Re: [cisco-voip] BAT and the VG310...
It might be better to configure 1 manually, do an Export then modify and import. However that might fail too ☺ From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jonathan Charles Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 9:40 AM To: Charles Goldsmith; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BAT and the VG310... I am doing SCCP... so how should it be formed? On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Charles Goldsmith wo...@justfamily.orgmailto:wo...@justfamily.org wrote: Not with MGCP Sent via C=64 Mobile On Jun 15, 2015, at 12:09 AM, Jonathan Charles jonv...@gmail.commailto:jonv...@gmail.com wrote: So, for Domain Name, did you not specify the SKIGWXXX or just the last 10 of the MAC? Jonathan On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Charles Goldsmith wo...@justfamily.orgmailto:wo...@justfamily.org wrote: Jonathan, here is the csv I've used recently with a MGCP vg310. Just like a 224, I create the gateway template and setup the first port with a line template. I did this recently on a 10.5.2 system with no issues. Let me know if you have any questions. On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Jonathan Charles jonv...@gmail.commailto:jonv...@gmail.com wrote: Tried BATing a VG310 in the same way we used to do a VG224 and it failed like crazy...it installs the first one, then errors out saying the domain name already exists... I used the BAT template with 10.5.2-11900 and used the tab for the VG310s. I tried adding the VG310 first and not, each time it fails... or just adds the first port 0... Any ideas? Jonathan ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip itevomcid ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question
Dears, I have upgraded from CWMS 2.5 to CWMS 2.5 MR5, the upgrade went smoothly and was successful. But after the upgrade I have notices a big delays when the user try to create/join a meeting which was the same symptoms when the server was not having a valid SSL certificate (we have a public CA signed certificate). And on the server I noticed that the previously working certificate was assigned on the server as internal SSL certificate while for the external SSL certificate it shows that it doesn't have one. In the release notes nothing was mentioned in this regard, so any ideas how we can get it to work normally after this upgrade ? 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: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 2:00 AM To: James Buchanan Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: 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] CUC 10.5 COBRAS possible bug on import?
We have a CUC 8.6 with a Message Action of accept and relay to email for voice messages. We used COBRAS to go to 10.5 and the read messages kicked off emails to the users. Shouldn't the system have NOT sent emails on restored read messages? Jonathan ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] Forked Audio
Depending on the use cases and requirements. You should consider Cisco MediaSense. It has support for both Network-based Recording (Built-in Bridge and Gateway) and CUBE dial-peer forking. Any questions, just reach out. +Chris TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jon Shay Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 9:42 PM To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: 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.netmailto: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.commailto: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.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip ___ 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] BAT and the VG310...
OK, the export and reimport worked... sort of... The phones are there and registered, but under the Gateway, they still show the ? on the ports... I don't think this worked... On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Jonathan Charles jonv...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, I tried just last 10 digits of MAC, tried SKIGW, all of it got weird results, never adding more than the first device... I may have to do the export and reimport... On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 9:17 AM, Charles Goldsmith wo...@justfamily.org wrote: I'm not sure Jonathan, I have not done SCCP on a VG310, I would assume it would be the same as a 224, but you know what that gets you (assuming). On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Charles jonv...@gmail.com wrote: I am doing SCCP... so how should it be formed? On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Charles Goldsmith wo...@justfamily.org wrote: Not with MGCP Sent via C=64 Mobile On Jun 15, 2015, at 12:09 AM, Jonathan Charles jonv...@gmail.com wrote: So, for Domain Name, did you not specify the SKIGWXXX or just the last 10 of the MAC? Jonathan On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Charles Goldsmith wo...@justfamily.org wrote: Jonathan, here is the csv I've used recently with a MGCP vg310. Just like a 224, I create the gateway template and setup the first port with a line template. I did this recently on a 10.5.2 system with no issues. Let me know if you have any questions. On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Jonathan Charles jonv...@gmail.com wrote: Tried BATing a VG310 in the same way we used to do a VG224 and it failed like crazy...it installs the first one, then errors out saying the domain name already exists... I used the BAT template with 10.5.2-11900 and used the tab for the VG310s. I tried adding the VG310 first and not, each time it fails... or just adds the first port 0... Any ideas? Jonathan ___ 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] BAT and the VG310...
I'm not sure Jonathan, I have not done SCCP on a VG310, I would assume it would be the same as a 224, but you know what that gets you (assuming). On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Charles jonv...@gmail.com wrote: I am doing SCCP... so how should it be formed? On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Charles Goldsmith wo...@justfamily.org wrote: Not with MGCP Sent via C=64 Mobile On Jun 15, 2015, at 12:09 AM, Jonathan Charles jonv...@gmail.com wrote: So, for Domain Name, did you not specify the SKIGWXXX or just the last 10 of the MAC? Jonathan On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Charles Goldsmith wo...@justfamily.org wrote: Jonathan, here is the csv I've used recently with a MGCP vg310. Just like a 224, I create the gateway template and setup the first port with a line template. I did this recently on a 10.5.2 system with no issues. Let me know if you have any questions. On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Jonathan Charles jonv...@gmail.com wrote: Tried BATing a VG310 in the same way we used to do a VG224 and it failed like crazy...it installs the first one, then errors out saying the domain name already exists... I used the BAT template with 10.5.2-11900 and used the tab for the VG310s. I tried adding the VG310 first and not, each time it fails... or just adds the first port 0... Any ideas? Jonathan ___ 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] BAT and the VG310...
Yeah, I tried just last 10 digits of MAC, tried SKIGW, all of it got weird results, never adding more than the first device... I may have to do the export and reimport... On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 9:17 AM, Charles Goldsmith wo...@justfamily.org wrote: I'm not sure Jonathan, I have not done SCCP on a VG310, I would assume it would be the same as a 224, but you know what that gets you (assuming). On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 8:39 AM, Jonathan Charles jonv...@gmail.com wrote: I am doing SCCP... so how should it be formed? On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Charles Goldsmith wo...@justfamily.org wrote: Not with MGCP Sent via C=64 Mobile On Jun 15, 2015, at 12:09 AM, Jonathan Charles jonv...@gmail.com wrote: So, for Domain Name, did you not specify the SKIGWXXX or just the last 10 of the MAC? Jonathan On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Charles Goldsmith wo...@justfamily.org wrote: Jonathan, here is the csv I've used recently with a MGCP vg310. Just like a 224, I create the gateway template and setup the first port with a line template. I did this recently on a 10.5.2 system with no issues. Let me know if you have any questions. On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Jonathan Charles jonv...@gmail.com wrote: Tried BATing a VG310 in the same way we used to do a VG224 and it failed like crazy...it installs the first one, then errors out saying the domain name already exists... I used the BAT template with 10.5.2-11900 and used the tab for the VG310s. I tried adding the VG310 first and not, each time it fails... or just adds the first port 0... Any ideas? Jonathan ___ 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] CUC 10.5 COBRAS possible bug on import?
The good news is the COBRAS developer Jeff Lindborg monitors NetPro forums supportforums.cisco.com Post your question there and you’ll likely get a response from him if it’s a known issue. From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jonathan Charles Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 11:59 AM To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: [cisco-voip] CUC 10.5 COBRAS possible bug on import? We have a CUC 8.6 with a Message Action of accept and relay to email for voice messages. We used COBRAS to go to 10.5 and the read messages kicked off emails to the users. Shouldn't the system have NOT sent emails on restored read messages? Jonathan itevomcid ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] Consolidate multiple CUCM clusters using Prime Collab Provisioning
I would say this would be extremely ambitious. I would just recommend using the UCM BAT export/import, along with some excel manipulation. On Jun 15, 2015 3:49 PM, Rob Dawson rdaw...@force3.com wrote: Not much more info than the subject – is it possible to consolidate multiple CUCM clusters onto a new virtualized infrastructure utilizing PCP? Anyone done it? Pointers? Thanks, Rob ___ 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
