Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question
Thanks James/Tim for all your valuable feedback. One last question, regarding the Split Certificate introduced in MR5, I already have a certificate signed from a public CA and it's working fine (my current version is 2.5 base release), so after updating to MR5 with Split Certificate do I have to change anything regarding the certificate ? do I have to issue/upload it again ? or the certificate operation will continue working normally. Best Regards Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman Senior Network Engineer - KSA Shahd Center for Investment. Office#6 Emam Saud bin Abdulaziz Road, Olaya, Hay al-Murooj P.O Box 17384 T +966 11 200 5778-5013 F +966 11 200 5811 M +966 50 792 0925 bmbgroup.com LEBANON . EGYPT . KSA . JORDAN . IRAQ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission (and/or the attachments accompanying it) may contain confidential information belonging to the sender. The information is intended only for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Any unauthorized interception of this transmission is illegal under the law. If you have received this transmission in error, please promptly notify the sender by reply e-mail, and then destroy all copies of the transmission. -Original Message- From: Tim Smith [mailto:tim.sm...@enject.com.au] Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 6:07 AM To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman; James Buchanan Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] WebEx question MR4 was ok for me, but it did have an issue with productivity tools updates. The earlier versions of 2.5 have quite a lot of sev 1 and 2 bugs, check the release notes and you'll see the details (well some of them) But if you are not hitting them, then you can use your judgement as to whether it's a reason to upgrade. The MR's do still seem to have a history of introducing bugs as we go along, again, that's a bit annoying. (again you'll see in release notes) At some points these are sev 1,2 bugs too. I didn't hit a cert issue that I can see on on my MR5 in SDC, but I'm not sure on all the symptoms, so it still might be lurking. If you are not hitting any issues with your current version, I'd probably be inclined to wait for MR6. When you go there, you can turn on the short URL's. Cheers, Tim. -Original Message- From: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman [mailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com] Sent: Friday, 12 June 2015 12:40 AM To: James Buchanan Cc: Tim Smith; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question So as a conclusion I can go with MR5 and if I faced an issue with the mobile client I can open a TAC case to get the hot fix which is what happened with you James ? And after that hot fix was everything running smoothly with you James? Hi Tim, did you installed the MR4 in your environment ? And is it working fine ? Best Regards Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman Senior Network Engineer - BMB KSA On Jun 11, 2015, at 5:32 PM, James Buchanan james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, The certificate issue with the mobile app is not yet in the release notes. If they will reference TAC case 635173083 when you open your TAC case, they can see if you need the hotfix or not. Thanks, James On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Tim Smith tim.sm...@enject.com.aumailto:tim.sm...@enject.com.au wrote: Just make sure to check release notes before as well! http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/collaboration/CWMS/2_5/Release_Notes/Release_Notes.html#reference_23E4C721B42E4B909ABE8ECA786F88BE Cheers, Tim. From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, 12 June 2015 12:08 AM To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman Cc: Tim Smith; cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question Open a TAC case. It is post MR5. On 11 Jun 2015, at 7:46 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote: Hi James, So I can go directly to MR5 with the hotfix you mentioned, but how I can get this hotfix if it is not published on Cisco.comhttp://Cisco.com ? Best Regards Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman Senior Network Engineer - KSA From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:16 PM To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman Cc: Tim Smith; cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question Hello, It would be cumulative. However, I went from MR2 to MR5, so I'm not sure about MR4. I would just get TAC to publish the hotfix for you with special file access. Thanks, James On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote: Hi James, One question here, I assume that everything mentioned to be fixed in MR4 and earlier should be
[cisco-voip] Forked Audio
Our Current call recording vendor just told me they only support SCCP phones. is anyone else using a Forked audio call recording server that supports SIP and Built in Bridge? we are migrating to 8861's which are SIP phones. What Vendors are you using and do you have the pro's and con's you would like to share? TIA scott ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question
Thanks James. Best Regards Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman Senior Network Engineer - BMB KSA On Jun 12, 2015, at 7:32 PM, James Buchanan james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, The split cert is optional. Your certs should continue working normally. Thanks, James On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 6:08 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote: Thanks James/Tim for all your valuable feedback. One last question, regarding the Split Certificate introduced in MR5, I already have a certificate signed from a public CA and it's working fine (my current version is 2.5 base release), so after updating to MR5 with Split Certificate do I have to change anything regarding the certificate ? do I have to issue/upload it again ? or the certificate operation will continue working normally. Best Regards Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman Senior Network Engineer - KSA Shahd Center for Investment. Office#6 Emam Saud bin Abdulaziz Road, Olaya, Hay al-Murooj P.O Box 17384 T +966 11 200 5778-5013 F +966 11 200 5811 M +966 50 792 0925 bmbgroup.comhttp://bmbgroup.com LEBANON . EGYPT . KSA . JORDAN . IRAQ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission (and/or the attachments accompanying it) may contain confidential information belonging to the sender. The information is intended only for the use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Any unauthorized interception of this transmission is illegal under the law. If you have received this transmission in error, please promptly notify the sender by reply e-mail, and then destroy all copies of the transmission. -Original Message- From: Tim Smith [mailto:tim.sm...@enject.com.aumailto:tim.sm...@enject.com.au] Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 6:07 AM To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman; James Buchanan Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] WebEx question MR4 was ok for me, but it did have an issue with productivity tools updates. The earlier versions of 2.5 have quite a lot of sev 1 and 2 bugs, check the release notes and you'll see the details (well some of them) But if you are not hitting them, then you can use your judgement as to whether it's a reason to upgrade. The MR's do still seem to have a history of introducing bugs as we go along, again, that's a bit annoying. (again you'll see in release notes) At some points these are sev 1,2 bugs too. I didn't hit a cert issue that I can see on on my MR5 in SDC, but I'm not sure on all the symptoms, so it still might be lurking. If you are not hitting any issues with your current version, I'd probably be inclined to wait for MR6. When you go there, you can turn on the short URL's. Cheers, Tim. -Original Message- From: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman [mailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com] Sent: Friday, 12 June 2015 12:40 AM To: James Buchanan Cc: Tim Smith; cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question So as a conclusion I can go with MR5 and if I faced an issue with the mobile client I can open a TAC case to get the hot fix which is what happened with you James ? And after that hot fix was everything running smoothly with you James? Hi Tim, did you installed the MR4 in your environment ? And is it working fine ? Best Regards Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman Senior Network Engineer - BMB KSA On Jun 11, 2015, at 5:32 PM, James Buchanan james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, The certificate issue with the mobile app is not yet in the release notes. If they will reference TAC case 635173083 when you open your TAC case, they can see if you need the hotfix or not. Thanks, James On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Tim Smith tim.sm...@enject.com.aumailto:tim.sm...@enject.com.aumailto:tim.sm...@enject.com.aumailto:tim.sm...@enject.com.au wrote: Just make sure to check release notes before as well! http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/collaboration/CWMS/2_5/Release_Notes/Release_Notes.html#reference_23E4C721B42E4B909ABE8ECA786F88BE Cheers, Tim. From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, 12 June 2015 12:08 AM To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman Cc: Tim Smith; cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question Open a TAC case. It is post MR5. On 11 Jun 2015, at 7:46 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com
Re: [cisco-voip] Lead Second
Document released today on cisco.comhttp://cisco.com regarding UC Applications impacted by the June 30th Leap Second: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-callmanager/119036-technote-vos-00.html -Matt On Jun 10, 2015, at 1:44 PM, Wes Sisk (wsisk) ws...@cisco.com wrote: Good call out Andrew. adding a quote so that this might register a little more… When the leap second update occurs it is possible for the kernel to hang or halt.” Kernel offline means all services/applications/processes offline. This is a little important. -w On Jun 8, 2015, at 8:53 PM, Andrew Grech agrec...@gmail.commailto:agrec...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Guys, As an advisory please check here for the up and coming leap second. Some UC versions are affected http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/leap-second.html#~ProductInformation ___ 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 ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] Forked Audio
Scott, while I did not work on that particular part of the engagement, a previous customer of mine used Telstrat. The phones were 79xx series running SIP firmware, and it also supported secure recording of SRTP streams. However, I can offer no comment or pros/cons of the software - other than that they got it to work with my assistance on the CUCM side. :-) On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Scott Voll svoll.v...@gmail.com wrote: Our Current call recording vendor just told me they only support SCCP phones. is anyone else using a Forked audio call recording server that supports SIP and Built in Bridge? we are migrating to 8861's which are SIP phones. What Vendors are you using and do you have the pro's and con's you would like to share? TIA scott ___ 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] Forked Audio
We currently use both verint and higher ground. The latter is using both a span port and built in bridge (two separate installs). Verint is expensive and is frustrating to support since they love using Java. But it works. Higher ground easy to install and support but it depends on a thick client. On Jun 12, 2015 4:29 PM, Dave Goodwin dave.good...@december.net wrote: Scott, while I did not work on that particular part of the engagement, a previous customer of mine used Telstrat. The phones were 79xx series running SIP firmware, and it also supported secure recording of SRTP streams. However, I can offer no comment or pros/cons of the software - other than that they got it to work with my assistance on the CUCM side. :-) On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Scott Voll svoll.v...@gmail.com wrote: Our Current call recording vendor just told me they only support SCCP phones. is anyone else using a Forked audio call recording server that supports SIP and Built in Bridge? we are migrating to 8861's which are SIP phones. What Vendors are you using and do you have the pro's and con's you would like to share? TIA scott ___ 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] 10.5.2 tomcat virtual memory issues?
Is anyone aware of any tomcat virtual memory issues in 10.5.2 SU1 or maybe a tomcat memory leak? We're getting RTMT alerts about low virtual memory on different 10.5 clusters since updating them from 8.x or 9.x. The VMs have 4 gig memory from prior version OVA and the CPU/memory on VM matches current 10.5 OVA. From the RTMT alerts it appears the tomcat is slowly using more memory. Erick ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] UCS c220 SFF unable to access CIMC
Is the https/ssh to the CIMC or vSphere or some application that is guest? Sound like maybe a host update (does the UEFI/BIOS, Controller, NICs etc) to fix a bug if CIMC. The CIMC has a dedicated NIC, are you using that? Normally I won’t do a trunk port to the CIMC, but switchport mode access. You really want the CIMC to be reliable for disasters, keep it simple. From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of K H Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 10:58 AM To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: [cisco-voip] UCS c220 SFF unable to access CIMC Thanks to all who investigate this issue or post advise. We have a UCS c220 and while the configuration by our reseller seemed to be solid we are unable to telnet, SSH, or access via browser HTTPS (unless we are on the same exact subnet and connected via Ethernet to the switchport) the UCS box to check the drive health etc. SSH and Telnet connections are Refused adjusted the baud rate and CIMC to enable telnet. It's not on the same subnet it's IP is 12.112.0.10 VLAN 1000 (enabled - UCS IP address), local data VLAN ID:10 IP: 12.112.10.25, local voice VLAN ID:110 IP: 12.112.20.25. We routinely traverse the LAN for Windows servers with IP's such as 12.112.2.25 12.112.2.75. So why the difference in being able to browse to the CIMC while on the local LAN but hit the x.x.0.10 VLAN 1000 ? Trunk ports seem to be configured properly allowing VLAN traffic of the two specific ID's access. This may be a basic question but once a trunk port is configured, must we explicitly add all vlan's on the subnet to the trunk port config i.e. Data vlan id: 10, voice vlan id: 110, Server vlan id:1000 ? Could that be the answer. Also, checking the port config on the UCS reveals management ports configured with the following: Interface GigabitEthernet2/0/2 switchport access vlan 10 switchport mode access switchport voice vlan 110 srr-‐queue bandwidth share 1 30 35 5 priority-‐queue out mls qos trust device cisco-‐phone mls qos trust cos Auto qos trust spanning-‐tree portfast spanning-‐tree bpduguard enable service-‐policy input AUTOQOS-‐SRND4-‐CISCOPHONE-‐POLICY Much appreciated ladies and gents, enjoy your weekend !!! itevomcid ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
[cisco-voip] Please remove me from this
Greg W Solutions Engineer This message w/attachments (message) is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or proprietary. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender, and then please delete and destroy all copies and attachments, and be advised that any review or dissemination of, or the taking of any action in reliance on, the information contained in or attached to this message is prohibited. Unless specifically indicated, this message is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of any products. ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] 10.5.2 tomcat virtual memory issues?
I'm not sure of a bug, but I do know in 11.0 they are increasing the memory requirements for all CUCM VMs because of increased memory usage over time. Could possibly just be a tuning issue with the alert settings. -Original Message- From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Erick Bergquist Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 7:22 AM To: voip puck Subject: [cisco-voip] 10.5.2 tomcat virtual memory issues? Is anyone aware of any tomcat virtual memory issues in 10.5.2 SU1 or maybe a tomcat memory leak? We're getting RTMT alerts about low virtual memory on different 10.5 clusters since updating them from 8.x or 9.x. The VMs have 4 gig memory from prior version OVA and the CPU/memory on VM matches current 10.5 OVA. From the RTMT alerts it appears the tomcat is slowly using more memory. Erick ___ 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] UCS c220 SFF unable to access CIMC
Thanks to all who investigate this issue or post advise. We have a UCS c220 and while the configuration by our reseller seemed to be solid we are unable to telnet, SSH, or access via browser HTTPS (unless we are on the same exact subnet and connected via Ethernet to the switchport) the UCS box to check the drive health etc. SSH and Telnet connections are Refused adjusted the baud rate and CIMC to enable telnet. It's not on the same subnet it's IP is 12.112.0.10 VLAN 1000 (enabled - UCS IP address), local data VLAN ID:10 IP: 12.112.10.25, local voice VLAN ID:110 IP: 12.112.20.25. We routinely traverse the LAN for Windows servers with IP's such as 12.112.2.25 12.112.2.75. So why the difference in being able to browse to the CIMC while on the local LAN but hit the x.x.0.10 VLAN 1000 ? Trunk ports seem to be configured properly allowing VLAN traffic of the two specific ID's access. This may be a basic question but once a trunk port is configured, must we explicitly add all vlan's on the subnet to the trunk port config i.e. Data vlan id: 10, voice vlan id: 110, Server vlan id:1000 ? Could that be the answer. Also, checking the port config on the UCS reveals management ports configured with the following: Interface GigabitEthernet2/0/2 switchport access vlan 10 switchport mode access switchport voice vlan 110 srr-‐queue bandwidth share 1 3035 5 priority-‐queue out mls qos trust device cisco-‐phone mls qos trust cos Auto qos trust spanning-‐tree portfast spanning-‐tree bpduguard enable service-‐policy input AUTOQOS-‐SRND4-‐CISCOPHONE-‐POLICY Much appreciated ladies and gents, enjoy your weekend !!! ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] 10.5.2 tomcat virtual memory issues?
We are having issues with it on CUC 10.5.1, and TAC tells us it's a false alert and we can ignore it. They have no plans to fix it. If anyone wants more details, I can give it to you and/or a TAC case number. On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Erick Bergquist erick...@gmail.com wrote: Yep, around 2G here to. I had increased the trigger on the alert by a bit earlier but now it is tripping again quite often. Looks to be slowly increasing over time so I'm leaning toward a leak. Will try to restart tomcat and see if same pattern occurs when I get a chance on one of them. On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Brian Meade bmead...@vt.edu wrote: We've been seeing pretty high memory utilization for 10.5 as well. It stays pretty constant around 2GB. We're thinking about increasing the RAM for some of these at it looks like 2GB is the new normal for tomcat. On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Erick Bergquist erick...@gmail.com wrote: Is anyone aware of any tomcat virtual memory issues in 10.5.2 SU1 or maybe a tomcat memory leak? We're getting RTMT alerts about low virtual memory on different 10.5 clusters since updating them from 8.x or 9.x. The VMs have 4 gig memory from prior version OVA and the CPU/memory on VM matches current 10.5 OVA. From the RTMT alerts it appears the tomcat is slowly using more memory. Erick ___ 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] Hosted Jabber, SSO and onprem UCM and UCXN
I should also add this is intermittent. Sometimes Jabber will connection to Unity Connection just fine with SSO. Sometimes it will try to connect to the DNS servers (Show Connection Status shows the DNS server as voicemail) and fail. Sometimes it will try to connect to Unity Connection but without SSO. On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Justin Steinberg jsteinb...@gmail.com wrote: It seems like the problem is that for some reason, Jabber thinks the DNS server is the voicemail server. So it is performing a SSO check with the DNS server and that fails. Any idea why Jabber would be doing this ? On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Justin Steinberg jsteinb...@gmail.com wrote: i've looked through it and i'm not sure where it is going wrong. It doesn't help that the file is 15,000 or so lines long for a three minute login :) i've opened a case with Webex Messenger team and will probably do the same with Jabber/CUC. Justin On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Brian Meade bmead...@vt.edu wrote: Probably worth pulling a problem report right after sign in. It should show the process of checking if SSO is enabled for Unity Connection. On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Justin Steinberg jsteinb...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Chris, I checked all that out and it looks alright. In testing this afternoon, we've gotten the UCXN SSO to work on a couple occasions but it doesn't stay. The Jabber client ends up not logging into voicemail and in the Jabber client FileOptionsAccounts, it wants the user to enter their credentials.Jabber shouldn't be allowing users to enter their credentials in the client with SSO enabled. I turned up samltrace to debug on UCXN and pulled the logs. Jabber doesn't even seem to be hitting the UCXN server when it fails, it's like Jabber doesn't realize UCXN is SSO enabled.I'm opening a case with Webex Messenger support to start, then will see where that goes. Justin On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Chris Clouse chris.clo...@cdw.com wrote: · Verify the following Unity Connection Services are started. - Connection Jetty - Connection REST Service · Verify the class of service has Allow Users to Use the Web Inbox and RSS Feeds, Allow Users to Access Voice Mail Using an IMAP Client and/or Single Inbox, Allow Users to Use Unified Client to Access Voice Mail enabled · Verify the Unity Connection API Settings are enabled (System Settings-Advanced-API Settings) - Allow Access to Secure Message Recordings through CUMI - Display Message Header Information of Secure Messages through CUMI - Allow Message Attachments through CUMI Also make sure that you don’t have VoicemailService_UseCredentialsFromphone/VoicemailService_UseCredentialsFrom in your jabber-config.xml file as it will need to have a separate login for the voicemail server versus CallManager. *~Chris* *From:* Justin Steinberg [mailto:jsteinb...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, June 10, 2015 12:30 PM *To:* Chris Clouse *Cc:* Cisco VOIP *Subject:* RE: [cisco-voip] Hosted Jabber, SSO and onprem UCM and UCXN Yes I've done that. The Unity Connection Web Inbox and UCM Self Care Portal page both have functioning SSO. It's just Jabber that won't utilize SSO when using CUC. Justin On Jun 10, 2015 1:16 PM, Chris Clouse chris.clo...@cdw.com wrote: In order for the phone services and voicemail to be connected via SSO, CUCM and UCXN will also need to be enabled for SAML SSO on their own as well as having the WebEx Messenger SSO. I would recommend that you be on 10.5+ even though it states supported with 10.0. http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/SAML_SSO_deployment_guide/10_0_1/CUCM_BK_SB003832_00_saml-sso-deployment-guide-for/CUCM_BK_SB003832_00_saml-sso-deployment-guide-for_chapter_010.html *~Chris* *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Justin Steinberg *Sent:* Wednesday, June 10, 2015 12:09 PM *To:* Cisco VOIP *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Hosted Jabber, SSO and onprem UCM and UCXN Has anyone setup SSO in the hybrid Jabber deployment model? Customer has hosted WebEx Messenger Jabber, on-prem CUCM, and UCXN. We have enabled SSO for all three systems. We can use SSO to login to jabber and the UCM and UCXN end user self service web interfaces.All that seems OK and SSO is working. The problem is that once jabbers logs in to WebEx Messenger, it requires the user to go into fileoptions and manually enter their voicemail credentials. I expect that it should just SSO into WebEx messenger, UCM phone services and UCXN voicemail services. Any thoughts? Justin ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ cisco-voip mailing list
