Re: [cisco-voip] DX series endpoints registered with cucm
Hi Brian, Yes the MCU is in the same Device Pool I’ll pull some new logs and have a look through them again Andy andy.ca...@gmail.com On 4 Feb 2015, at 16:08, Brian Meade bmead...@vt.edu wrote: Might want to pull CallManager traces and see what happens when it tries to allocate the video conference bridge. Do you have the MCU in the same device pool as the rest of the devices? On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Andy andy.ca...@gmail.com mailto:andy.ca...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I’m in the process of deploying DX80 and 70 endpoints that are registered to CUCM, that piece is ok. I can place calls between them and audio conferencing is fine, my issue is with a conference with video……. I have an MCU5310 running version 4.5(1.45) which I have registered with CUCM 9.1.2.11900-12 as a Cisco Telepresence MCU. That seems to be fine. So I have created a new device pool and MRGL which all participants from an end point perspective are in (1x dx80, 1x dx70, 1x8941, 1x Jabber Client) They are all in the same region. But if I try and create a conference from Jabber when I try to merge the participants it says Waiting to Join and the DX plays MOH I get the same effect if I try to start the con on one of the DX endpoints. Do I need to setup a SIP connection between the MCU and the CUCM? in the 4.4 guide its gives some config settings on SIP but in the 4.5 code they are not available. I don’t have access to the 4.4 code to downgrade at the moment. Any pointers would be gratefully received. Andy andy.ca...@gmail.com mailto:andy.ca...@gmail.com ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] DX series endpoints registered with cucm
Might want to pull CallManager traces and see what happens when it tries to allocate the video conference bridge. Do you have the MCU in the same device pool as the rest of the devices? On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Andy andy.ca...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I’m in the process of deploying DX80 and 70 endpoints that are registered to CUCM, that piece is ok. I can place calls between them and audio conferencing is fine, my issue is with a conference with video……. I have an MCU5310 running version 4.5(1.45) which I have registered with CUCM 9.1.2.11900-12 as a Cisco Telepresence MCU. That seems to be fine. So I have created a new device pool and MRGL which all participants from an end point perspective are in (1x dx80, 1x dx70, 1x8941, 1x Jabber Client) They are all in the same region. But if I try and create a conference from Jabber when I try to merge the participants it says Waiting to Join and the DX plays MOH I get the same effect if I try to start the con on one of the DX endpoints. Do I need to setup a SIP connection between the MCU and the CUCM? in the 4.4 guide its gives some config settings on SIP but in the 4.5 code they are not available. I don’t have access to the 4.4 code to downgrade at the moment. Any pointers would be gratefully received. Andy andy.ca...@gmail.com ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] RTMT logs for disconnect signal of RCC
Jefflin, Usually you just want to hit Default then set trace level to Detailed. If SIP is involved, also want to enable SIP Stack trace. Having all the default traces enabled just makes sure nothing gets missed. Brian On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Jefflin Choi jefflin.c...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks all. we are still running ver 8.5. I don't see any On Hook with it unfortunately. logged ticket with vendor then TAC and turns out they wanted me to get detailed traces instead of Arbitrary. weird part is they want me to mostly all traces including PRI trace, Enable DT-24+/DE-30+ Trace, Enable Annunciator Trace , Enable Music On Hold Trace , etc. Even MGCP trace.Can't understand why since we do not use MGCP. On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Rajamani N rajaman...@gmail.com wrote: Please do look into the SIP Proxy logs from the CUPS, you can see the CSTA events for RCC in them -Rajamani On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 2:45 AM, Brian Meade bmead...@vt.edu wrote: 9.x has the interleaved traces as well. On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) rratl...@cisco.com wrote: For an SCCP phone you'll see a StationInit from CCM to the phone instructing the phone to go OnHook. Using SDL traces you can follow that back to where it originated from, which will likely be CTI if I recall how RCC works correctly. This tracking is much easier in 10.x with interleaved traces. -Ryan On Jan 23, 2015, at 6:55 AM, Jefflin Choi jefflin.c...@gmail.com wrote: All, We have lync remote call control integrated on our CCM/CUPS system. I'm troubleshooting some call disconnect issues basically. Does anyone know which criteria to look for if it's caused by the lync RCC on CCM and CUPS traces? If it's SIP phone, 9951 did saw one time with SIP REFER Message to the phone to disconnect on CCM traces though not sure if this is also the case with SCCP phones. Softkey event does show me if it was an end call press but i don't think this applies if it was triggered by closing the call dialog box on lync. What's the normal logging trace configuration that needs to be enabled also? TIA, Jeff ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
[cisco-voip] Informix Drivers for CCX
I had to open a TAC case because our wallboard stopped working. The ODBC drivers in the 3.70 and 4.1 informix were not working. The TAC solution was to somehow find me an ancient 3.0 version of the Informix SDK. It did start working, but it just doesn't make sense and now our wallboard doesn't work. That's because of code differences in the SDK. We are trying to correct, but something seems off... Maybe my google wizardry level is down, but is there somewhere that lists the acceptable SDK versions for each CCX version? This client is on 10.0 SU1... I don't have that running elsewhere so I can't compare. Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-Voice, CCNA-RS, CCDA Network Engineer Direct Voice: 443.541.1518 Facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/heliontech?ref=hl | Twitterhttps://twitter.com/HelionTech | LinkedInhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/helion-technologies?trk=top_nav_home | G+https://plus.google.com/+Heliontechnologies/posts ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] Informix Drivers for CCX
They would just not connect, same setting 3.0 driver and it works ODBC wise. Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-RS, CCDA Network Engineer Direct Voice: 443.541.1518 Facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/heliontech?ref=hl | Twitterhttps://twitter.com/HelionTech | LinkedInhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/helion-technologies?trk=top_nav_home | G+https://plus.google.com/+Heliontechnologies/posts From: Justin Steinberg [mailto:jsteinb...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 2:59 PM To: Matthew Loraditch Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Informix Drivers for CCX what wasn't working about the drivers ? I've used them before without any issues. I suspect maybe it was a 32/64 bit issue. I've also seen some weird behavior where the odbc gui is just finicky about how you enter the data for it to save properly. On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Matthew Loraditch mloradi...@heliontechnologies.commailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com wrote: I had to open a TAC case because our wallboard stopped working. The ODBC drivers in the 3.70 and 4.1 informix were not working. The TAC solution was to somehow find me an ancient 3.0 version of the Informix SDK. It did start working, but it just doesn’t make sense and now our wallboard doesn’t work. That’s because of code differences in the SDK. We are trying to correct, but something seems off… Maybe my google wizardry level is down, but is there somewhere that lists the acceptable SDK versions for each CCX version? This client is on 10.0 SU1… I don’t have that running elsewhere so I can’t compare. Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-RS, CCDA Network Engineer Direct Voice: 443.541.1518tel:443.541.1518 Facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/heliontech?ref=hl | Twitterhttps://twitter.com/HelionTech | LinkedInhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/helion-technologies?trk=top_nav_home | G+https://plus.google.com/+Heliontechnologies/posts ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs
Really you only talk to one or two IP address at the Service provider, a default route out the internet/SP interface is less than typically critical. From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Norton, Mike Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 3:05 PM To: Erick Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs What I’m failing to understand is... if I set the CUBE’s default route to be my router on my network, then how will CUBE be able to reach the SIP provider’s call servers on the SIP provider’s network? It seems like I will need a routing protocol on whichever side of the CUBE doesn’t get a default route. Is that a normal requirement? Just to back up a bit, I have been assuming CUBE would have two interfaces – one on my network, one on the SIP provider’s network. I’ve always assumed that this was the normal way of deploying CUBE but maybe I’m off base there and getting myself confused. -mn From: Erick [mailto:erick...@gmail.com] Sent: February-03-15 6:50 PM To: Norton, Mike Cc: Jason Aarons (AM); cisco-voip@puck.nether.net mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs Only one voice vrf can be defined in IOS. Global under voice service voip. Cube-SP lets you do multiple vrf's but is EoL and way different configuration. If you plop a cube off your router and router interface is in a vrf and your separate cube is on that network then it should be fine as the cube is just a host then with default route to router. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 3, 2015, at 6:08 PM, Norton, Mike mikenor...@pwsd76.ab.ca mailto:mikenor...@pwsd76.ab.ca wrote: Doesn’t have to be two VRFs, could be one VRF and the global route table, if that makes a difference. This idea is no connectivity between them, other than the application-layer connectivity provided by CUBE. This is hypothetical – I’m just trying to understand how/if this would work. I’m looking to plop a CUBE between my network and a SIP provider’s network without having to participate in routing protocol on either side. -mn From: Jason Aarons (AM) [mailto:jason.aar...@dimensiondata.com] Sent: February-03-15 5:02 PM To: Norton, Mike; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: CUBE across VRFs You have two VRFs, do they have connectivity between them? From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Norton, Mike Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 4:36 PM To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs Can CUBE sit across two separate VRFs? I’ve never used it, but I’m envisioning an ISR having a VRF-Lite with default route pointed at my network, and a VRF-Lite with default route pointed at the SIP provider’s network. I’m thinking this would be the preferred way to do it, but maybe I’m missing something? My Googling is dredging up a lot of really old info that I’m not sure is still relevant. -- Mike Norton itevomcid ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] Informix Drivers for CCX
what wasn't working about the drivers ? I've used them before without any issues. I suspect maybe it was a 32/64 bit issue. I've also seen some weird behavior where the odbc gui is just finicky about how you enter the data for it to save properly. On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Matthew Loraditch mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com wrote: I had to open a TAC case because our wallboard stopped working. The ODBC drivers in the 3.70 and 4.1 informix were not working. The TAC solution was to somehow find me an ancient 3.0 version of the Informix SDK. It did start working, but it just doesn’t make sense and now our wallboard doesn’t work. That’s because of code differences in the SDK. We are trying to correct, but something seems off… Maybe my google wizardry level is down, but is there somewhere that lists the acceptable SDK versions for each CCX version? This client is on 10.0 SU1… I don’t have that running elsewhere so I can’t compare. Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-RS, CCDA Network Engineer Direct Voice: 443.541.1518 Facebook https://www.facebook.com/heliontech?ref=hl | Twitter https://twitter.com/HelionTech | LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/company/helion-technologies?trk=top_nav_home | G+ https://plus.google.com/+Heliontechnologies/posts ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
[cisco-voip] UCCE Patching
Just a general UCCE maintenance question for anyone out there. How do you go about patching those windows servers? Do you have a policy to patch them only for critical issues? Do you patch them every quarter, etc? I know Cisco's stance is to follow whatever company policy dictates, however I don't want to cause needless headaches. So I just want to see what everyone else typically does. ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs
Use Acme Packet instead of CUBE if you need to handle multiple customers/overlapping IPs. To bad they are Oracle now On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:49 AM, Erick erick...@gmail.com wrote: Only one voice vrf can be defined in IOS. Global under voice service voip. Cube-SP lets you do multiple vrf's but is EoL and way different configuration. If you plop a cube off your router and router interface is in a vrf and your separate cube is on that network then it should be fine as the cube is just a host then with default route to router. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 3, 2015, at 6:08 PM, Norton, Mike mikenor...@pwsd76.ab.ca wrote: Doesn’t have to be two VRFs, could be one VRF and the global route table, if that makes a difference. This idea is no connectivity between them, other than the application-layer connectivity provided by CUBE. This is hypothetical – I’m just trying to understand how/if this would work. I’m looking to plop a CUBE between my network and a SIP provider’s network without having to participate in routing protocol on either side. -mn From: Jason Aarons (AM) [mailto:jason.aar...@dimensiondata.com] Sent: February-03-15 5:02 PM To: Norton, Mike; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: CUBE across VRFs You have two VRFs, do they have connectivity between them? From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Norton, Mike Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 4:36 PM To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs Can CUBE sit across two separate VRFs? I’ve never used it, but I’m envisioning an ISR having a VRF-Lite with default route pointed at my network, and a VRF-Lite with default route pointed at the SIP provider’s network. I’m thinking this would be the preferred way to do it, but maybe I’m missing something? My Googling is dredging up a lot of really old info that I’m not sure is still relevant. -- Mike Norton itevomcid ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] UCCE Patching
We do quarterly windows updates here, anything more often than that is a nuisance. Ed -Original Message- From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ken Rhodes Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 4:22 PM To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: [cisco-voip] UCCE Patching Just a general UCCE maintenance question for anyone out there. How do you go about patching those windows servers? Do you have a policy to patch them only for critical issues? Do you patch them every quarter, etc? I know Cisco's stance is to follow whatever company policy dictates, however I don't want to cause needless headaches. So I just want to see what everyone else typically does. ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs
What I’m failing to understand is... if I set the CUBE’s default route to be my router on my network, then how will CUBE be able to reach the SIP provider’s call servers on the SIP provider’s network? It seems like I will need a routing protocol on whichever side of the CUBE doesn’t get a default route. Is that a normal requirement? Just to back up a bit, I have been assuming CUBE would have two interfaces – one on my network, one on the SIP provider’s network. I’ve always assumed that this was the normal way of deploying CUBE but maybe I’m off base there and getting myself confused. -mn From: Erick [mailto:erick...@gmail.com] Sent: February-03-15 6:50 PM To: Norton, Mike Cc: Jason Aarons (AM); cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs Only one voice vrf can be defined in IOS. Global under voice service voip. Cube-SP lets you do multiple vrf's but is EoL and way different configuration. If you plop a cube off your router and router interface is in a vrf and your separate cube is on that network then it should be fine as the cube is just a host then with default route to router. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 3, 2015, at 6:08 PM, Norton, Mike mikenor...@pwsd76.ab.camailto:mikenor...@pwsd76.ab.ca wrote: Doesn’t have to be two VRFs, could be one VRF and the global route table, if that makes a difference. This idea is no connectivity between them, other than the application-layer connectivity provided by CUBE. This is hypothetical – I’m just trying to understand how/if this would work. I’m looking to plop a CUBE between my network and a SIP provider’s network without having to participate in routing protocol on either side. -mn From: Jason Aarons (AM) [mailto:jason.aar...@dimensiondata.com] Sent: February-03-15 5:02 PM To: Norton, Mike; cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: CUBE across VRFs You have two VRFs, do they have connectivity between them? From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Norton, Mike Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 4:36 PM To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs Can CUBE sit across two separate VRFs? I’ve never used it, but I’m envisioning an ISR having a VRF-Lite with default route pointed at my network, and a VRF-Lite with default route pointed at the SIP provider’s network. I’m thinking this would be the preferred way to do it, but maybe I’m missing something? My Googling is dredging up a lot of really old info that I’m not sure is still relevant. -- Mike Norton itevomcid ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs
I’ve seen it come two ways, riding your same MPLS circuit, in which case if you have a dedicated VG you just default route that to your MPLS router and there you go. The other way is like you say and I’ve done that with att and I didn’t have to route with them, they NAT’d everything on their side to me. So I just routed their couple SBC IPs/Subnets across that handoff and my default still goes into my LAN. I’m sure there are other ways as well. Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-RS, CCDA Network Engineer Direct Voice: 443.541.1518 Facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/heliontech?ref=hl | Twitterhttps://twitter.com/HelionTech | LinkedInhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/helion-technologies?trk=top_nav_home | G+https://plus.google.com/+Heliontechnologies/posts From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Norton, Mike Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 5:05 PM To: Erick Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs What I’m failing to understand is... if I set the CUBE’s default route to be my router on my network, then how will CUBE be able to reach the SIP provider’s call servers on the SIP provider’s network? It seems like I will need a routing protocol on whichever side of the CUBE doesn’t get a default route. Is that a normal requirement? Just to back up a bit, I have been assuming CUBE would have two interfaces – one on my network, one on the SIP provider’s network. I’ve always assumed that this was the normal way of deploying CUBE but maybe I’m off base there and getting myself confused. -mn From: Erick [mailto:erick...@gmail.com] Sent: February-03-15 6:50 PM To: Norton, Mike Cc: Jason Aarons (AM); cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs Only one voice vrf can be defined in IOS. Global under voice service voip. Cube-SP lets you do multiple vrf's but is EoL and way different configuration. If you plop a cube off your router and router interface is in a vrf and your separate cube is on that network then it should be fine as the cube is just a host then with default route to router. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 3, 2015, at 6:08 PM, Norton, Mike mikenor...@pwsd76.ab.camailto:mikenor...@pwsd76.ab.ca wrote: Doesn’t have to be two VRFs, could be one VRF and the global route table, if that makes a difference. This idea is no connectivity between them, other than the application-layer connectivity provided by CUBE. This is hypothetical – I’m just trying to understand how/if this would work. I’m looking to plop a CUBE between my network and a SIP provider’s network without having to participate in routing protocol on either side. -mn From: Jason Aarons (AM) [mailto:jason.aar...@dimensiondata.com] Sent: February-03-15 5:02 PM To: Norton, Mike; cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: CUBE across VRFs You have two VRFs, do they have connectivity between them? From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Norton, Mike Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 4:36 PM To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: [cisco-voip] CUBE across VRFs Can CUBE sit across two separate VRFs? I’ve never used it, but I’m envisioning an ISR having a VRF-Lite with default route pointed at my network, and a VRF-Lite with default route pointed at the SIP provider’s network. I’m thinking this would be the preferred way to do it, but maybe I’m missing something? My Googling is dredging up a lot of really old info that I’m not sure is still relevant. -- Mike Norton itevomcid ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] Selfprovisioning
I know I'm dredging this one up, but to contribute to the knowledge base here - the IVR service will log a message with isAlreadyProvisioned anyways, regardless of if it is or if it isn't. The error message about associating the device to the account is related to the end user profile in some regard. I have one that works, and one that doesn't. The only differences being that there are already devices associated with one of them and a primary extension. I'll play with it more later, but this one wasted a bunch of my time already today - the IVR service doesn't log any clear message at the default trace level anyways as to why it plays that recording back. This occurs prior to asking for the PIN so there's clearly some qualifier there. Regards, Adam P SUNYAB Tired that there was a SCCP template that I deleted but still no go. Leslie Meade .. Mobile:778.228.4339 | Main: 604.676.5239 Email: leslie.meade [at] lvs1mailto:leslie.meade [at] lvs1 From: Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) [mailto:rratliff [at] cisco] Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 11:10 AM To: Leslie Meade Cc: Bill Riley; cisco-voip voyp list Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Selfdeployment Look and see if a phone button template for that phone is hanging around. This sql query may be handy: select pt.name from phonetemplate pt where pt.name matches '*-Individual Template' and not exists (select 1 from device where fkphonetemplate = pt.pkid) -Ryan On Jul 11, 2014, at 1:53 PM, Leslie Meade Leslie.Meade [at] lvs1mailto:Leslie.Meade [at] lvs1 wrote: Yea the profile is not the default one but the system still tells me that it cannot be attached to the profile. I delete the phone and set it to auto register again and still get the same thing Leslie Meade .. Mobile:778.228.4339 | Main: 604.676.5239 Email: leslie.meade [at] lvs1mailto:leslie.meade [at] lvs1 From: Bill Riley [mailto:bill [at] hitechconnection] Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 10:46 AM To: Leslie Meade; cisco-voip (cisco-voip [at] puckmailto:cisco-voip [at] puck) Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Selfdeployment Sorry, you should assign a user profile to the user that is not the system default. On 7/11/2014 12:34 PM, Bill Riley wrote: Does the phone auto-register again? Also I believe the work around is to not use a profile that is not the default and assign it to the user? On 7/11/2014 11:33 AM, Leslie Meade wrote: While I wait on a response back form TAC. CUCM 10.5 with self-deployment running. I got one phone registered and it worked well. Then I decided to delete that phone and test it again. Now I get the error of This device could not be associated to your account. Please contact the System administrator to complete provisioning. I have used this doc.. and made sure that the UDT is on the user profiles. I am also aware of the bug that states that the standard/default profiles can be broken and the work around is to manual create them or assign them to the user. I look at the debug and see the devices that I am trying to register report that SEP005056911998 ~ 1033/2 ~ inside isAlreadyProvisioned I assume that this is what is causing it to fault. Any ideas ? ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip [at] puckmailto:cisco-voip [at] puck https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip [at] puckmailto:cisco-voip [at] puck https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip [at] puckmailto:cisco-voip [at] puck https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
