[cisco-voip] Caller ID

[Lisa Notarianni]

In Call Manager ver 10.5, is there any way when a call comes in through a PRI 
(outside of the network) to a DID and then forwards to a Remote Destination 
configuration to pass the caller ID along instead of the default number 
associated with the PRI?




___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[cisco-voip] Cisco hardware with built-in echo service

[Sevana Oy]

Hi,

I heard there are Cisco phones with built-in echo service, do you know any
by chance?

Thanks,
Amanda @ Sevana
http://sevana.biz
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Caller ID

[Matthew Loraditch]

It depends on where you are programming the outbound Caller ID. The redirecting 
CSS is the path used to get to the mobile so as long as nothing in that path 
sets the ID it will pass through.
We use to program the CID directly on the MGCP PRI configs in CUCM. With 
mobility we moved it to the route patterns and then set up a separate set of 
partitions/rps just for mobility calls that didn't force the CID.

Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R, CCDA
Network Engineer
Direct Voice: 443.541.1518

Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | G+

-Original Message-
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lisa 
Notarianni
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 7:29 AM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Caller ID

In Call Manager ver 10.5, is there any way when a call comes in through a PRI 
(outside of the network) to a DID and then forwards to a Remote Destination 
configuration to pass the caller ID along instead of the default number 
associated with the PRI?




___
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] ESXi RAM Requirements

[Anthony Holloway]

Hey All,

I'm trying to understand the concept of ESXi's RAM requirements, and with
5.5 VMWare says the minimum is 4GB, but they do recommend 8GB for "full
features."

When I look at this one guide as an example:
http://docwiki.cisco.com/wiki/UC_Virtualization_Supported_Hardware#BE6000H.C2.A0Servers_and_Small_Plus_UConUCS_Tested.C2.A0Reference_Configurations

It shows that 48GB of RAM is installed inside, but only 44GB is available
to VMs.  That makes me think Cisco is only accounting for a 4GB minimum,
and not the 8GB recommended.

Is that what you read that as, as well?  And how does one allocate 8GB to
ESXi?  Do you just not use it for your VMs and leave it on the table, a la
CUC core reservation?

A little late Friday evening thoughts right before a holiday weekend.
That's how you know I'm in this job deep.  Thanks and have a great weekend.
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] ESXi RAM Requirements

[Charles Goldsmith]

This is purely a guess, but I think the fact that we don't use a lot of the
features available in ESXI is why Cisco doesn't have us reserve 8gb.  I've
never had an issue with running out of ram on a production system, always
cores.

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey All,
>
> I'm trying to understand the concept of ESXi's RAM requirements, and with
> 5.5 VMWare says the minimum is 4GB, but they do recommend 8GB for "full
> features."
>
> When I look at this one guide as an example:
>
> http://docwiki.cisco.com/wiki/UC_Virtualization_Supported_Hardware#BE6000H.C2.A0Servers_and_Small_Plus_UConUCS_Tested.C2.A0Reference_Configurations
>
> It shows that 48GB of RAM is installed inside, but only 44GB is available
> to VMs.  That makes me think Cisco is only accounting for a 4GB minimum,
> and not the 8GB recommended.
>
> Is that what you read that as, as well?  And how does one allocate 8GB to
> ESXi?  Do you just not use it for your VMs and leave it on the table, a la
> CUC core reservation?
>
> A little late Friday evening thoughts right before a holiday weekend.
> That's how you know I'm in this job deep.  Thanks and have a great weekend.
>
>
> ___
> 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] Remote Phone Control -- Opinions

[Terry Oakley]

I add to the UnifiedFX solution for remote phone control.  We still are a 
strong Singlewire shop with their InformaCast product for notification, both 
informational and emergency.  With the drop in support of the RemotePhone 
software it was very nice to find the UnifiedFX solution.   Very happy with the 
results and they just keep adding to the offering so that even makes it better.

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Scott 
Voll
Sent: October 29, 2015 3:51 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Remote Phone Control -- Opinions

So what vendor do you use for Remote phone control?

Do you like them?

Pro's and Con's?

We have used SingleWire for the last 5 or 6 years, but they have made their's 
free and not continuing support for new Models.

We are moving from 7961's to 88xx series.  I have a Demo of Uplinx.  It seems 
very feature rich, but the GUI could use a little updating (seems a little 
xp'ish).

Before I go and spend any money, I want to go with the best.

TIA

Scott

___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Remote Phone Control -- Opinions

[Tom Sparks]

I recently did some research into these tools and here are my pros and cons
for whoever is insterested.

*UnifiedFX, Singlewire*
 Pros: nice, functional, affordable
 Cons: thick client, point tool so not great for making available to a team
of users

*Variphy*
 Pros: decent, server-based, does other things like configuration reporting
 Cons: newest phones didn't work that well, sluggish screen load

*Riverbed UCExpert* (used to be called Clarus)
 Pros: good performance, server-based, does similar things to Variphy but
also testing and other vendor support besides Cisco (that was important for
my particular need)
 Cons: more expensive


At this point, I haven't decided but am leaning towards Riverbed because 1)
it supports other vendors 2)  I like the product and 3) we already have
some other Riverbed equipment (sniffers and steelheads).



Tom Sparks
Taos Consulting
Sr. Voice | Video Engineer
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Caller ID

[Norton, Mike]

Caller ID will normally survive call-forwarding, unless you are rewriting it 
somewhere. In which case, the solution is to not do that, as Matthew explained.

There's a good chance you are already sending the correct caller ID (check out 
the debug isdn q931 on your gateway to confirm). But since you sent a number 
that you don't own, your carrier is rewriting it to your main PRI number. This 
is very common behaviour for carriers.

With my carrier, the magic phrase I had to ask for was for them to "remove the 
screening tables." There was no cost, but to protect themselves from liability, 
they required my corporate treasurer to sign a letter saying that we promise 
not to mess up caller ID of 911 calls. After that they allow us to send 
whatever caller ID we want.

-mn


-Original Message-
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lisa 
Notarianni
Sent: October-30-15 5:29 AM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Caller ID

In Call Manager ver 10.5, is there any way when a call comes in through a PRI 
(outside of the network) to a DID and then forwards to a Remote Destination 
configuration to pass the caller ID along instead of the default number 
associated with the PRI?
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Remote Phone Control -- Opinions

[Scott Voll]

Nice list.  Thanks for the feed back.

Scott


On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Tom Sparks 
wrote:

> I recently did some research into these tools and here are my pros and
> cons for whoever is insterested.
>
> *UnifiedFX, Singlewire*
>  Pros: nice, functional, affordable
>  Cons: thick client, point tool so not great for making available to a
> team of users
>
> *Variphy*
>  Pros: decent, server-based, does other things like configuration reporting
>  Cons: newest phones didn't work that well, sluggish screen load
>
> *Riverbed UCExpert* (used to be called Clarus)
>  Pros: good performance, server-based, does similar things to Variphy but
> also testing and other vendor support besides Cisco (that was important for
> my particular need)
>  Cons: more expensive
>
>
> At this point, I haven't decided but am leaning towards Riverbed because
> 1) it supports other vendors 2)  I like the product and 3) we already have
> some other Riverbed equipment (sniffers and steelheads).
>
>
>
> Tom Sparks
> Taos Consulting
> Sr. Voice | Video Engineer
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Remote Phone Control -- Opinions

[Dan Schmitt]

1:55 -0500
> From: Charles Goldsmith <wo...@justfamily.org>
> To: Scott Voll <svoll.v...@gmail.com>
> Cc: "cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remote Phone Control -- Opinions
> Message-ID:
>   <cagm7t+ashp_od9yuireqtbwzyjm5nlu5se3dzykdw39e4wn...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Variphy (variphy.com), and it comes with a lot of other very handy tools.
> 
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.v...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > So what vendor do you use for Remote phone control?
> >
> > Do you like them?
> >
> > Pro's and Con's?
> >
> > We have used SingleWire for the last 5 or 6 years, but they have made
> > their's free and not continuing support for new Models.
> >
> > We are moving from 7961's to 88xx series.  I have a Demo of Uplinx.  It
> > seems very feature rich, but the GUI could use a little updating (seems a
> > little xp'ish).
> >
> > Before I go and spend any money, I want to go with the best.
> >
> > TIA
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> > ___
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >
> >
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20151029/5dbb5cea/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 12
> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:55:03 +1100
> From: Nick Britt <nickolasjbr...@gmail.com>
> To: Charles Goldsmith <wo...@justfamily.org>
> Cc: Scott Voll <svoll.v...@gmail.com>,  "cisco-voip@puck.nether.net"
>   <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remote Phone Control -- Opinions
> Message-ID:
>   <cakss23+b3e00hqyrreypp8tfiknpfv_btuwfc98mxnlzodx...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> +1 plus for unified fx saved my bacon numerous times ;-)
> 
> On Friday, 30 October 2015, Charles Goldsmith <wo...@justfamily.org> wrote:
> 
> > Variphy (variphy.com), and it comes with a lot of other very handy tools.
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.v...@gmail.com
> > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','svoll.v...@gmail.com');>> wrote:
> >
> >> So what vendor do you use for Remote phone control?
> >>
> >> Do you like them?
> >>
> >> Pro's and Con's?
> >>
> >> We have used SingleWire for the last 5 or 6 years, but they have made
> >> their's free and not continuing support for new Models.
> >>
> >> We are moving from 7961's to 88xx series.  I have a Demo of Uplinx.  It
> >> seems very feature rich, but the GUI could use a little updating (seems a
> >> little xp'ish).
> >>
> >> Before I go and spend any money, I want to go with the best.
> >>
> >> TIA
> >>
> >> Scott
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> cisco-voip mailing list
> >> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cisco-voip@puck.nether.net');>
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >>
> >>
> >
> 
> -- 
> - Nick
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20151030/40bd5065/attachment-0001.html>
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 13
> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 20:36:13 -0400
> From: Mike King <m...@mpking.com>
> To: Scott Voll <svoll.v...@gmail.com>
> Cc: "cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Windows SFTP / FTP server recommendations?
> Message-ID:
>   <cantppk4zsbbap9gv2n713zioo5k4gxlu9mbqmibkelza9du...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Filezilla is the FTP/ SFTP server I've been rolling with for awhile.
> 
> Mike
> 
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Scott Voll <svoll.v...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > What are others using for there UC backup server Application for SFTP and
> > FTP?
> >
> > I've started a pilot with FreeFTPd but it keeps crashing and then I have
> > to restart it and run my backups again.
> >
> > What have others had good success using?
> >
> >