralidharan]

yes, enable checked.

thanks.
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 8:44 PM,  wrote:

> Did you check the enable check box?
> -Original Message-
> From: Baktha Muralidharan 
> Sender: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com
> Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 19:50:09
> To: 
> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Phone service doesn't show
>
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
> visit www.ipexpert.com
>
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Phone service doesn't show

[ccieforme]

Did you check the enable check box?
-Original Message-
From: Baktha Muralidharan 
Sender: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 19:50:09 
To: 
Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Phone service doesn't show

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Phone service doesn't show

[Baktha Muralidharan]

Hello,



As part of lab 9A, I configured phone service for extension mobility, with
service URL etc. I then restarted the EM service under “CM Servicability”
page.

However, when I go into the Subscribe/Unsubscribe services page for a phone
or device profile,  I don’t see the [EM] service in the pull-down menu.

All I see for “Select a service” is “Intercomm calls”



Any hints on what I am missing will be much appreciated.



Thanks,

/Baktha
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Barge/CBarge

[givemeccievoice2010]

Hi Ron,

The point is that this is the expected behavior.  If you don't want your
screen cluttered you can use the privacy button to toggle privacy on/off in
order to go from 2 displays to 1.  To my knowledge there is no service
parameter, feature, or anything else besides the privacy setting to effect
this behavior.

Jeff

-Original Message-
From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com
[mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of
rsmail...@solcon.nl
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 10:33 AM
To: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Barge/CBarge

hmmm?

is this a "feature" :)
doesn't the phone have to do this itself ?

because the cbarge is active and working acros the 3 phones.

Ron



> While on the barged call, hit privacy and you'll see that second "call" go
> away.
> Matthew Berry, CCIE #26721
>
> Email: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/CiscoVoiceGuru
> Blog: http://ciscovoiceguru.com
>
> On Feb 9, 2011, at 12:07 PM, rsmail...@solcon.nl wrote:
>
>> hello matthew,
>>
>> privacy is off, because if it's on i can not barge in.
>>
>> take a look at the picture, you see what i mean with two call lines.
>>
>> Ron
>> 
>
>


___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
visit www.ipexpert.com

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Barge/CBarge

[givemeccievoice2010]

I think what Matt meant was if you have a privacy button on one of the other
lines, you can toggle between seeing two displays or one by using the
privacy on/off button.

Try this and see if it produces the results you desire.

Jeff

-Original Message-
From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com
[mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of
rsmail...@solcon.nl
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 9:07 AM
To: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Barge/CBarge

hello matthew,

privacy is off, because if it's on i can not barge in.

take a look at the picture, you see what i mean with two call lines.

Ron

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Barge/CBarge

[rsmail...@solcon.nl]

hmmm?

is this a "feature" :)
doesn't the phone have to do this itself ?

because the cbarge is active and working acros the 3 phones.

Ron



> While on the barged call, hit privacy and you'll see that second "call" go
> away.
> Matthew Berry, CCIE #26721
>
> Email: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/CiscoVoiceGuru
> Blog: http://ciscovoiceguru.com
>
> On Feb 9, 2011, at 12:07 PM, rsmail...@solcon.nl wrote:
>
>> hello matthew,
>>
>> privacy is off, because if it's on i can not barge in.
>>
>> take a look at the picture, you see what i mean with two call lines.
>>
>> Ron
>> 
>
>


___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Barge/CBarge

[matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com]

While on the barged call, hit privacy and you'll see that second "call" go away.
Matthew Berry, CCIE #26721

Email: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/CiscoVoiceGuru
Blog: http://ciscovoiceguru.com

On Feb 9, 2011, at 12:07 PM, rsmail...@solcon.nl wrote:

> hello matthew,
> 
> privacy is off, because if it's on i can not barge in.
> 
> take a look at the picture, you see what i mean with two call lines.
> 
> Ron
> 

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?

[CCIE]

You can see clipping at the beginning of people speaking after silence. 

On Feb 9, 2011, at 8:44 AM, "Farkas Péter"  wrote:

> Also can source voice quality issues like hissing.
> 
> Peter
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com" 
> Date: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 5:16 pm
> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?
> To: "Stutz, Bernhard" 
> Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
> 
> 
>> I've always understood that VAD results in a higher CPU utilization.  For a 
>> site of 10 phones 
>> running a 2921 it wouldn't be an issue.  However, if you're running several 
>> hundred (or 
>> thousand) users running off the same pool of devices then you'd run into a 
>> significant impact 
>> on CPU performance.
>> 
>> Matthew Berry, CCIE #26721
>> 
>> Email: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
>> Twitter: 
>> Blog: 
>> 
>> On Feb 9, 2011, at 9:38 AM, Stutz, Bernhard wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> i am just wondering why vad is bad and we all learn as a rule of thumb to 
>>> disable vad on all 
>> voip dial peers?
>>> 
>>> When you have a look for what vad has been designed for it looks to me as a 
>>> valuable 
>> algorithm (
>>> 
>>> Whats the reason we disable it all the time?
>>> Is Cisco not able to support vad correctly or is it user experience that 
>>> they want to hear a 
>> noise otherwise they think of that the connection has been lost? But 
>> therefore you have 
>> comfort-noise isn’t it?
>>> 
>>> Kindly regards,
>>> Bernhard
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
>>> visit www.ipexpert.com
>> 
>> ___
>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
>> visit www.ipexpert.com 
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
> visit www.ipexpert.com
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?

[Farkas Péter]

Also can source voice quality issues like hissing.

Peter

- Original Message -
From: "matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com" 
Date: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 5:16 pm
Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?
To: "Stutz, Bernhard" 
Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com


> I've always understood that VAD results in a higher CPU utilization.  For a 
> site of 10 phones 
> running a 2921 it wouldn't be an issue.  However, if you're running several 
> hundred (or 
> thousand) users running off the same pool of devices then you'd run into a 
> significant impact 
> on CPU performance.
>  
>  Matthew Berry, CCIE #26721
>  
>  Email: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
>  Twitter: 
>  Blog: 
>  
>  On Feb 9, 2011, at 9:38 AM, Stutz, Bernhard wrote:
>  
>  > Hi,
>  >  
>  > i am just wondering why vad is bad and we all learn as a rule of thumb to 
> disable vad on all 
> voip dial peers?
>  >  
>  > When you have a look for what vad has been designed for it looks to me as 
> a valuable 
> algorithm (
>  >  
>  > Whats the reason we disable it all the time?
>  > Is Cisco not able to support vad correctly or is it user experience that 
> they want to hear a 
> noise otherwise they think of that the connection has been lost? But 
> therefore you have 
> comfort-noise isn’t it?
>  >  
>  > Kindly regards,
>  > Bernhard
>  >  
>  > ___
>  > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
> visit www.ipexpert.com
>   
> ___
>  For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
> visit www.ipexpert.com 
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?

[Pulos, Greg]

Per Cisco, when VAD is enabled, it contributes to a slightly degraded sound 
quality.

Also, VAD is to be disabled on both sides of a FAX connection as it can 
interfere with the successful reception of the fax traffic.

Per experience, unless VAD actually alleviates bandwidth problem, it is likely 
best to keep it disabled in most applications.

Please see the following link for more information on VAD:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/voice/command/reference/vr_v1.html#wp1103127

Thank you.

Greg

From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com 
[mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of Stutz, Bernhard
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 10:43 AM
To: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?

Hm this depends on your available ISDN Channels.
You may have 1000 phones but you can only have for example max 30 or lets say 
60 channels available if you have a standard PRI to PSTN.
You may run into this issue if you got a SIP Trunk to a SIP Provider with 
multiple channels but 60 voip legs shouldn't be a problem with a 2921 I hope ;-)
Or is a SIP Trunk now Standard at US?

Cheers,
Bernhard


Von: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com [mailto:matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 9. Februar 2011 16:25
An: Stutz, Bernhard
Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
Betreff: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?

I've always understood that VAD results in a higher CPU utilization.  For a 
site of 10 phones running a 2921 it wouldn't be an issue.  However, if you're 
running several hundred (or thousand) users running off the same pool of 
devices then you'd run into a significant impact on CPU performance.

Matthew Berry, CCIE #26721

Email: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/CiscoVoiceGuru
Blog: http://ciscovoiceguru.com

On Feb 9, 2011, at 9:38 AM, Stutz, Bernhard wrote:

Hi,

i am just wondering why vad is bad and we all learn as a rule of thumb to 
disable vad on all voip dial peers?

When you have a look for what vad has been designed for it looks to me as a 
valuable algorithm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_activity_detection)

Whats the reason we disable it all the time?
Is Cisco not able to support vad correctly or is it user experience that they 
want to hear a noise otherwise they think of that the connection has been lost? 
But therefore you have comfort-noise isn't it?

Kindly regards,
Bernhard

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Barge/Cbarge

[matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com]

This is affected by the privacy feature.  If privacy is turned on you won't see 
that.


Matthew Berry, CCIE #26721

Email: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/CiscoVoiceGuru
Blog: http://ciscovoiceguru.com

On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:31 AM, rsmail...@solcon.nl wrote:

> hi everyone,
> 
> i was wondering if it's "as it should work"
> 
> when i configure and use CBarge, al works fine.
> but on the phone there are 2 call (lines) shown.
> 
> is this correct, or am i missing a "secret" service parameter.
> 
> Ron
> 
> 
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
> visit www.ipexpert.com

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?

[Stutz, Bernhard]

Hm this depends on your available ISDN Channels. 

You may have 1000 phones but you can only have for example max 30 or
lets say 60 channels available if you have a standard PRI to PSTN.

You may run into this issue if you got a SIP Trunk to a SIP Provider
with multiple channels but 60 voip legs shouldn't be a problem with a
2921 I hope ;-)

Or is a SIP Trunk now Standard at US?

 

Cheers,

Bernhard

 

 

Von: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com [mailto:matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com] 
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 9. Februar 2011 16:25
An: Stutz, Bernhard
Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
Betreff: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?

 

I've always understood that VAD results in a higher CPU utilization.
For a site of 10 phones running a 2921 it wouldn't be an issue.
However, if you're running several hundred (or thousand) users running
off the same pool of devices then you'd run into a significant impact on
CPU performance.

 

Matthew Berry, CCIE #26721

Email: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/CiscoVoiceGuru
Blog: http://ciscovoiceguru.com

 

On Feb 9, 2011, at 9:38 AM, Stutz, Bernhard wrote:





Hi,

 

i am just wondering why vad is bad and we all learn as a rule of thumb
to disable vad on all voip dial peers?

 

When you have a look for what vad has been designed for it looks to me
as a valuable algorithm
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_activity_detection)

 

Whats the reason we disable it all the time?

Is Cisco not able to support vad correctly or is it user experience that
they want to hear a noise otherwise they think of that the connection
has been lost? But therefore you have comfort-noise isn't it?

 

Kindly regards,

Bernhard

 

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
please visit www.ipexpert.com

 

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Barge/Cbarge

[rsmail...@solcon.nl]

hi everyone,

i was wondering if it's "as it should work"

when i configure and use CBarge, al works fine.
but on the phone there are 2 call (lines) shown.

is this correct, or am i missing a "secret" service parameter.

Ron


___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?

[matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com]

I've always understood that VAD results in a higher CPU utilization.  For a 
site of 10 phones running a 2921 it wouldn't be an issue.  However, if you're 
running several hundred (or thousand) users running off the same pool of 
devices then you'd run into a significant impact on CPU performance.

Matthew Berry, CCIE #26721

Email: matt...@ciscovoiceguru.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/CiscoVoiceGuru
Blog: http://ciscovoiceguru.com

On Feb 9, 2011, at 9:38 AM, Stutz, Bernhard wrote:

> Hi,
>  
> i am just wondering why vad is bad and we all learn as a rule of thumb to 
> disable vad on all voip dial peers?
>  
> When you have a look for what vad has been designed for it looks to me as a 
> valuable algorithm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_activity_detection)
>  
> Whats the reason we disable it all the time?
> Is Cisco not able to support vad correctly or is it user experience that they 
> want to hear a noise otherwise they think of that the connection has been 
> lost? But therefore you have comfort-noise isn’t it?
>  
> Kindly regards,
> Bernhard
>  
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
> visit www.ipexpert.com

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] why is vad bad?

[Stutz, Bernhard]

Hi,

 

i am just wondering why vad is bad and we all learn as a rule of thumb
to disable vad on all voip dial peers?

 

When you have a look for what vad has been designed for it looks to me
as a valuable algorithm
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_activity_detection)

 

Whats the reason we disable it all the time? 

Is Cisco not able to support vad correctly or is it user experience that
they want to hear a noise otherwise they think of that the connection
has been lost? But therefore you have comfort-noise isn't it?

 

Kindly regards,

Bernhard

 

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] moh on srst router

[Ki Wi]

My idea is the router need to produce a 1x g711 stream. If I'm not wrong , this 
will take 15 MIPS from dsp resource. If there's no dsp, I doubt it works?

Sent from my iPhone
Pls pardon my fat fingers.

On Feb 7, 2011, at 10:33 PM, ccieid1ot  wrote:

> Never heard that.
> 
> duy
> ccie #27737 voice
> 
> tmobile g2
> 
> On Feb 7, 2011 4:28 AM, "anupam TYAGI"  wrote:
> > Hi ,
> > 
> > Is there a mandatory requirement of having dsp on router for moh on srst
> > Router .( moh should play from router flash )
> > 
> > Thanks
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
> visit www.ipexpert.com
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Cisco SIP phone not registering in SRST

[Shrini]

Since telephony-service and call-manager-fallback commands are used/required
for SRST I thought it is used for SIP phones also only when configuring
SRST.
Thanks for clarifying it. 

  _  

From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com
[mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of Roger Carpio
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 5:58 PM
To: Chris
Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Cisco SIP phone not registering in SRST


telephony-service instead and call-manager-fallback are not used for SIP
SRST. 

I would try removing the number from the voice register pools. I've had the
same error message in the past and not with SIP SRST but with SIP CME. The
problem was related to the DN.

voice register pool  1
 id network 10.2.3.0 mask 255.255.0.0
 codec g711ulaw

voice register pool  2
 id network 10.2.3.0 mask 255.255.0.0
 codec g711ulaw

Have you tried this?

Regards,
Roger Carpio.



On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Shrini  wrote:


Can you try using telephony-service instead of call-manager-fallback.

On 2/8/2011 4:00 PM, Chris wrote: 

I am having issues with registering my sip phone during SRST my SCCP phone
registers just fine. Is it possible to register both SCCP and SIP phones in
SRST? 
The phone does not register and I receive the error:

.Feb  8 23:51:11.575: VOICE_REG_POOL: Register request for (3001) from
(10.2.3.145)
.Feb  8 23:51:11.575: VOICE_REG_POOL: Contact doesn't match any pools

Here is my SIP SRST config the complete config is attached:
voice service voip 
 allow-connections h323 to h323
 allow-connections h323 to sip
 allow-connections sip to h323
 allow-connections sip to sip
 no supplementary-service h450.2
 no supplementary-service h450.3
 h323
  call start slow
 sip
  bind control source-interface FastEthernet0/0.302
  bind media source-interface FastEthernet0/0.302
  registrar server
voice register global
 max-dn 144
 max-pool 24
voice register pool  1
 id network 10.2.3.0 mask 255.255.0.0
 number 1 3001
 codec g711ulaw
voice register pool  2
 id network 10.2.3.0 mask 255.255.0.0
 number 1 30..
 codec g711ulaw


Thanks,
Chris Lundi



___

For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
visit www.ipexpert.com


___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
visit www.ipexpert.com




___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com