Re: [cisco-voip] Call Manager publisher - Database Communication Error

[Charles Goldsmith]

platform config xml is created during install, which is something that TAC
will have to root in and modify / resolve for you.

On Sun, Jun 4, 2023 at 9:01 AM Terry Oakley 
wrote:

> Cannot login to the GUI on the publisher but can on both subscribers.
> cli to publisher and ran 'show tech dbstateinfo'
> [Fatal Error] platformConfig.xml:187:16: Character reference "" is an
> invalid XML character.
>
> If I go to the output file 'showtechdbstatetxt I see the same fatal
> error as above
>
> In the  log file I have
>
> db...@xxx.rdc.xxx: User db...@xxx.rdc.xxx's password is not
> correct format for the database server.
> Password validation for user (dbims) failed!
> Check for password aging/account lock-out
>
> run utils dbreplication runtimestate
> same invalid xml character error
> Sync completed
> All tables are in sync
>
>
> When I logon to the Subscribers (GUI) and run the System report Unified CM
> Database Status I get
>
> Source has failed due to source on xxx timing out
> The publisher database cannot be reached
> The local database cannot be reached
>
> Kind of spinning my wheels as I am not sure where to start to get the
> publisher back into the happy world of the CCM cluster and remote users
> will be trying to connect via Jabber and my remote test fails.
>
> Thanking you in advance for any assistance/direction you can provide.
>
> Terry
>
>
> ___
> 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] Compatibility question

[Charles Goldsmith]

Yes, runs fine on 7.03k, which is the latest patch IIRC.

>From the docs:

   - *ESXi patches* within a supported ESXi major/minor/maintenance (e.g.
   patch 6.7.0d for "L1TF – VMM" mitigation): all are supported unless
   otherwise indicated, or if they clash with other requirements in this
   document.

Found in
https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/uc_system/virtualization/cisco-collaboration-infrastructure.html

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 11:09 AM Terry Oakley 
wrote:

> Our infrastructure team are looking to upgrade our VMWare ESXi from 6.x to
> 7.0 U3.   Cisco support pages show that UC 12.5 supports 7.0 U1.   Do any
> of you know if going to U3 would cause issues for our on prem telephony?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Terry
> ___
> 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] Webex App Config XML?

[Charles Goldsmith]

It's my understanding that the jabber-config.xml works on Webex soft
phone settings, but not sure if it has options for other Webex settings.

Never had the need to modify them.

Have you checked for those settings in the control hub?

On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 4:02 PM Johnson, Tim  wrote:

> Hello all,
>
>
>
> We just recently migrated to the Webex App and have found some annoyances
> with the settings that are default. Is there a way to customize the
> settings for the Webex app globally, similar to how you could setup a
> jabber-config.xml file? The thing we’re specifically looking for right now
> is how to disable the “Use ultrasound” option under Devices, but I imagine
> there will be more items we’d like to manipulate.
>
>
>
> TIA,
>
> Tim Johnson
> ___
> 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] Certificate questioin

[Charles Goldsmith]

If you check all of your certs, I bet you have none that reference the
GeoTrust.

IIRC, it was used for the Call Home feature, and unless you are using that,
you don't need it and can safely delete it out of the trust.

On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:17 PM Terry Oakley 
wrote:

> I would have in the past, sent this to TAC but our institution is
> exploring other telephony solutions and decided to error on the side of
> Cisco reliability and therefore we no longer have said support.   So I am
> left to try and manage the old and new simultaneously.   The old has an
> expired certificate (certificates are not my friend, acquaintance or
> anything that assimilates that).   Can any of you who are much more
> brilliant and certainly more certificate savvy than I, tell me where I
> would get a replacement to a GeoTrust_Global_CA certificate?   I went
> looking via the googs and well my brain just cannot wrap my head around
> which would be the right one.
>
>
>
> Thank you for in advance for the assistance and sharing of knowledge.
>
>
>
> Terry
>
>
> ___
> 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] Copper plant

[Charles Goldsmith]

Lisa, is it your copper or Verizons?  If Verizon is removed, can you re-use
the copper for analog phones and use VG's?

That would probably be the most cost effective way to transition.  Dropping
ethernet is the next option and not cost effective as. you've stated.

The other thing you could go with is wireless phones, but securing
redundant power may not be cost effective either, plus ensuring that your
wireless coverage has redundant power.

Sometimes you just have to keep things simple and stick with analog, as bad
as many of us detest it.

Good luck!
Charles


On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 12:09 PM Lisa Notarianni <
lisa.notaria...@scranton.edu> wrote:

> Hello –
>
>
>
> We are planning future projects and would appreciate input on what others
> have done with analog lines.  We currently use Verizon for over 500 analog
> lines on campus.  They provide service to call boxes, alarm lines, elevator
> lines, house phones etc…  We also don’t have network cable runs in some
> areas so we just kept the analog service running.
>
>
>
> The idea behind all of this was to rely on Verizon Centrex service if our
> premise based VOIP phones or power went down and all phone service was lost
> on campus.  When we transitioned years ago to VoIP and moved the majority
> of lines away from Centrex, our General Counsel felt it would help with
> safety if we provided these phones in case of emergency.  I recently passed
> this by General Counsel and they still feel we need to continue to use this
> service for the same reason.  But I think the clock is ticking and from
> what I understand Verizon is abandoning copper.  They have suggested we
> transition to their VoIP service but it wouldn’t make sense to do that
> since they rely on our power. So, we would just switch to VoIP if we were
> to do that.
>
>
>
> I know there is also an LTE option but many callboxes are in fields or
> parking lots and the equipment is dated.  So, on top of needing to address
> this, we really don’t have funding to replace expensive callboxes to
> accommodate LTE service.  I know we really need to evaluate and rethink the
> need for this equipment.  We have considered transitioning the funding to a
> safety app that students, staff and faculty can use but again we would put
> the onus of safety on the user and their wireless phone – not preferred.
>
>
>
> This is complicated for Higher Ed.
>
>
>
> Any solutions or steps anyone has taken?   Is Verizon really abandoning
> all copper?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Lisa
>
>
>
> *Lisa Notarianni*
>
> University of Scranton
>
> Telecommunications Engineer
>
> Infrastructure Services
>
> 800 Linden St.
>
> Scranton PA 18510
>
> 570.941.4325
>
>
> ___
> 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] SIP Log Export CDR to CSC

[Charles Goldsmith]

I know Variphy is working on CDR for CUBEs, so you may send them a message,
to see if they have that in beta yet.

On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 10:26 AM Lizzy Anderson 
wrote:

> Morning Folx,
>
> I have a mess of DIDs to test for a port and need a way to take SIP logs
> in txt format from ISR/CUBE debug ccsip messages and dump the high level
> cdr info from the calls into a CSV. I really only need info like calling
> number and called number. I looked at TranslatorX but it can only export
> the full CDR data one call at a time, ideally I would take that whole calls
> list and export that.
>
> Thanks for the help!
> --
> Erik Anderson
> ___
> 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] OT: Best Serial Console Device

[Charles Goldsmith]

I'm a big fan of https://www.get-console.com/shop/en/27-airconsole

I keep one in my backpack and it's the best console I've worked with.  I've
never worked with the expanders, but I understand it can do up to 16 ports,
may not be good for every use case, but for me, I don't work without it :)


On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 10:34 AM Scott Voll  wrote:

> Guys--
>
> IF I were in the market for a Serial console device, What have you had the
> best luck with?
>
> the more ports the better.  No JAVA. Must be html5 based.  the Cheaper the
> better without sacrificing quality and features.
>
> Let me know what is Great as well as what is Cr@P.
>
> 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] RedSky SIP Trunk

[Charles Goldsmith]

assuming that any potential call back goes to the DID, redsky is only
providing the address info and the call back number

On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 10:05 AM Matthew Loraditch <
mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:

> Outbound only
>
> Get Outlook for iOS 
>
> Matthew Loraditch​
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*   |
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
> [image: Helion Technologies] 
> [image: Facebook] 
> [image: Twitter] 
> [image: LinkedIn] 
> --
> *From:* Anthony Holloway 
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 8, 2020 8:58:39 AM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch 
> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] RedSky SIP Trunk
>
>
> [EXTERNAL]
>
> Was there a need for inbound traffic initiated from RedSky, or is this
> purely outbound from CUCM?
>
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 1:29 PM Matthew Loraditch <
> mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:
>
> Nope it is actually as simple as they said. Basic sip trunk out of CUCM.
> No special profiles, or anything.  Am having problems as one of my CUCMs
> goes through an ISR to get to RedSky vs an ASA. ISR NAT is being funky but
> dealing with that.
>
>
>
> Matthew Loraditch​
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*   |
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
> [image: Helion Technologies] 
> [image: Facebook] 
> [image: Twitter] 
> [image: LinkedIn] 
>
> *From:* Anthony Holloway 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:27 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch 
> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] RedSky SIP Trunk
>
>
>
> [EXTERNAL]
>
>
>
> So...are you still without a functional SIP trunk then Matt?
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 8:08 AM Matthew Loraditch <
> mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:
>
> Has anyone done this? Surprisingly they don’t provide a bunch of guidance
> here. I’m so used to carriers and other vendors being very very specific
> about how to setup their trunks.
>
>
>
> I was planning on doing them directly in CUCM as that seemed simpler, but
> would appreciate any input.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Matthew Loraditch**​*
>
> *Sr. Network Engineer*
>
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com* 
>
>  |
>
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
>
> [image: Helion Technologies] 
>
> [image: Facebook] 
>
> [image: Twitter] 
>
> [image: LinkedIn] 
>
> ___
> 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] Keeping my phone clean in the age of Covid-19 and other nasty germs

[Charles Goldsmith]

Thankfully I don't have to deal with that, but if it were me, I'd ask my
management/HR to get involved, get the CDC suggested methods (assuming you
are in the US), and let them draft a policy and implement it.

This is all primarily to CYA, because you don't want to be blamed for
anything that arises.

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 9:41 AM James Buchanan 
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> What are you guys doing to ensure phones are kept clean, especially in
> shared spaces? I don't know much about the potential health issues of
> sharing a handset--maybe it's a non-issue. Is there an argument here for
> ripping out handsets and going soft client just to make sure? Honest
> question and I welcome any thoughts.
>
> Thanks,
>
> James
> ___
> 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] End of Sale for Perpetual Calling Licenses and related SWSS

[Charles Goldsmith]

"come with *tired* TAC support?"

I bet they are!


On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 9:23 AM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That's great info, thank you for sharing.
>
> Does this mean that "traditional" tac support is also changing?  Because,
> doesn't Flex come with tired TAC support?  Any info you can share there?
> Thanks!
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 8:48 AM Matthew Loraditch <
> mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/unified-communications/unified-communications-licensing/eos-eol-notice-c51-744285.html
>>
>>
>> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/unified-communications/unified-communications-licensing/eos-eol-notice-c51-744286.html
>>
>>
>>
>> Everything CUCM/UCXN is moving to a new Flex 3.0 License model.
>>
>>
>>
>> It’s got better pricing than before with significant multi year discounts
>> for 36 month or greater commitments. For on-prem folks SRST and CER
>> licenses are included with all license levels and there are levels now with
>> cheaper options for what would have been UCL Enhanced, and UCL
>> Essential/Basic users.
>>
>>
>>
>> Key Dates:
>>
>>
>>
>> Yesterday- SWSS Reinstatements ended
>>
>> 1/23/21 – Non BE6K licenses/SWSS no longer available for Sale, all add
>> ons must be flex, also last day to renew existing SWSS as multi year
>>
>> 7/24/21 – BE6K licenses/SWSS no longer available for sale
>>
>> 1/29/22- Last Day to renew any SWSS Contract
>>
>> 1/27/24- Last Day of Support via SWSS (you would have had to do a Multi
>> Year Renewal before 1/23/21)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Partner Link: https://salesconnect.cisco.com/#/program/PAGE-2888
>>
>>
>>
>> Customer Link:
>> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/unified-communications/cisco-collaboration-flex-plan/datasheet-c78-744220.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Matthew Loraditch
>> Sr. Network Engineer
>> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
>> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*   |
>> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com*
>> 
>> [image: Helion Technologies] 
>> [image: Facebook] 
>> [image: Twitter] 
>> [image: LinkedIn] 
>> ___
>> 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] os admin and security password recovery 10.5.2

[Charles Goldsmith]

Use the recovery ISO to change the passwords, it doesn't matter which order
you do the nodes in, but before you shut it down, hit RTMT and make sure
your database is in sync.

On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 7:34 PM naresh rathore  wrote:

> hi
>
>
> one of our new customer have redundant cucm, im and presence and unity.
> they are still using 10.5.2.2000-1. they dont have recording of cli and
> security password and want to reconfigure those. i came through following
> link
>
>
> https://community.cisco.com/t5/collaboration-voice-and-video/cucm-passwords-and-password-recovery/ta-p/3162863
>
> i have following queries.
>
>
>1. do we have to use recovery iso or bootable cucm/imp/cuc iso
>2. in case of redundancy, whether we have to do publisher first and
>then subscriber?
>3. customer dont have iso images for 10.5.2.2000-1. when i looked into
>software, i found out that recovery image of 10.5.2.1000-5 is available
>only? will it work when i use it while changing cli and security password
>for 10.5.2.2000-1.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Naray
> ___
> 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] [External] IPCC best practice

[Charles Goldsmith]

Agreed with TIm, it's just simpler to involve less systems if you can.
With 12.0 UCCX and higher, the calendar function is a nice addition, no
more XML files for schedules.

On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 7:37 AM Johnson, Tim  wrote:

> It seems to me that there's not a "best practice" label for most
> scenarios. When I started with UCCX, we went to a call handler first to
> provide us with an easy way to provide a schedule, and a familiar way for
> the customer to record a greeting. Later, we ended up building the schedule
> into our script and directing calls to the trigger. That's my preference,
> just to involve less systems.
>
> Tim Johnson
> Voice & Video Engineer
> Central Michigan University
> Call me: +19897744406
> Video Call me: johns...@cmich.edu
> Fax me: +19897795900
> Meet me: http://cmich.webex.com/meet/johns10t
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of
> f...@browardcommunications.com
> Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2020 8:19 AM
> To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [External] [cisco-voip] IPCC best practice
>
>
> Hello, I just have a quick question.
> When setting up a call center for a SMB, Is it best practice to have the
> main number go to a unity call handler 1st, with caller input going to uccx
> triggers, or is it considered best practice to have the main number go
> right to CCX?  I have seen both ways.
>
> Thank you.
> ___
> 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] [External] Re: how to disable backup warning message on cucm

[Charles Goldsmith]

Agreed, SFTP via linux or windows isn't hard, then VEEAM those, that's what
I advise my customers.

On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 5:21 PM James B  wrote:

> To add, configuring an SFTP server is not all that hard. Either build a
> Linux box that includes SFTP or build a Windows box and use OpenSSH—both
> relatively inexpensive solutions.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Hunter Fuller 
> *Sent: *30 July 2020 00:18
> *To: *Ryan Huff 
> *Cc: *cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject: *Re: [cisco-voip] [External] Re: how to disable backup warning
> message on cucm
>
>
>
> If Veeam works the same way as NetBackUp, aka, takes a snapshot, then
>
> you are going to start hearing stutter or maybe even dropped calls
>
> during the snapshot. Worst case your pub/sub sync could become broken.
>
> Don't do it!
>
>
>
> --
>
> Hunter Fuller (they)
>
> Router Jockey
>
> VBH Annex B-5
>
> +1 256 824 5331
>
>
>
> Office of Information Technology
>
> The University of Alabama in Huntsville
>
> Network Engineering
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 2:41 AM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
> >
>
> > No way to disable the alert message that I’m aware of. I think DRS is an
> unavoidable assumption (and by extension m, the alert) in the modern
> versions.
>
> >
>
> > As you know, this isn’t a great strategy. It’s a little more than, “not
> recommended”, it’s actually not supported by Cisco to backup this way.
> Veeam has been known to cause CPU spikes, kernel panics.. etc in CUCM
> (while powered on)... not a good strategy at all. DRS is the path to
> reinforce ;)
>
> >
>
> > From my understanding, it’s a pretty simplistic check... just looking
> for a backup device, and the the XML file for the backup set in the backup
> device’s location.
>
> >
>
> > They might be able to run one manual DRS, and then just keep modifying
> the dates in the XML for the backup set. Seems like something that could be
> scripted fairly easily too.
>
> >
>
> > To me though, that’s a lot of work to intentionally do it the wrong way.
> It’s been my experience that when customers invite the Devil to dinner, he
> usually shows up.
>
> >
>
> > - Ryan
>
> >
>
> > On Jul 29, 2020, at 03:12, naresh rathore  wrote:
>
> >
>
> > 
>
> > hi,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > One of our Customer running version cucm 12.5.1.12900-115 (upgraded from
> 10). they had backup enabled, they decided to do veem backup (even though
> not recommended by Cisco). they deleted backup device and schedule
> configuration and also disabled DRF Master and DRF local and restarted
> tomcat but still we see  message of 32 days without backup. is there a way
> to disable this warning?
>
> >
>
> > 
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > ___
>
> > cisco-voip mailing list
>
> > cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>
> >
> https://eur06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7C150a2df1c2d243dfdaae08d8338ed164%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637316035775661784sdata=gfRhVVMa%2Fw0yeYtdfWrOaxbCFeoBKW3pXvpfGXE6CWQ%3Dreserved=0
>
> >
>
> > ___
>
> > 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

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 11.6 Real Time Port Usage

[Charles Goldsmith]

You can simply put Tanner in the To: field, old school I know, but it still
works :)

On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 4:46 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That's nothing I've ever heard of.  I'd imagine you could use the CTI API
> ,
> but not the Admin API.
>
> This isn't a REST based API though, and it is relatively harder to
> implement and work with though.  My man Tanner at CTI Logic should be able
> to help.  Yo Tanner! Where you at?  Ok, so one PRO for chat rooms are
> mentions.  Email needs mentions.
>
> The CTI Protocol:
>
>
>- Is a TCP/IP socket based message protocol
>- Allows clients to send and receive information/events about:
>   - Current system configuration and future updates.
>   - Agents and their states
>   - Calls and their states
>   - *Statistics for agents, calls, and queues on a real-time basis*
>   - Third-party call control
>   - Device snapshots
>- Provides support for two client modes for connecting with Unified
>CCX:
>   - Bridge mode clients receive all agent-state and call events for
>   all logged in agents in the system.
>   - Agent mode clients only receives messages related to the agent.
>- Has version control
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 4:07 PM JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
>> Is there any way to see real time CTI port usage with UCCX Admin API? I
>> did a quick search and it looks like it’s a supported function but having
>> trouble finding the correct name to use.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jason
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Wildcard certificates

[Charles Goldsmith]

It has never been supported, so, if you run into any issues and TAC sees
it, they may tell you to remove it, just FYI.

Given that, with Digicert, can you duplicate a wildcard cert, like you can
a Multi-San?

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 11:57 PM James Andrewartha <
jandrewar...@ccgs.wa.edu.au> wrote:

> Hi voipers,
>
> I'm trying to update the wildcard on our CUCM/IMP servers, and am
> hitting a problem. We have a digicert wildcard, which I used
> successfully before, but now when generating the certificate the UI
> complains that *.ccgs.wa.edu.au isn't a valid certificate name or SAN. I
> hacked the javascript to ignore this warning, and generated a CSR with
> *.ccgs.wa.edu.au in the SAN:
>
> $ openssl req -in tomcat\(8\).csr -text|grep DNS
> DNS:callmanager1.voip.ccgs.wa.edu.au,
> DNS:*.ccgs.wa.edu.au, DNS:ccgs.wa.edu.au,
> DNS:speeddial.voip.ccgs.wa.edu.au, DNS:callmanager2.voip.ccgs.wa.edu.au,
> DNS:voip.ccgs.wa.edu.au, DNS:callmanager.voip.ccgs.wa.edu.au,
> DNS:presence.voip.ccgs.wa.edu.au
>
> But when I try to upload the certificate to CUCM, it complains "CSR SAN
> and Certificate SAN does not match". But the SANs on the certificate are
> the same (albeit in a different order):
>
> $ openssl x509 -in ../ssl/digicert/cucm-star_ccgs_wa_edu_au.crt -text
> |grep DNS
> DNS:*.ccgs.wa.edu.au, DNS:ccgs.wa.edu.au,
> DNS:voip.ccgs.wa.edu.au, DNS:callmanager1.voip.ccgs.wa.edu.au,
> DNS:callmanager2.voip.ccgs.wa.edu.au, DNS:speedidal.voip.ccgs.wa.edu.au,
> DNS:callmanager.voip.ccgs.wa.edu.au, DNS:presence.voip.ccgs.wa.edu.au
>
> I found
>
> https://community.cisco.com/t5/unified-communications/wildcard-certificate-on-call-manager-10-5/td-p/2757989
> from 2016 which says they got it working then, and I also got it working
> in 2018 when the cert was last renewed, with *.ccgs.wa.edu.au as the
> common name and a SAN. But I can't get it working now. Anyone got any
> thoughts? Running CUCM 10.5.2.15900-8
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> James Andrewartha
> Network & Projects Engineer
> Christ Church Grammar School
> Claremont, Western Australia
> Ph. (08) 9442 1757
> Mob. 0424 160 877
> ___
> 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] 7900 Factory Reset w/out connecting to the network

[Charles Goldsmith]

No DHCP is needed, don't even need a live network to reset, just need power

you only need option 150 if you want it to try and update firmware, and of
course, it needs a phone config on CUCM to do that

for what a 7970 is worth as trade in or resell, it's too much work, a
hammer works better/faster :)


On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 4:12 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Adam,  I've always been under the impression that either of these options
> require DHCP Option 150 with a working TFTP and files to work properly.
> Are you saying they don't?  I've never tested it though.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:26 PM Pawlowski, Adam  wrote:
>
>> Sean,
>>
>>
>>
>> The two codes for it, are to hold the pound key when powering it on.
>>
>>
>>
>> When the line keys flash, key go of pound and enter: 123456789*0# , which
>> should erase the configuration.
>>
>>
>>
>> If you observe that it is still showing internal information, try
>> 3491672850*# , which in my experience rips it down to a bootstrap, but,
>> I’ve never loaded the term default on it to see if there’s anything left by
>> the time it recovers.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>>
>>
>> Adam
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Riley,
>> Sean
>> *Sent:* Monday, June 8, 2020 3:59 PM
>> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] 7900 Factory Reset w/out connecting to the
>> network
>>
>>
>>
>> We are finally refreshing our 7970’s.  We wanted to factory reset the old
>> phones before sending out for scrap.  Is there a way to factory reset
>> without having to connect to the network?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sean.
>> ___
>> 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] CAD to Finesse Utility

[Charles Goldsmith]

A few months ago, I had contacted the author, Ryan, about 12.0 support,
this was his reply:

"I haven’t updated the tool since the initial release. It may work, or at
least get some of the configuration migrated over. It all depends on
whether the Finesse API has changed since the version I wrote against vs
12.0. I’d try it in the lab first and see. Whatever config it migrates is
config you don’t have to migrate and the rest you can do manually…



HTH."


Customer I was working with chose not to try it, and we migrated manually.



On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 10:14 PM Matthew Loraditch <
mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:

> Does anyone know if this will still work on an upgrade from 10.6 to 12.0?
> It says it doesn’t work in 11.5 but no mention of 12.  I’m guessing not,
> but if anyone has unofficially used it, you will save me some time writing
> a ton of junk down!
>
> Matthew Loraditch​
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*   |
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
> [image: Helion Technologies] 
> [image: Facebook] 
> [image: Twitter] 
> [image: LinkedIn] 
> ___
> 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] Third Party CDR Analysis

[Charles Goldsmith]

Another vote for Variphy, I have several customers that are happy with it. 

> On Jun 3, 2020, at 9:00 PM, Brian Meade  wrote:
> 
> 
> Variphy seems to be my favorite so far.  I like it much better than the ISI 
> offering.
> 
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 4:25 PM UC Penguin  wrote:
>> I’m curious what third party CDR Analysis software is commonly used today 
>> and pros/cons of each?
>> 
>> Looking for something friendly for non-Engineers to run reports.
>> 
>> Thanks in advance  
>> ___
>> 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] 8865 Wireless and the integrated switch

[Charles Goldsmith]

Does not seem to, laptop would never pull a DHCP address, didn't try to
test further than that.

On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 8:56 AM Josh Nordquist 
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I was wondering if I have a wireless VOIP handset (Like a 8865) connected
> to a wireless network will the integrated switch still provide network over
> to a wired workstation?
>
> Wasn't able to ascertain from the datasheet although I'm sure I'm just
> missing something.
>
> Thank you
> ___
> 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] UCCX upgrade versions

[Charles Goldsmith]

Anytime you are planning an upgrade or install of UCCX, you should be 
consulting the compatibility guides 
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/customer-collaboration/unified-contact-center-express/products-device-support-tables-list.html

Along with CUCM version compatibility, it has phone, client browser and OS and 
a lot more info. 

I see a lot of customer installs that are not in a TAC supported configuration 
because they do not follow these when making changes. 


> On May 25, 2020, at 5:48 AM, James Dust  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> Just on the advisory notice below, is version 12.5 of CCX backwards 
> compatible to version 11.x version of CUCM?
>  
>  
> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Mark H. 
> Turpin
> Sent: 23 May 2020 19:49
> To: Jason Aarons ; Lelio Fulgenzi 
> Cc: Cisco VoIP List 
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX upgrade versions
>  
> This message originates from outside Charles Stanley. Please do not click 
> links or open attachments unless you know the sender and are confident the 
> content is safe.
> Another reason to go to 12.5 -> 
> https://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-uccx-rce-GMSC6RKN
>  
>  
> From: cisco-voip  on behalf of Jason 
> Aarons 
> Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2020 10:18 AM
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi 
> Cc: Cisco VoIP List 
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX upgrade versions
>  
> *** EXTERNAL EMAIL - DO NOT CLICK LINKS ***
> 
> Now would be a good time for other upgrades if 10.x. Device Last Seen is a 
> rock star for me. 
>  
> On Sat, May 23, 2020, 11:06 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>  
> Let’s not forget the compatibility matrix. Unless you’re willing to upgrade 
> cucm as well, you might be limited with your options. 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> 
> On May 23, 2020, at 10:38 AM, Jason Aarons  wrote:
> 
> 
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph. Do 
> not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know 
> the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to 
> ith...@uoguelph.ca
>  
> For so few Agents (20) I would go with latest UCCX. Usually the bigger 
> headache is L2 upgrades/major version. The switch from CAD to Finesse. Most 
> 12.x stuff has been fairly stable, few bugs. 
>  
> On Fri, May 22, 2020, 11:05 AM Andy Carse  wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm going to ask a probably stupid question but it's been awhile since I had 
> to do a UCCX Upgrade.
>  
> So what is the "go to" version of UCCX these days?
> I'm currently on 10.6(SU3) as its the last CAD version. 
> So now I need to bring on Finesse which doesn't seem too difficult albeit its 
> an old version on our system.
> It will be a new install as I can't break the existing setup on purpose.
> One issue I think I will have is on demand call recording which was 
> relatively straight forward with CAD 
> and the built in bridge on the handset, but I don't think that work with 
> Finesse from what I can see from Google searches, unless WFO comes into the 
> mix.
> We have a max of 20 agents logged in at any one time.
>  
> Any pointers for the path to tread would be appreciated.
>  
> Rgds Andy
> 
> ___
> 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
> 
> Consider the environment - Think before you print
> 
> The contents of this email are confidential to the intended recipient and may 
> not be disclosed. Although it is believed that this email and any attachments 
> are virus free, it is the responsibility of the recipient to confirm this. 
> 
> You are advised that urgent, time-sensitive communications should not be sent 
> by email. We hereby give you notice that a delivery receipt does not 
> constitute acknowledgement or receipt by the intended recipient(s).
> 
> Details of Charles Stanley group companies and their regulators (where 
> applicable), can be found at this URL 
> http://www.charles-stanley.co.uk/contact-us/disclosure/
> 
> ___
> 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] Cisco moth-balling CUE - Is Connection SRSV the answer?

[Charles Goldsmith]

The nice thing about CUC vs CUCM, is that while you still have a publisher
for CUC, the sub can become master of the application (much like UCCX can,
and yes, we still use that acronym a lot) :)

If something happens to your CUC server, you are rebuilding from the DRS.
if you had a sub, you wouldn't have to, you can actually tell CUC to
rebuild its database from the sub.

Too many companies rely on voicemail and/or call handlers, I cringe when I
see a customers setup with a pub/sub setup on CUCM, but they let CUC only
have the pub.

CUC is so resilient, that Cisco doesn't even advise you backup the sub.
It's not like CUCM in that regard, the pub doesn't backup the sub.  Backing
up 1 is good enough for the cluster.

If you have another DC, or even another building with servers, do yourself
a favor, put in a sub, verify the sip trunk works, etc, then shut down your
pub during a maintenance window and verify fail over.  After that, forget
about it, it will just run nicely.  Check your failover (on all of your
apps) routinely.

No more worrying about CUE, SRSV or anything else.

Other than server resources (which aren't that bad), it doesn't cost
anything.  Unlike having something like a CUE module in a router.

Just my $0.03 worth (inflation)


On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 3:11 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> All valid questions. No offense taken. Unless of course, you complain
> about me primarily using the @ macro plus route filters in all my route
> patterns. Then, them’s fighting words. 
>
>
>
> The great thing about CUE was that it covered all scenarios with one
> solution. Every other scenario will need at least another fall-back meaning
> two solutions. I did this in my head a while back, never got it down on
> paper.
>
>
>
> While I can appreciate the idea of a UNTCNXN cluster (is that the right
> acronym Anthony?), I’m not sold that there will never be a scenario where
> the second node will always work during whatever maintenance we’re
> planning. I’ve read document after document after scenario after scenario
> and have found we always seem to fit in that one exception to the rule for
> whatever reason.
>
>
>
> I’m not saying that we won’t eventually move to a CUXN cluster (we’re not
> there yet) – but I was hoping to have a bit more time to delve into a
> proper design of both what the cluster can and can’t give us and what
> options we have for fall-back.
>
>
>
> Let’s say, for whatever reason, a database corruption is replicated across
> the cluster. Then what? What do I do? I have to restore services from
> backup, rebuild the cluster, etc. All the while, having an unreliable AA
> going around because SRSV is trying to connect? (again, I don’t know the
> ins and outs of SRSV and CNXN clusters).
>
>
>
> Having CUE available let me sleep at night and gave me a quick get out of
> jail free card I could use for almost any maintenance requirement,
> including those outside my control.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Charles Goldsmith 
> *Sent:* Monday, May 4, 2020 1:53 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* Eric Pedersen ; voyp list, cisco-voip (
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco moth-balling CUE - Is Connection SRSV
> the answer?
>
>
>
> *CAUTION:* This email originated from outside of the University of
> Guelph. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
> sender and know the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails
> to ith...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> Lelio, just curious why you would have scheduled downtime for the entire
> CUC cluster?  I can appreciate downtime for a node for maintenance, but
> even during an upgrade, your cluster should be up, one node or the other.
>
>
>
> If it's more DC / network outage, why not have the 2nd node of your CUC
> cluster where ever you have your CUE for "backup".
>
>
>
> No offense intended on your design, just wanting to know and possibly
> learn if it's something I'm overlooking.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:48 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>
>
> Ok. Thanks. This might work.
>
>
>
> What I’m hoping to be able to do is to manually redirect calls from
> Connection to SRSV (for AA and voicemail) and still allow calls to be
> transferred accordingly to phones registered to CUCM, not SRST.
>
>
>
> This was easily done with CUE, since it would register to both CUCM and
> SRST.
>
>
>
> If SRSV has similar functionality, we’re golden.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On May 4, 2020, at 1:43 PM, Eric Pedersen 
> wrote:
>
> 
>
> *CAUTION:* This email originated from outside of the University of
> Guelph. Do not click links or open attachments 

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco moth-balling CUE - Is Connection SRSV the answer?

[Charles Goldsmith]

I find myself swapping between CUC and CUCXN, depending on who I'm talking
to and context, and if it's someone not in Collaboration, Spelling it out.
Seems CUCM is universal around technical people, but the others aren't so
much.

Unity...  *shudders*

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:01 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "CUCX"
>
> I find it interesting the different ways we Engineers write that.  I have
> also seen CUXN, CUCXN and CUC.  I'm team CUC, but I think we can all
> agree that simply "Unity" is wrong.
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:45 PM Eric Pedersen 
> wrote:
>
>> Yes, from what I remember it can operate while CUCM and CUCX are both up.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Lelio
>> Fulgenzi
>> *Sent:* Monday, May 4, 2020 9:37 AM
>> *To:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco moth-balling CUE - Is Connection SRSV
>> the answer?
>>
>>
>>
>> Do you know if SRSV can operate while CUCM is up?
>>
>>
>>
>> The great thing about CUE, is that it operated while CUCM was up.
>> Completely independent of Unity Connection.
>>
>>
>>
>> This means, I could schedule downtime for Connection and have an almost
>> fully operational AA working.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Eric Pedersen 
>> *Sent:* Monday, May 4, 2020 11:35 AM
>> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi ; voyp list, cisco-voip (
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
>> *Subject:* RE: Cisco moth-balling CUE - Is Connection SRSV the answer?
>>
>>
>>
>> *CAUTION:* This email originated from outside of the University of
>> Guelph. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
>> sender and know the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails
>> to ith...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> I used SRSV a while ago for one of our remote sites. I found it much
>> simpler to get up and running than CUE and you can use your centralized
>> Exchange.  IIRC you can send your voicemail pilot back to the gateway SRSV
>> is registered to so all calls go to it. But it's been a really long time…
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Lelio
>> Fulgenzi
>> *Sent:* Sunday, May 3, 2020 11:38 AM
>> *To:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Cisco moth-balling CUE - Is Connection SRSV the
>> answer?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Looks like Cisco is moth-balling CUE. I liked that product. I’ll miss it.
>>
>>
>>
>> It looks like Connection SRSV is the answer. Although I’m not sure it
>> will offer everything we used (and planned to use) CUE for. For example,
>> our voicemail ports forwarded to CUE which was always registered to CUCM.
>> This way, calls would continue to work. It’s looking like SRSV will only
>> work if the router is in SRST mode and all phones are registered to SRST.
>>
>>
>>
>> Has anyone successfully deployed SRSV? How about using it during
>> voicemail maintenance?
>>
>>
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Bennett Jones is committed to mitigating the spread of COVID-19. We have
>> transitioned to a remote work environment and continue to provide complete
>> and uninterrupted service to our clients. Visit our COVID-19 Resource
>> Centre (https://www.bennettjones.com/COVID-19) for timely legal updates.
>>
>> The contents of this message may contain confidential and/or privileged
>> subject matter. If this message has been received in error, please contact
>> the sender and delete all copies. Like other forms of communication, e-mail
>> communications may be vulnerable to interception by unauthorized parties.
>> If you do not wish us to communicate with you by e-mail, please notify us
>> at your earliest convenience. In the absence of such notification, your
>> consent is assumed. Should you choose to allow us to communicate by e-mail,
>> we will not take any additional security measures (such as encryption)
>> unless specifically requested.
>>
>> If you no longer wish to receive commercial messages, you can unsubscribe
>> by accessing this link: http://www.bennettjones.com/unsubscribe
>>
>>
>> Bennett Jones is committed to mitigating the spread of COVID-19. We have
>> transitioned to a remote work environment and continue to provide complete
>> and uninterrupted service to our clients. Visit our COVID-19 Resource
>> Centre (https://www.bennettjones.com/COVID-19) for timely legal updates.
>>
>> The contents of this message may contain confidential and/or privileged
>> subject matter. If this message has been received in error, please contact
>> the sender and delete all copies. Like other forms of communication, e-mail
>> communications may be vulnerable to interception by unauthorized parties.
>> If you do not wish us to communicate with you by e-mail, please notify us
>> at your earliest convenience. In the absence of such notification, your
>> consent is assumed. Should you choose to allow us to communicate by e-mail,
>> we will not take any additional security measures (such as encryption)

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco moth-balling CUE - Is Connection SRSV the answer?

[Charles Goldsmith]

Lelio, just curious why you would have scheduled downtime for the entire
CUC cluster?  I can appreciate downtime for a node for maintenance, but
even during an upgrade, your cluster should be up, one node or the other.

If it's more DC / network outage, why not have the 2nd node of your CUC
cluster where ever you have your CUE for "backup".

No offense intended on your design, just wanting to know and possibly learn
if it's something I'm overlooking.

Thanks


On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:48 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> Ok. Thanks. This might work.
>
> What I’m hoping to be able to do is to manually redirect calls from
> Connection to SRSV (for AA and voicemail) and still allow calls to be
> transferred accordingly to phones registered to CUCM, not SRST.
>
> This was easily done with CUE, since it would register to both CUCM and
> SRST.
>
> If SRSV has similar functionality, we’re golden.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 4, 2020, at 1:43 PM, Eric Pedersen 
> wrote:
>
> 
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph.
> Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and
> know the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to
> ith...@uoguelph.ca
>
> Yes, from what I remember it can operate while CUCM and CUCX are both up.
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Lelio
> Fulgenzi
> *Sent:* Monday, May 4, 2020 9:37 AM
> *To:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco moth-balling CUE - Is Connection SRSV
> the answer?
>
>
>
> Do you know if SRSV can operate while CUCM is up?
>
>
>
> The great thing about CUE, is that it operated while CUCM was up.
> Completely independent of Unity Connection.
>
>
>
> This means, I could schedule downtime for Connection and have an almost
> fully operational AA working.
>
>
>
> *From:* Eric Pedersen 
> *Sent:* Monday, May 4, 2020 11:35 AM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi ; voyp list, cisco-voip (
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
> *Subject:* RE: Cisco moth-balling CUE - Is Connection SRSV the answer?
>
>
>
> *CAUTION:* This email originated from outside of the University of
> Guelph. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the
> sender and know the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails
> to ith...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> I used SRSV a while ago for one of our remote sites. I found it much
> simpler to get up and running than CUE and you can use your centralized
> Exchange.  IIRC you can send your voicemail pilot back to the gateway SRSV
> is registered to so all calls go to it. But it's been a really long time…
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Lelio
> Fulgenzi
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 3, 2020 11:38 AM
> *To:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Cisco moth-balling CUE - Is Connection SRSV the
> answer?
>
>
>
>
>
> Looks like Cisco is moth-balling CUE. I liked that product. I’ll miss it.
>
>
>
> It looks like Connection SRSV is the answer. Although I’m not sure it will
> offer everything we used (and planned to use) CUE for. For example, our
> voicemail ports forwarded to CUE which was always registered to CUCM. This
> way, calls would continue to work. It’s looking like SRSV will only work if
> the router is in SRST mode and all phones are registered to SRST.
>
>
>
> Has anyone successfully deployed SRSV? How about using it during voicemail
> maintenance?
>
>
>
> Lelio
>
>
>
>
>
> Bennett Jones is committed to mitigating the spread of COVID-19. We have
> transitioned to a remote work environment and continue to provide complete
> and uninterrupted service to our clients. Visit our COVID-19 Resource
> Centre (https://www.bennettjones.com/COVID-19) for timely legal updates.
>
> The contents of this message may contain confidential and/or privileged
> subject matter. If this message has been received in error, please contact
> the sender and delete all copies. Like other forms of communication, e-mail
> communications may be vulnerable to interception by unauthorized parties.
> If you do not wish us to communicate with you by e-mail, please notify us
> at your earliest convenience. In the absence of such notification, your
> consent is assumed. Should you choose to allow us to communicate by e-mail,
> we will not take any additional security measures (such as encryption)
> unless specifically requested.
>
> If you no longer wish to receive commercial messages, you can unsubscribe
> by accessing this link: http://www.bennettjones.com/unsubscribe
>
>
> Bennett Jones is committed to mitigating the spread of COVID-19. We have
> transitioned to a remote work environment and continue to provide complete
> and uninterrupted service to our clients. Visit our COVID-19 Resource
> Centre (https://www.bennettjones.com/COVID-19) for timely legal updates.
>
> The contents of this message may contain confidential and/or privileged
> subject matter. 

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 12.5(1) Docker Engine Not Running

[Charles Goldsmith]

I put this in my lab right after 12.5 came out, but never setup RTMT alerts
(who does unless you are testing that functionality)...  Guess QA doesn't
either :)


On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 12:15 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> For what it's worth, this turned out to be a bug:
>
> https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvt61935
>
> So, if you deploy the 100 Agent OVA without Cloud Connect, be ready to be
> bombarded with alerts from RTMT.
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 2:27 PM Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Anyone else running UCCX 12.5(1) and their Docker Engine is Not Running?
>>
>> It's being caught by CriticalServicesDown and SyslogSeverityMatchFound
>> and sending a lot of emails to tech support.
>>
>> TAC is telling me the Docker Engine is not a UCCX service, so likely just
>> some bloat on the UCOS/VOS image, however, that doesn't solve the problem
>> of the alerts which are being sent.
>>
>> I've asked for BU escalation at this point, and am waiting to hear back,
>> but in the meantime, it would be good to know if others have already been
>> down this path, or simply to put this information out there, for when you
>> deploy your first UCCX 12.5(1).
>>
> ___
> 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] Renewing Expressway E Cert

[Charles Goldsmith]

Very true on the service interruption, but how about jabber, new certs on
it require the XMPP services to restart.  And true, a satellite server
could alleviate it all, but you are talking major changes for the CUCM
team, and then the CUC team, etc.

I'd love for it to happen, but we have some hurdles, and I'm sure this has
been discussed amongst the developers and the BUs.

With Apple changing and advising certs for 1 year, I had a bigger customer
just tell me that they are adopting 1 year certs as the standard.  I'm
about to renew their entire cluster of 18 nodes (across all of the apps)
for their certs, and they will be 1 year certs.

For a 24/7 operation, that's a pain, but, more work for us I guess.


On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 5:36 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> You Charles, with smart licensing being a catalyst for internet access for
> your apps, and the way the port 80 thing for ACME actually works, it's
> certainly possible, and I could see it gaining adoption with SMBmaybe
> not the fortune 500 though.  But then again, they can just spend the money
> on public certs.
>
> And also, you mentioned the challenge of updating certs every 90 days and
> the service restarts, however, with the way Expressway implemented it, the
> renewals are automatic and there is no service interruption at all.
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 4:50 PM Charles Goldsmith  wrote:
>
>> Early on with MRA, back in the CUCM 9.1 days, a mobile user coming in
>> across MRA got cert alerts if you didn't have signed certs on all of the
>> applications (CUCM, IM, Unity Connection).  There was/is no easy way to
>> push an internal CA cert to those devices.
>>
>> That's the whole reason we push for 3rd party everywhere, so that the C
>> level folks on their smart phones didn't get an alert.
>>
>> I'd really like to see let's encrypt enabled on all of the apps, but that
>> is challenging, updating certs every 90 days, restarting services, etc.
>> Plus, the whole thing of the Acme process needing to be available into the
>> application to validate.
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 4:27 PM Anthony Holloway <
>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, that depends.  And let me just ask, why did they do it this way?
>>> If it was even a self-signed cert, we could atleast import it to E, but
>>> it's not even that. It's some invalid bogus cert in there.  Why?
>>>
>>> I have seen the following:
>>>
>>> 1. publicly sign it (name cheap has dirt cheap certs)
>>> 2. get a private ca installed because just like you need a network, a
>>> server, licensing, phones, an internet connection, etc.  it's apart of the
>>> solution
>>> 3. sign it yourself with any ca you want to include the one running on
>>> your home computer, and just don't tell anyone what you did because you
>>> setup it for
>>>  34 years and it wont matter by then anyway (ok, just kidding here...or
>>> am I?)
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 3:55 PM Bill Talley  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Great info Anthony, thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Question, what do you do for Expressway Core if you don’t have an
>>>> internal CA to sign the EXPC (meaning no internal root cert to upload to
>>>> EXPE to establish the traversal zone trust)?
>>>>
>>>> Sent from an iPhone mobile device with very tiny touchscreen input
>>>> keys.  Please excude my typtos.
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 17, 2020, at 3:25 PM, Anthony Holloway <
>>>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>> This might be an unpopular opinion, but I think using the free certs
>>>> provided by let's encrypt, coupled with it being automatic from now on,
>>>> it's just an unbeatable combination.
>>>>
>>>> Here are my cliff notes:
>>>>
>>>> Reference Document:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/expressway/config_guide/X12-5/exwy_b_certificate-creation-use-deployment-guide/exwy_b_certificate-creation-use-deployment-guide_chapter_0100.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> High Level Steps:
>>>>
>>>>1. Expressway 12.5.7 to avoid ACMEv1 vs ACMEv2 registration issues (
>>>>https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvr82346)
>>>>2. For your Unified CM registrations domains don’t use parent
>>>>domain only (E.g., company.com), switch to CollabEdgeDNS format
>>>>instead (E.

Re: [cisco-voip] Renewing Expressway E Cert

[Charles Goldsmith]

Early on with MRA, back in the CUCM 9.1 days, a mobile user coming in
across MRA got cert alerts if you didn't have signed certs on all of the
applications (CUCM, IM, Unity Connection).  There was/is no easy way to
push an internal CA cert to those devices.

That's the whole reason we push for 3rd party everywhere, so that the C
level folks on their smart phones didn't get an alert.

I'd really like to see let's encrypt enabled on all of the apps, but that
is challenging, updating certs every 90 days, restarting services, etc.
Plus, the whole thing of the Acme process needing to be available into the
application to validate.

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 4:27 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, that depends.  And let me just ask, why did they do it this way?  If
> it was even a self-signed cert, we could atleast import it to E, but it's
> not even that. It's some invalid bogus cert in there.  Why?
>
> I have seen the following:
>
> 1. publicly sign it (name cheap has dirt cheap certs)
> 2. get a private ca installed because just like you need a network, a
> server, licensing, phones, an internet connection, etc.  it's apart of the
> solution
> 3. sign it yourself with any ca you want to include the one running on
> your home computer, and just don't tell anyone what you did because you
> setup it for
>  34 years and it wont matter by then anyway (ok, just kidding here...or am
> I?)
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 3:55 PM Bill Talley  wrote:
>
>> Great info Anthony, thanks.
>>
>> Question, what do you do for Expressway Core if you don’t have an
>> internal CA to sign the EXPC (meaning no internal root cert to upload to
>> EXPE to establish the traversal zone trust)?
>>
>> Sent from an iPhone mobile device with very tiny touchscreen input keys.
>> Please excude my typtos.
>>
>> On Apr 17, 2020, at 3:25 PM, Anthony Holloway <
>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> This might be an unpopular opinion, but I think using the free certs
>> provided by let's encrypt, coupled with it being automatic from now on,
>> it's just an unbeatable combination.
>>
>> Here are my cliff notes:
>>
>> Reference Document:
>>
>>
>> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/expressway/config_guide/X12-5/exwy_b_certificate-creation-use-deployment-guide/exwy_b_certificate-creation-use-deployment-guide_chapter_0100.html
>>
>>
>>
>> High Level Steps:
>>
>>1. Expressway 12.5.7 to avoid ACMEv1 vs ACMEv2 registration issues (
>>https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvr82346)
>>2. For your Unified CM registrations domains don’t use parent domain
>>only (E.g., company.com), switch to CollabEdgeDNS format instead
>>(E.g., collab-edge.company.com), because you’ll need that in the next
>>step
>>3. DNS A records for the Expressway-E FQDN and the CM registration
>>domains
>>4. Upload the root and intermediates for Let’s Encrypt (needed on
>>both Expressway-E and Expressway-C) (certs are linked in documentation)
>>5. Enable the ACME client on Expressway-E and supply any email
>>address you want to link to this registration (This creates your account
>>with Let’s Encrypt)
>>6. Generate a new CSR (Server Certificate Only, Domain Cert Was Not
>>Needed)
>>7. Click button to Submit CSR to ACME
>>8. Click button to Deploy New Certificate on Expressway-E
>>(documentation states this is non-service impacting)
>>9. Setup the automatic scheduler so you never have to deal with this
>>again
>>10. Sit back, relax and enjoy free shit
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 1:43 PM Riley, Sean 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We had our Cisco partner setup our Expressways a couple of years ago.
>>> It is a cluster with 2 E’s and 2 C’s currently at v 12.5.7 using for MRA.
>>> I have been managing them, installing updates, troubleshooting etc.  The
>>> public Edge cert is up for renewal.  Can anyone provide advice on renewing
>>> this cert?  I am planning on just renewing with the same cert provider, but
>>> was interested in if there is anything to watch out for.  Example, will
>>> there be a service interruption when replacing the cert?  Or just install
>>> the new cert/pk and rest easy?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sean.
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Cost-Effective Public Certificate Authority for CUCM certificates

[Charles Goldsmith]

Last I looked, SSL certs can be had for 2 years, so agreed, not as good as
3, but still.

I'm a big fan of Let's Encrypt, but putting that on the inside of your
network will be challenging, since that whole process has to be accessed
from the internet for it to work.  I do hope they solve it for CUCM, CUC
and IM, but I don't see it happening anytime soon.

When you setup LE on the Expressway Edge, it has to be accessed by port 80
for them to validate it, no security engineer is going to let you do that
to CUCM, unless they work up a method to do some other validation.

On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 11:28 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> Yeah. Considering how much effort we put on security, telling people to
> ignore cert warnings is probably not the best. It does take a bit more
> work. And it was ok with three year certs. Annual certs are going to make
> things a bit worse.
>
> Pushing self signed certs (or roots?) to devices will be an issue. And
> outside the scope of telephony. There are tools that can help. I believe
> JoinNow tool is one example. We use that and I believe my colleague got
> that working in a test environment.
>
> I’m hoping they have an SU that introduces let’s encrypt for v11.5. 爛爛
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 5, 2020, at 12:00 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Not to answer for Brian, but with the introduction of MRA, employees can
> run Jabber on any device they want.  This makes putting private ca signed
> certs on those devices impossible or at least a giant headache.
>
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 7:30 AM Mark H. Turpin  wrote:
>
>> I’m using namecheap and have for years. Cheap certs from Comodo and they
>> work fine. You can do email, web, and DNS validation -
>> https://www.namecheap.com/support/knowledgebase/article.aspx/9637/68/how-can-i-complete-the-domain-control-validation-dcv-for-my-ssl-certificate
>>
>> Sorry, I missed the part on why you’re not using an internal CA for your
>> internal servers though?
>>
>> --
>> -Mark
>> --
>> *From:* cisco-voip  on behalf of
>> Anthony Holloway 
>> *Sent:* Monday, March 30, 2020 9:58:12 PM
>> *To:* UC Penguin 
>> *Cc:* cisco-voip voyp list ; Jonatan Quezada
>> ; Adrian Arevalo-Orozco <
>> adrian.arevalo.oro...@chemeketa.edu>
>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] [EXTERNAL] Cost-Effective Public Certificate
>> Authority for CUCM certificates
>>
>> *** EXTERNAL EMAIL - DO NOT CLICK LINKS ***
>>
>> It's a good thing you don't have to prove ownership for collab certs
>> then.  I have not bought through namecheap myself, but I have witnessed the
>> mistake someone has made trying to get domain validated, or EV certs for
>> their collab gear when it's not needed, and yeah, it seemed like a hassle
>> and it took a few days or more.
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 4:40 PM UC Penguin  wrote:
>>
>> Namecheap cert process is a PITA. Haven’t used them for UC servers but
>> helped a friend with their website after they already bought them from NC.
>>
>> You can only have it verify ownership with certain predefined by them
>> emails at your domain, or dns/web.
>>
>> Namecheap is a good domain registrar but I’d personally steer clear of
>> their other services.
>>
>> On Mar 30, 2020, at 14:57, Brian Meade  wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Namecheap seems to be the cheapest option I've found from some quick
>> looking.  They seem to resell Comodo certificates but cheaper than Comodo
>> offers them.
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 2:45 PM Jonatan Quezada <
>> jonatan.quez...@chemeketa.edu> wrote:
>>
>> Im totally looking to update all of mine I think we use digi-cert,
>> pleasea let us know what you find out :)
>> Cheers!
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 11:43 AM Brian Meade  wrote:
>>
>> Does anyone know of any public certificate authorities that have cheaper
>> multi-server SAN certificate options?  I had seen some in the past that let
>> you buy a wildcard and then can submit CSR's against that still but having
>> trouble finding that now.
>>
>> Trying to avoid buying 4 multi-server certificates to cover CUCM
>> Tomcat/Unity Connection Tomcat/UCCX Tomcat/IM XMPP.
>> ___
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> During this time of remote work, There will be the need for connectivity
>> to other devices such as a cell phone. If you require assistance forwarding
>> your desk phone to a remote cell or message phone, please email with desk
>> number and where we are forwarding calls. I can do these remotely.
>>
>> Johnny Q
>> Voice Technology Analyst II
>> Chemeketa Community College
>> johnn...@chemeketa.edu
>> Building 22 

Re: [cisco-voip] Can MRA work with old UCM configured with IP addresses?

[Charles Goldsmith]

never tried, but I wouldn't be surprised if FQDN is required.  Are your
hosts discovered in the expressway core and showing as TCP Active?  I'm
also assuming you have TLS verify mode off?

On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 9:13 PM Dana Tong  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
> I have a customer who was installed some 9 years ago and the hosts were
> all configured with IP address instead of FQDN. They’re up on UCM 10.5(2)
> now and I have spun up Expressway X12.5.7.
>
> The UC Traversal zone is up and running. The Expressway’s have
> certificates installed.
>
> However I am hitting issues with getting the edge config and signing in. I
> get the usual “cannot communicate with server” when I try to login with
> Jabber.
>
>
>
> I’ve tried changing some things such as configuring the UCM, IM, Unity
> servers in Expressway-C by IP or FQDN and have had some varying results on
> the Collaboration Solution Analyser. Sometimes its downloads the user UDS
> configuration and sometimes it doesn’t.
>
>
>
> Is MRA do-able with the UCM using IP address? Or am I going to have to
> bite the bullet and reconfigure all the devices to use FQDN for their
> clustering? Or is there some kind of easy fix?
>
>
>
> Cheers
> Dana
>
>
> ___
> 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] CUCM Interop with MS Teams

[Charles Goldsmith]

I've set it up with one customer so far, we brought a partner in to help
with it, using a Ribbon SBC.  The partner setup the ribbon, took very
little time and we can direct route to MS Teams.

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 5:06 PM UC Penguin  wrote:

> Does anyone have an experience with setting up interop between
> CUCM/Microsoft Teams with Direct Routing?
>
> If so what (supported) SBC did you use and what if any issues did you
> encounter?
>
> Thanks!
> ___
> 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] Mitel 3300 anyone?

[Charles Goldsmith]

I set one up years ago, but direct between CUCM and Mitel, and I remember
it being a pain and had to reach out to TAC for help.  This was back around
the 7 or 8.0 days.

Sorry, not much help there, but we did get it to pass calls.

On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 7:48 PM Dana Tong  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
>
> Anyone ever done anything with a MITEL 3300?
>
>
>
> I am trying to setup a SIP trunk to CUBE. The trunk “appears” to be up on
> both ends.
>
> I can see OPTIONS pings from MITEL.
>
> But no calls from Cisco to MITEL go through. I get a 404 Not Found and I’m
> trying to get some kind of logs out of the MITEL to see how it is
> processing the TO address.
>
> I’m sending 9 digits with an configured to absorb 5. So you would think it
> should just match the 4 digit extension.
>
>
>
> Cheers
> Dana
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Uccx maximum ivr ports

[Charles Goldsmith]

That's the way I read it, Advanced IVR ports are double the agent count, up
to a maximum of 400, basic IVR ports have no limit hard coded, but it does
reference a calculation.  I didn't dig into it to see.

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 7:00 PM Bill Talley  wrote:

> The platform capacity on UCCX is 400 ports using the largest OVA, no?
>
>
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/crs/express_12_5/design/guide/uccx_b_solution-design-guide-125/uccx_b_solution-design-guide-125_chapter_01001.html
>
> Sent from an iPhone mobile device with very tiny touchscreen input keys.
> Please excude my typtos.
>
> On Mar 10, 2020, at 6:52 PM, Myron Young  wrote:
>
> 
> You should’ve gotten 600 IVR ports I believe but check with the licensing
> team. May need to open a TAC case at this point for assistance
>
> On Mar 10, 2020, at 7:46 PM, Fares Alsaafani  wrote:
>
> 
> Hello everyone,
> I’m in the middle of Uccx deployment. We bought 300 premium agent licenses
> but only got 400 ivr port. Shouldn’t we get 600 ivr ports ?
> --
> Best Regards
>
> *FARES ALSAAFANI*
> ___
> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] 8800 w/ USB External Sound Card

[Charles Goldsmith]

No, but I don't think it's driverless, the OS just already has drivers for
it if it works without installing anything.  The phones would need to
have drivers for this to work, would be interesting if it did, but my guess
is that it won't.

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 9:03 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> Anyone try a driverless USB External sound card on the 8800s? Something
> like:
>
> https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B01M7QQQC7
>
> [cid:image001.jpg@01D5E642.796882A0]
> ___
> 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] CUCM Cluster Expansion

[Charles Goldsmith]

Agreed 100% on this, unless you are on be6k stuff.  Prior to the m5
hardware, it was cut and dry, if you had > 2.5ghz processors, you could use
the 7500 user or larger with no problem.  1000 user ova was less can be on
2.0 - 2.4ghz, and most of the be6k stuff came with 2.4ghz.  There are some
other restrictions on cpu types, but in the enterprise, I haven't seen much
that didn't fit, other than just speed.

Some of the be6k for the m5 hardware, I'm seeing some other cpu's in use
now (like 2.2ghz).  Cisco also has some additional criteria if you don't
want to do 2.5ghz and not 1:1 vCpu to core, but it's on an approval basis.

Read up here
https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/uc_system/virtualization/collaboration-virtualization-hardware.html

Basically, if your hardware supports it, go with the 7500 user, makes your
life easier down the road.



On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 5:40 PM NateCCIE  wrote:

> I always do the 7.5k cucm size.  I hate single cpu cucm, ram is usually
> not a problem and I’d rather have the 110GB disk because upgrades about
> never work on the 80gb without clearing some space.  Even 110GB has become
> a problem lately.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 13, 2020, at 3:29 PM, Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
> 
> For 11.x, but I've found this helpful:
> https://www.cisco.com/web/software/283088407/126036/cucm-11.0.ova.readme.txt
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ryan
> --
> *From:* Matthew Loraditch 
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:24 PM
> *To:* Ryan Huff ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* RE: CUCM Cluster Expansion
>
>
> Yeah, I’m just trying to understand (as I read the ovf file) what the
> actual difference is between the 1000/2500 user OVA. I seem to be missing
> something (or maybe not). CPU is actually 1 less starting but same
> reservation, same RAM, same HDD.
>
>
>
> Matthew Loraditch​
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*
> 
>  |  e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com*
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> *From:* Ryan Huff 
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:21 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch ;
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: CUCM Cluster Expansion
>
>
>
> [EXTERNAL]
>
>
>
> I wouldn't see a reason not to just up-size the two nodes you have now to
> the 2.5k OVA (use 2 vCPU on each node). For the *15 pieces of flair*, I'd
> then add in a 3rd 2.5k OVA w/o the CCM service enabled and run TFTP.. etc
> on it and give the pub a break.
>
>
>
> -Ryan
>
>
> --
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  on behalf of
> Matthew Loraditch 
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:10 PM
> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net 
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] CUCM Cluster Expansion
>
>
>
> One of my biggest customers is experiencing issues that appear to be
> related to resource utilization. I’ve never had a customer who needed more
> than a 2 node 1000 user cluster.
>
>
>
> They are getting close to some of the capacity levels listed in the sizing
> guides.
>
>
>
> I’m looking for some opinions on what the best way to deal with this. I
> have the hardware capacity for either method.
>
>
>
> Add a Third 1000 user Subscriber and turn off call processing and tftp on
> the Pub?
>
>
>
> Rebuild both existing servers to 2500 user OVAs?
>
>
>
> Add a third and do the rebuild also?
>
>
>
> Can I just make the existing server be the 2500 capacity level? I actually
> don’t understand the difference between the 2500 and 1000 user OVAs, the
> 2500 appears to actually be lesser capacity by default (1 less cpu). So go
> to 7500?
>
>
>
> I’d appreciate any opinions out there. Going to 

Re: [cisco-voip] 8851 - power draw

[Charles Goldsmith]

I have a single 8845 here in my office, on a 2960 switch.  It was
manufactured 09/19 per the box.  My 2960 is reporting it as a class 2 and
it's drawing 7w with power/screen on.Just to give you a bit more data.
I don't have an 8851 here.  My 8865 is on wifi and in the other office, but
if you want correlating data, I can go grab it.  The 8845 is on 12.7, the
8865 is currently connected to Webex, so whatever code they push, I'd have
to go look.

office-2960#sh power inline g1/0/8
Interface Admin  Oper (W) Power   Device  Class Max
- -- -- --- --- - 
Gi1/0/8   auto   on 7.0 IP Phone 8845   2 30.0

Interface  AdminPowerMax   AdminConsumption
 (Watts)   (Watts)
-- --- 
Gi1/0/8   30.0 15.4


On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 5:11 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> Does anyone have a bunch of 8851s deployed? Can I trouble you for a "show
> inline power" output? I'm looking for what normal operating power draw is
> for this model. No side cars, no USB, sort of thing.
>
> I've got an 8865 showing 12.9W, and I'm hoping it's less. We're looking at
> selecting 8841 or 8851 and power draw is a concern. Startup too, but
> apparently, startup will cycle through.
>
> Lelio
>
> ___
> 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] 12.5 Upgrade files posted on CCO

[Charles Goldsmith]

I'm 100% beside you, I've yet to see them look at it, just not something
I'm willing to risk though.

With the way licensing is these days, the restrictions of bootable ISO
downloads is kinda silly.   I see no reason why they restrict it, since if
we really wanted to, we can download the publicly available ISO, add the
bootrom, boot it up, change root login, and do what we want.  Restricting
the bootables only slows down our support for the customer.


On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 12:26 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:

> Totally see your point.
>
> While I guess it may be a possibility, TAC has never, in my experience,
> come close to digging that deep to look for an exit from a support request
> (which is conceivably why they would look that deep since it poses no
> functional risk). In my 20+ years of experience with TAC and Cisco, as long
> as the “thing” is under a support contract, TAC is far more willing to
> assist you than to look for an exit.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 6, 2020, at 12:42, Charles Goldsmith  wrote:
>
> 
> Agreed, but I've never done this for a customer, and here is my
> reasoning.  From my understanding, when you install/upgrade, the md5 of the
> iso used is written into the logs or a file on the system.  If TAC were so
> inclined, they could tell if you installed from valid media or not.
>
> Granted, I've had TAC supplied bootable media fail the media test and not
> match md5, but was cleared in writing to use it.
>
> I've never had TAC check my files before, but there is always the
> possibility.
>
> PUT can be a bit delayed (at least it has been for me), but never more
> than about 24 hours.  Seems we get most orders in within 12 - 18 hours.
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 11:17 AM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
>> I can handle the bootable issue far faster and more efficiently than the
>> PUT process can, which is one of the reasons why I’ve found PUT to not be
>> super useful to me.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Feb 6, 2020, at 11:33, Pawlowski, Adam  wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>> As far as I know, ordering from PUT creates a sales order number that is
>> used for entitlement when migrating your licenses. It also gives you a
>> bootable ISO or should.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Nick
>> via cisco-voip
>> *Sent:* Thursday, February 6, 2020 11:20 AM
>> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] 12.5 Upgrade files posted on CCO
>>
>>
>>
>> The upgrade files for CUCM 12.5 both SU1 and SU2 both state the following
>>
>>
>>
>> For upgrades from 12.x only. Upgrades from 11.x or earlier are requested
>> via PUT
>>
>>
>>
>> Is this just incorrect wording as far as i am aware there has never been
>> any different files for upgrades from 11 or 12, I have ordered 12.5.1 SU1
>> from PUT and the upgrade file is identical to the one you can download from
>> CCO supposedly for 12 only?
>>
>>
>>
>> Anyone able to confirm these are the same files?
>> ___
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>
>> https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7Ce8ead415b0184407467f08d7ab2240bd%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637166035922535203sdata=XxLnfHbAA5ShezR82O0U%2BZQy%2B2XpZowwZ%2BZ5QDtsacc%3Dreserved=0
>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voip=02%7C01%7C%7C3b05623a7e6548c6112508d7ab2be0d2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637166077248718633=ZIlMYNREw5lOrTLV49aUedbFRZ15Nnj14PNZ745gwO4%3D=0>
>>
>> ___
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voip=02%7C01%7C%7C3b05623a7e6548c6112508d7ab2be0d2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637166077248728637=sbYrnAkK%2BFhL5FXCGHStfpbG9EZ1Z10ATKwYnP6iWYc%3D=0>
>>
> ___
> 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] 12.5 Upgrade files posted on CCO

[Charles Goldsmith]

Agreed, but I've never done this for a customer, and here is my reasoning.
>From my understanding, when you install/upgrade, the md5 of the iso used is
written into the logs or a file on the system.  If TAC were so inclined,
they could tell if you installed from valid media or not.

Granted, I've had TAC supplied bootable media fail the media test and not
match md5, but was cleared in writing to use it.

I've never had TAC check my files before, but there is always the
possibility.

PUT can be a bit delayed (at least it has been for me), but never more than
about 24 hours.  Seems we get most orders in within 12 - 18 hours.


On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 11:17 AM Ryan Huff  wrote:

> I can handle the bootable issue far faster and more efficiently than the
> PUT process can, which is one of the reasons why I’ve found PUT to not be
> super useful to me.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 6, 2020, at 11:33, Pawlowski, Adam  wrote:
>
> 
>
> As far as I know, ordering from PUT creates a sales order number that is
> used for entitlement when migrating your licenses. It also gives you a
> bootable ISO or should.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Nick
> via cisco-voip
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 6, 2020 11:20 AM
> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] 12.5 Upgrade files posted on CCO
>
>
>
> The upgrade files for CUCM 12.5 both SU1 and SU2 both state the following
>
>
>
> For upgrades from 12.x only. Upgrades from 11.x or earlier are requested
> via PUT
>
>
>
> Is this just incorrect wording as far as i am aware there has never been
> any different files for upgrades from 11 or 12, I have ordered 12.5.1 SU1
> from PUT and the upgrade file is identical to the one you can download from
> CCO supposedly for 12 only?
>
>
>
> Anyone able to confirm these are the same files?
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>
> https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7Ce8ead415b0184407467f08d7ab2240bd%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637166035922535203sdata=XxLnfHbAA5ShezR82O0U%2BZQy%2B2XpZowwZ%2BZ5QDtsacc%3Dreserved=0
>
> ___
> 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] [EXTERNAL] 12.5 Upgrade files posted on CCO

[Charles Goldsmith]

I've had no problem upgrading customers from 10.5 to 12.5 su1 using the
files downloaded from the support site.  We only use PUT to get the upgrade
SO# for licensing, and half of the time that's not even needed.

PUT also gets you bootable iso's, but not always the latest SU.

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:29 AM JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip <
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> wrote:

> I’ve always wondered the same thing so I’ll be interested to hear some
> other answers. PUT has never worked properly for me and no one has ever
> been able to tell me why so I pretty much just gave up on using that and
> I’ve downloaded software from CCO for upgrades.
>
> When I went from 10.5 to 11.5 I opened up a TAC case asking about that
> same message you are asking about and was told to disregard it as it was
> the same file I would get from PUT but not sure if that holds true for all
> upgrade packages.
>
> Jason
>
> On Feb 6, 2020, at 11:21 AM, Nick via cisco-voip <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
> 
> CAUTION: This email originated outside of Founders Federal Credit Union.
> Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and
> know the content is safe.
> --
> The upgrade files for CUCM 12.5 both SU1 and SU2 both state the following
>
> For upgrades from 12.x only. Upgrades from 11.x or earlier are requested
> via PUT
>
> Is this just incorrect wording as far as i am aware there has never been
> any different files for upgrades from 11 or 12, I have ordered 12.5.1 SU1
> from PUT and the upgrade file is identical to the one you can download from
> CCO supposedly for 12 only?
>
> Anyone able to confirm these are the same files?
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_mailman_listinfo_cisco-2Dvoip=DwICAg=CrVsPA4meZ6vEtstSPLQqC5izq21_OrN_h8zxKzEuwc=cxTKAF4Iaor9PiEwHMcKcEgAJ-ObtwqWBXjTvqngqNk=vj6cNqJH_-kssYOe-rUNGB7RHISCPXDspZxBpoxz6i4=ggtZ2LB__vTKLez3eloR1WqIh5BmwzhC4Zu89mlGd6I=
>
> ___
> 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] Cisco website downloads

[Charles Goldsmith]

Using Firefox ESR here on my mac.

On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:58 AM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I switched to the new MS Edge and everything is peachy.  ;)
>
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:48 AM Charles Goldsmith  wrote:
>
>> For what it's worth, I downloaded 12.5.1su2 just fine last night, and
>> just downloaded a smaller ova with no problems as a test.
>>
>> Maybe all of your hard work, selling, and help in the community has
>> finally paid off, they are giving you a well-deserved break :)
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:38 AM Anthony Holloway <
>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> And when you click the link to send an email to report the
>>> problembounce back!
>>>
>>> [image: image.png]
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:35 AM Anthony Holloway <
>>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> And the problems continue today:
>>>>
>>>> [image: image.png]
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 9:48 AM Anthony Holloway <
>>>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I am having some troubles this morning.  Intermittently.  I was trying
>>>>> to download the new 12.7.1 firmware so I can mark Ryan's calls as Spam.
>>>>>
>>>>> [image: image.png]
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 12:04 PM Ryan Huff 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Working now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> *From:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
>>>>>> *Sent:* Sunday, February 2, 2020 12:05 PM
>>>>>> *To:* Anthony Holloway 
>>>>>> *Cc:* Ryan Huff ; cisco-voip voip list <
>>>>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco website downloads
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just checked. Looks like it’s fixed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph,
>>>>>> ON | N1G 2W1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
>>>>>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uoguelph.ca%2Fccs=02%7C01%7C%7Cf7349059403046ebc39508d7a80214f2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637162599220133081=VRdUTB2ob5IXO4Cw%2F0oSOeZxe5ln8fJWDJsaHEPoxiM%3D=0>
>>>>>>  |
>>>>>> @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 2, 2020, at 2:54 AM, Anthony Holloway <
>>>>>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yep.  Just tried it.  Looks like the EULA API call is returning a 400
>>>>>> Bad Request to the page.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 9:10 PM Ryan Huff 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyone else having issues with the downloads section for the Cisco
>>>>>> website? I've tried multiple browsers and OSs and I get the same thing 
>>>>>> each
>>>>>> time. I attempt to download an image file and get the popup modal asking 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> accept the license agreement and then after I click the accept button, 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> screen opacity decreases (as if another window opened or is about to) and
>>>>>> then nothing happens. I've waited up to 10 minutes and nothing happens.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought perhaps an entitlement issue, but I get the same issue when
>>>>>> trying to download images that I have very recently been entitled to /
>>>>>> downloaded.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ryan
>>>>>> ___
>>>>>> cisco-voip mailing list
>>>>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>>>>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voip=02%7C01%7C%7Cf7349059403046ebc39508d7a80214f2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637162599220143089=%2FiAIYq5D8ebR8OX5CU%2FI1Z6B4brYnITny84mY0vLtEY%3D=0>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ___
>>>>>> cisco-voip mailing list
>>>>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>>>>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voip=02%7C01%7C%7Cf7349059403046ebc39508d7a80214f2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637162599220143089=%2FiAIYq5D8ebR8OX5CU%2FI1Z6B4brYnITny84mY0vLtEY%3D=0>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ___
>>> 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] Cisco website downloads

[Charles Goldsmith]

For what it's worth, I downloaded 12.5.1su2 just fine last night, and just
downloaded a smaller ova with no problems as a test.

Maybe all of your hard work, selling, and help in the community has finally
paid off, they are giving you a well-deserved break :)


On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:38 AM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> And when you click the link to send an email to report the
> problembounce back!
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:35 AM Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> And the problems continue today:
>>
>> [image: image.png]
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 9:48 AM Anthony Holloway <
>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I am having some troubles this morning.  Intermittently.  I was trying
>>> to download the new 12.7.1 firmware so I can mark Ryan's calls as Spam.
>>>
>>> [image: image.png]
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 12:04 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>>>
 Working now.

 --
 *From:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
 *Sent:* Sunday, February 2, 2020 12:05 PM
 *To:* Anthony Holloway 
 *Cc:* Ryan Huff ; cisco-voip voip list <
 cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
 *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco website downloads


 I just checked. Looks like it’s fixed?

 *-sent from mobile device-*


 *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst

 Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph

 Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON
 | N1G 2W1

 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca



 www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
 
  |
 @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook



 [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]

 On Feb 2, 2020, at 2:54 AM, Anthony Holloway <
 avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

 Yep.  Just tried it.  Looks like the EULA API call is returning a 400
 Bad Request to the page.

 On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 9:10 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:

 Anyone else having issues with the downloads section for the Cisco
 website? I've tried multiple browsers and OSs and I get the same thing each
 time. I attempt to download an image file and get the popup modal asking to
 accept the license agreement and then after I click the accept button, the
 screen opacity decreases (as if another window opened or is about to) and
 then nothing happens. I've waited up to 10 minutes and nothing happens.

 I thought perhaps an entitlement issue, but I get the same issue when
 trying to download images that I have very recently been entitled to /
 downloaded.

 

 Thanks,

 Ryan
 ___
 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

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco website downloads

[Charles Goldsmith]

Have you tried turning it off and on again?


On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:38 AM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> And when you click the link to send an email to report the
> problembounce back!
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:35 AM Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> And the problems continue today:
>>
>> [image: image.png]
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 9:48 AM Anthony Holloway <
>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I am having some troubles this morning.  Intermittently.  I was trying
>>> to download the new 12.7.1 firmware so I can mark Ryan's calls as Spam.
>>>
>>> [image: image.png]
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 12:04 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>>>
 Working now.

 --
 *From:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
 *Sent:* Sunday, February 2, 2020 12:05 PM
 *To:* Anthony Holloway 
 *Cc:* Ryan Huff ; cisco-voip voip list <
 cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
 *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco website downloads


 I just checked. Looks like it’s fixed?

 *-sent from mobile device-*


 *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst

 Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph

 Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON
 | N1G 2W1

 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca



 www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
 
  |
 @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook



 [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]

 On Feb 2, 2020, at 2:54 AM, Anthony Holloway <
 avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

 Yep.  Just tried it.  Looks like the EULA API call is returning a 400
 Bad Request to the page.

 On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 9:10 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:

 Anyone else having issues with the downloads section for the Cisco
 website? I've tried multiple browsers and OSs and I get the same thing each
 time. I attempt to download an image file and get the popup modal asking to
 accept the license agreement and then after I click the accept button, the
 screen opacity decreases (as if another window opened or is about to) and
 then nothing happens. I've waited up to 10 minutes and nothing happens.

 I thought perhaps an entitlement issue, but I get the same issue when
 trying to download images that I have very recently been entitled to /
 downloaded.

 

 Thanks,

 Ryan
 ___
 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

Re: [cisco-voip] uccx browser response slow when redundant uccx is down

[Charles Goldsmith]

Best practices is to have an NTP of stratum 4 or lower, but I wouldn't
think it would cause a slow down.  Your cluster is having issues, so
resolve that, just causing more work on your system if all tests aren't
good.

Are you on supported hardware?  Does RTMT have any alerts that would be
pertinent?

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 9:17 PM naresh rathore  wrote:

> hi
>
>
> I did fresh installation of uccx1 and 2. currently demo license is expired
> and i am sorting that out but whenever i shutdown one of the uccx. the
> browser response of the powered on UCCX is very very slow. UCCX version is
> 12. can it be because of ntp?
>
> admin:utils diagnose test
>
> Log file: platform/log/diag1.log
>
> Starting diagnostic test(s)
> ===
> test - disk_space  : Passed (available: 8409 MB, used: 17621 MB)
> skip - disk_files  : This module must be run directly and off hours
> test - service_manager : Passed
> test - tomcat  : Passed
> test - tomcat_deadlocks: Passed
> test - tomcat_keystore : Passed
> test - tomcat_connectors   : Passed
> test - tomcat_threads  : Passed
> test - tomcat_memory   : Passed
> test - tomcat_sessions : Passed
> skip - tomcat_heapdump : This module must be run directly and off hours
> test - validate_network: Error, intra-cluster communication is broken,
> unable to connect to [10.10.160.109]
> test - raid: Passed
> test - system_info : Passed (Collected system information in
> diagnostic log)
> test - ntp_reachability: Passed
> test - ntp_clock_drift : Passed
> test - ntp_stratum : Failed
> The reference NTP server is a stratum 5 clock.
> NTP servers with stratum 5 or worse clocks are deemed unreliable.
> Please consider using an NTP server with better stratum level.
>
> Please use OS Admin GUI to add/delete NTP servers.
>
> skip - sdl_fragmentation   : This module must be run directly and off hours
> skip - sdi_fragmentation   : This module must be run directly and off hours
>
> Diagnostics Completed
>
>
>  The final output will be in Log file: platform/log/diag1.log
>
>
>  Please use 'file view activelog platform/log/diag1.log' command to see
> the output
>
> admin:
>
>
> Regards
>
>
> Naray
> ___
> 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] CUCM requirements for AD account import - anything else other than SN=* (non-empty) ?

[Charles Goldsmith]

This is what I recommend to customers, users, not pc's and the ipPhone
field is populated.

(&(objectclass=user)(!(objectclass=Computer))(ipPhone=*))

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 3:34 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> OK - I'm trying to reconcile accounts being imported into CUCM before I
> modify the filter we're using.
>
> I've used the base filter suggested, plus I've added the (sn=*) to ensure
> we get only accounts with non-empty last names.
>
> However, my reconciliation is off by 1 (including taking into account
> inactive LDAP accounts).
>
> CUCM: 86,636
> LDAP Browser: 86,637
>
> I could just write it off as an anomaly, but I've sync'ed multiple times
> and ran the LDAP search multiple times, and I'm pretty sure no one is
> making changes.
>
> Anyone aware of any other criteria CUCM puts on to the import process?
> ___
> 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] Expressway Cluster failover for MRA...

[Charles Goldsmith]

Yes, but when installing distributed systems (across geographically diverse
DC's), this is better than having Core1 talk to Edge2 scenario all the time.

Hopefully this is resolved soon and we can go back to clustering.


On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 11:59 AM ROZA, Ariel 
wrote:

> But without clustering, if Core1 fails, Edge1 will still be active and
> Jabber clients will still see Edge1 running and attempt to connect through
> it!
>
>
>
> *De:* cisco-voip  *En nombre de *Charles
> Goldsmith
> *Enviado el:* martes, 28 de enero de 2020 23:18
> *Para:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *CC:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Asunto:* Re: [cisco-voip] Expressway Cluster failover for MRA...
>
>
>
> We've built them as individual pairs (Edge/Core) and then use DNS to
> control which one goes where.  Without the cluster, we know that Edge1 will
> always talk to Core1.
>
>
>
> I get the feeling that clustering was always meant to be in the same DC,
> and for redundancy purposes in the same DC.
>
>
>
> If you have two DC's, either a cluster at each DC, or just a pair at each
> DC, depending on the business needs.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 8:11 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>
>
> How does no. 2 actually solve the problem of having to log back in?
>
>
>
> Is this a supported/suggested deployment method?
>
>
>
> It’s been a while since I first looked at things and don’t recall things
> mentioning using the cluster name in the SRV records.
>
>
>
> I’m intrigued. And interested!
>
>
>
>
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uoguelph.ca%2Fccs=02%7C01%7Cariel.roza%40la.logicalis.com%7Cc0d1c180d7f641ba09fb08d7a461a4bb%7C2e3290cb8d404058abe502c4f58b87e3%7C0%7C0%7C637158611596247024=tcEox%2FkkBKTgCYb4MyUOvCU4nl%2Bb9teAf7ijtXlv5lE%3D=0>
>  |
> @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 28, 2020, at 9:03 PM, Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
> 1.) It used to be in previous versions that all cluster nodes could
> technically be active at any time and SRV weights and priorities could
> influence the path selection but not guarantee it end-to-end when all
> cluster nodes are up and running.
>
> I believe this behavior has changed/improved and I think you are supposed
> to be able to control that now with SRV weights and priorities, but I could
> be wrong. I haven’t played with Expressway clustering in a bit.
>
> 2.) As far as the Jabber registration goes; what I’ve done before in the
> edge is have the collab-edge SRV point to the edge cluster FQDN as the
> target. Then I create round robin A records for the cluster FQDN (one
> resolving your each edge server). The for the edge certs, just make sure
> the edge cluster fqdn is in the SAN.
>
> This way if one of the edge server goes down, the Jabber client is
> ultimately still trying to resolve the same MRA FQDN via SRV lookup (this a
> key to Jabber client failover for MRA).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ryan
>
>
> On Jan 28, 2020, at 20:50, Jonathan Charles  wrote:
>
>
>
> 
>
> We have two pairs of Expressway clusters (C/E) at two different locations
> (primary and DR)...
>
>
>
> The cluster is up, however, we want to make sure that we are in
> Active/Standby.
>
>
>
> Currently, we have one of our SRV records for collab-edge set at 5 (the
> backup is at 10) with the same weight.
>
>
>
> The clustering guide says we should set the priority and weight on both
> SRV records the same, which will cause half of the registrations to go to
> the DR site. It is far away and has less capability.
>
>
>
> How do we:
>
>
>
> 1 - Make sure the primary site handles all MRA registrations and the DR
> site is only used when the primary is down.
>
> 2 = Make sure failover occurs automatically... currently Jabber users have
> to log out and back in to connect to the DR site.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> ___
>
> cisco-voip mailing list
>
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>
>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7C2f536d8162984707853908d7a45d8e24%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637158594035084563sdata=atRtI

Re: [cisco-voip] Expressway Cluster failover for MRA...

[Charles Goldsmith]

We've built them as individual pairs (Edge/Core) and then use DNS to
control which one goes where.  Without the cluster, we know that Edge1 will
always talk to Core1.

I get the feeling that clustering was always meant to be in the same DC,
and for redundancy purposes in the same DC.

If you have two DC's, either a cluster at each DC, or just a pair at each
DC, depending on the business needs.

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 8:11 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> How does no. 2 actually solve the problem of having to log back in?
>
> Is this a supported/suggested deployment method?
>
> It’s been a while since I first looked at things and don’t recall things
> mentioning using the cluster name in the SRV records.
>
> I’m intrigued. And interested!
>
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> On Jan 28, 2020, at 9:03 PM, Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
> 1.) It used to be in previous versions that all cluster nodes could
> technically be active at any time and SRV weights and priorities could
> influence the path selection but not guarantee it end-to-end when all
> cluster nodes are up and running.
>
> I believe this behavior has changed/improved and I think you are supposed
> to be able to control that now with SRV weights and priorities, but I could
> be wrong. I haven’t played with Expressway clustering in a bit.
>
> 2.) As far as the Jabber registration goes; what I’ve done before in the
> edge is have the collab-edge SRV point to the edge cluster FQDN as the
> target. Then I create round robin A records for the cluster FQDN (one
> resolving your each edge server). The for the edge certs, just make sure
> the edge cluster fqdn is in the SAN.
>
> This way if one of the edge server goes down, the Jabber client is
> ultimately still trying to resolve the same MRA FQDN via SRV lookup (this a
> key to Jabber client failover for MRA).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ryan
>
> On Jan 28, 2020, at 20:50, Jonathan Charles  wrote:
>
>
> 
>
> We have two pairs of Expressway clusters (C/E) at two different locations
> (primary and DR)...
>
>
> The cluster is up, however, we want to make sure that we are in
> Active/Standby.
>
>
> Currently, we have one of our SRV records for collab-edge set at 5 (the
> backup is at 10) with the same weight.
>
>
> The clustering guide says we should set the priority and weight on both
> SRV records the same, which will cause half of the registrations to go to
> the DR site. It is far away and has less capability.
>
>
> How do we:
>
>
> 1 - Make sure the primary site handles all MRA registrations and the DR
> site is only used when the primary is down.
>
> 2 = Make sure failover occurs automatically... currently Jabber users have
> to log out and back in to connect to the DR site.
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> ___
>
> cisco-voip mailing list
>
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>
>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7C2f536d8162984707853908d7a45d8e24%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637158594035084563sdata=atRtIR8sWZ60Ja8akD6GjzBIgBNC8GSJjaOmu%2BTxmWw%3Dreserved=0
>
> ___
> 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] best way to move CUCM Publisher from one host/DC to another

[Charles Goldsmith]

No sir, never messed with it or needed to.  I've moved a couple of PLM's to
new hardware, even to another vendor's hardware with no issue.

On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 9:55 AM Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) 
wrote:

> Has anyone run into problems setting a static MAC on your ELM/PLM vm?
> Dynamic mac addresses can definitely bite you but I’m curious how this
> workaround (that we do document as best practice) works in the real world.
>
>
>
>- Ryan
>
>
>
> *From: *cisco-voip  on behalf of
> Charles Goldsmith 
> *Date: *Wednesday, December 11, 2019 at 10:37 AM
> *To: *Ryan Huff 
> *Cc: *cisco-voip list 
> *Subject: *Re: [cisco-voip] best way to move CUCM Publisher from one
> host/DC to another
>
>
>
> Yes sir, moving to new hosts in the same DC, both hosts plugged into the
> same Nexus on 10gbit.
>
>
>
> To UC Penguin's point, it was on 6.0
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 7:46 AM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
> Interesting, was it 10GB end2end (nics and all)? I’ve done it on a 1GB
> end2end and got close to 700 mbps (if I recall correctly, 680-682 was the
> highest it hit).
>
>
>
> Not disagreeing, just interesting... it would be worth some investigating
> someday.
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On Dec 11, 2019, at 01:50, Charles Goldsmith  wrote:
>
> I'm a big fan of SCP as well, but it's limited to 1 vCPU on the
> encryption, so that seems to limit it more than the links.  I know this
> because trying to move VM's over 10gbit connections and was only getting
> about 400 mbps.
>
>
>
> If you have a middle pc/jump box, I'm a big fan of simple export/import if
> you don't have a vCenter in the picture.  That way, you get a backup of the
> VM.  vCenter is nice, but migration moves it, doesn't copy, even with
> different storage.
>
>
>
> I have never tried to use vmkstools, may have to investigate that the next
> time I migrate.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 8:26 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
> Yes, SCP is beholden to the line rate between the hosts. Though VMWare
> doesn’t “recommend” it, I can say I’ve also never had a problem with it,
> FWIW... and yeah, super convenient.
>
>
>
> Is you have shared storage between the hosts and can migrate the storage
> and compute, I’d power off the VM and just do that.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On Dec 10, 2019, at 21:20, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> SCP is so slow and not recommended by VMware*, but damn if it's not
> convenient.
>
>
>
> Ovftool is super fast but I think it requires a middle PC to be ran from.
>
>
>
> It would be awesome if you could have the best of both worlds. Like run
> ovftool right on ESXi. I wonder.
>
>
>
> I have used Veeam free backup to move VMs, which is as fast as ovftool,
> but a huge install for a one time move.
>
>
>
> *To prevent performance and data management related issues on ESX, avoid
> the use of using scp, cp, or mv for storage operations; instead use
> vmkfstools, VMware's virtual machine Importer tool.
>
> https://kb.vmware.com/s/article/1000936
> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fkb.vmware.com%2Fs%2Farticle%2F1000936=02%7C01%7C%7Ceb93b37ca4fb479b4b6008d77e0670b0%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637116438430643299=mFju5OvyMPfidnEhicwZeqm2AVIkyG6fcymST%2B5Txl4%3D=0>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019, 7:50 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
> I don’t think vMotion would change the MAC address, UUID.. etc and I think
> you’d be fine (not while the VM is powered on though).
>
>
>
> Typically, what I do is power the VM down and SCP the VM folder to the
> target host from the source host (requires SSH server/client be enabled and
> excluded in the host firewall for the hosts). Then in the target host, add
> the .vmx file into inventory and power on. You’ll initially be asked if you
> moved or copied the VM and you’ll want to select move (if you select copy,
> then it will randomize a few things like nic MAC .. etc).
>
>
>
> Lastly, remove the source VM from inventory and after you’re sure the
> target VM is healthy and running fine, delete the source VM from storage on
> the source host.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Ryan
>
>
>
> On Dec 10, 2019, at 20:42, naresh rathore  wrote:
>
> hi
>
>
>
>
>
> We have to migrate our Voice VMs from one host/DC to another host/DC. i
> think if we clone or do vmotion, mac address gets changed and we have to
> apply for license, we may face database corruption.
>
>
>
>
>
> Is there a way which Cisco recommends to do migration, if we have to
> migrate Voic

Re: [cisco-voip] best way to move CUCM Publisher from one host/DC to another

[Charles Goldsmith]

Yes sir, moving to new hosts in the same DC, both hosts plugged into the
same Nexus on 10gbit.

To UC Penguin's point, it was on 6.0

On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 7:46 AM Ryan Huff  wrote:

> Interesting, was it 10GB end2end (nics and all)? I’ve done it on a 1GB
> end2end and got close to 700 mbps (if I recall correctly, 680-682 was the
> highest it hit).
>
> Not disagreeing, just interesting... it would be worth some investigating
> someday.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 11, 2019, at 01:50, Charles Goldsmith  wrote:
>
> 
> I'm a big fan of SCP as well, but it's limited to 1 vCPU on the
> encryption, so that seems to limit it more than the links.  I know this
> because trying to move VM's over 10gbit connections and was only getting
> about 400 mbps.
>
> If you have a middle pc/jump box, I'm a big fan of simple export/import if
> you don't have a vCenter in the picture.  That way, you get a backup of the
> VM.  vCenter is nice, but migration moves it, doesn't copy, even with
> different storage.
>
> I have never tried to use vmkstools, may have to investigate that the next
> time I migrate.
>
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 8:26 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
>> Yes, SCP is beholden to the line rate between the hosts. Though VMWare
>> doesn’t “recommend” it, I can say I’ve also never had a problem with it,
>> FWIW... and yeah, super convenient.
>>
>> Is you have shared storage between the hosts and can migrate the storage
>> and compute, I’d power off the VM and just do that.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Dec 10, 2019, at 21:20, Anthony Holloway <
>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> SCP is so slow and not recommended by VMware*, but damn if it's not
>> convenient.
>>
>> Ovftool is super fast but I think it requires a middle PC to be ran from.
>>
>> It would be awesome if you could have the best of both worlds. Like run
>> ovftool right on ESXi. I wonder.
>>
>> I have used Veeam free backup to move VMs, which is as fast as ovftool,
>> but a huge install for a one time move.
>>
>> *To prevent performance and data management related issues on ESX, avoid
>> the use of using scp, cp, or mv for storage operations; instead use
>> vmkfstools, VMware's virtual machine Importer tool.
>> https://kb.vmware.com/s/article/1000936
>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fkb.vmware.com%2Fs%2Farticle%2F1000936=02%7C01%7C%7Ceb93b37ca4fb479b4b6008d77e0670b0%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637116438430643299=mFju5OvyMPfidnEhicwZeqm2AVIkyG6fcymST%2B5Txl4%3D=0>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019, 7:50 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>>
>>> I don’t think vMotion would change the MAC address, UUID.. etc and I
>>> think you’d be fine (not while the VM is powered on though).
>>>
>>> Typically, what I do is power the VM down and SCP the VM folder to the
>>> target host from the source host (requires SSH server/client be enabled and
>>> excluded in the host firewall for the hosts). Then in the target host, add
>>> the .vmx file into inventory and power on. You’ll initially be asked if you
>>> moved or copied the VM and you’ll want to select move (if you select copy,
>>> then it will randomize a few things like nic MAC .. etc).
>>>
>>> Lastly, remove the source VM from inventory and after you’re sure the
>>> target VM is healthy and running fine, delete the source VM from storage on
>>> the source host.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Ryan
>>>
>>> On Dec 10, 2019, at 20:42, naresh rathore  wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>> hi
>>>
>>>
>>> We have to migrate our Voice VMs from one host/DC to another host/DC. i
>>> think if we clone or do vmotion, mac address gets changed and we have to
>>> apply for license, we may face database corruption.
>>>
>>>
>>> Is there a way which Cisco recommends to do migration, if we have to
>>> migrate Voice VMs from one host to another?
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> Naray
>>> ___
>>> cisco-voip mailing list
>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>>
>>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7C57141ead670d42edf74808d77ddb677d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637116253590181473sdata=z44wxHsKAhdz2lak4%2Fj7to5R2HV22lmr3D2%2BVr%2Fe5vQ%3Dreserved=0
>>> <https://eur02.safelinks.

Re: [cisco-voip] best way to move CUCM Publisher from one host/DC to another

[Charles Goldsmith]

I'm a big fan of SCP as well, but it's limited to 1 vCPU on the encryption,
so that seems to limit it more than the links.  I know this because trying
to move VM's over 10gbit connections and was only getting about 400 mbps.

If you have a middle pc/jump box, I'm a big fan of simple export/import if
you don't have a vCenter in the picture.  That way, you get a backup of the
VM.  vCenter is nice, but migration moves it, doesn't copy, even with
different storage.

I have never tried to use vmkstools, may have to investigate that the next
time I migrate.

On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 8:26 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:

> Yes, SCP is beholden to the line rate between the hosts. Though VMWare
> doesn’t “recommend” it, I can say I’ve also never had a problem with it,
> FWIW... and yeah, super convenient.
>
> Is you have shared storage between the hosts and can migrate the storage
> and compute, I’d power off the VM and just do that.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 10, 2019, at 21:20, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 
> SCP is so slow and not recommended by VMware*, but damn if it's not
> convenient.
>
> Ovftool is super fast but I think it requires a middle PC to be ran from.
>
> It would be awesome if you could have the best of both worlds. Like run
> ovftool right on ESXi. I wonder.
>
> I have used Veeam free backup to move VMs, which is as fast as ovftool,
> but a huge install for a one time move.
>
> *To prevent performance and data management related issues on ESX, avoid
> the use of using scp, cp, or mv for storage operations; instead use
> vmkfstools, VMware's virtual machine Importer tool.
> https://kb.vmware.com/s/article/1000936
> 
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2019, 7:50 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
>> I don’t think vMotion would change the MAC address, UUID.. etc and I
>> think you’d be fine (not while the VM is powered on though).
>>
>> Typically, what I do is power the VM down and SCP the VM folder to the
>> target host from the source host (requires SSH server/client be enabled and
>> excluded in the host firewall for the hosts). Then in the target host, add
>> the .vmx file into inventory and power on. You’ll initially be asked if you
>> moved or copied the VM and you’ll want to select move (if you select copy,
>> then it will randomize a few things like nic MAC .. etc).
>>
>> Lastly, remove the source VM from inventory and after you’re sure the
>> target VM is healthy and running fine, delete the source VM from storage on
>> the source host.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>> On Dec 10, 2019, at 20:42, naresh rathore  wrote:
>>
>> 
>> hi
>>
>>
>> We have to migrate our Voice VMs from one host/DC to another host/DC. i
>> think if we clone or do vmotion, mac address gets changed and we have to
>> apply for license, we may face database corruption.
>>
>>
>> Is there a way which Cisco recommends to do migration, if we have to
>> migrate Voice VMs from one host to another?
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>> Naray
>> ___
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7C57141ead670d42edf74808d77ddb677d%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637116253590181473sdata=z44wxHsKAhdz2lak4%2Fj7to5R2HV22lmr3D2%2BVr%2Fe5vQ%3Dreserved=0
>> 
>>
>> ___
>> 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] CUCM CDR Reporting options

[Charles Goldsmith]

I’m a fan of Variphy, grab a trial, it has a lot in it


> On Dec 10, 2019, at 5:02 PM, Dana Tong  wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi all,
>  
> What are you guys using for CDR analysis and reporting? Are there any SaaS 
> offerings for CUCM CDR’s?
>  
> I thought I saw some reporting and analytics service that was compatible with 
> both on-prem, Webex, and other feeds.
> Does anyone recall what this might be?
>  
> Cheers
> Dana
>  
> ___
> 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] Webex: feedback issues in rooms with mice and speakers

[Charles Goldsmith]

Not that I've seen.  Have had too many people join a meeting from their
laptop in a room with a video unit and room mics and we get feedback.

On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 7:06 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> I may have asked this before, but my searching isn’t working.
>
> If I set up Webex in a room and pipe the audio from a mic into our Webex
> session, and then pipe the audio from the PC into the room, does Webex have
> “magic” to prevent feedback? Both for us in the room, but also remote
> participants?
>
> What if I step it up and feed the mic into the room system as well?
>
> It’s two things we’ve not done yet that people have been asking.
>
> I’ve been told by our A/V tech support that it really needs a sound
> processing system.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
> ___
> 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] Automatic disconnect

[Charles Goldsmith]

Not that I'm aware of, but we have used Informacast to do panic buttons :
https://www.singlewire.com/informacast/use-case/panic-buttons

On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 6:43 AM  wrote:

>
>
>
>
> Can I program a speed dial button on a 7945/7965 to call an extension and
> have it automatically hang-up in say 10/20 seconds.  Looking at using a
> speed dial on a 7945/7965 as a panic button.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Norm Nicholson*
>
> *Telecom Analyst*
>
> *City of Kitchener*
>
> *(519) 741-2200 x 7000*
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] End-to-End Troubleshooting & Central Log Repo

[Charles Goldsmith]

We tried to get https://sipcapture.org/ up and going for doing sip traces
across multiple clusters, but it just didn't speak CUCM very well and we
just didn't have time to work with them on getting it to work.  This was
probably 18 months ago.  It may be a solution, if you can get it to run.

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 10:57 AM Sreekanth Narayanan (sreenara) via
cisco-voip  wrote:

> Hey All!
>
> I'm reaching out to understand how call issues are troubleshot today
> end-to-end within an enterprise. I wanted to get a sense of whether you all
> use any applications that act as Central Logging servers for all the
> applications that provide Collaboration services.
>
> For example, CUCM, UCCE/X, CUBE, GW (or other vendors like Mitel, Avaya
> etc) all dumping their logs or CDRs to a central application that could
> help you troubleshoot a call failure all the way from the Edge to the phone.
>
> Do you use some 3rd party logging applications that make the job easier
> and get to the root cause quickly?
> Or do you follow the traditional methods which involve checking the logs
> on the first application in the call flow and then using the Session-ID /
> Call-ID to correlate the same call on the next hop and so on?
>
> Regards
> Sreekanth
> ___
> 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] what's the NC model of phones?

[Charles Goldsmith]

If it's really Non-China, why does it only seem to be the camera models?

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 3:37 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> Where do we see this description? Source/Reference? (if you can share)
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *
> Nimloth
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 17, 2019 4:13 PM
> *To:* Anthony Holloway 
> *Cc:* Tucci, Ben via cisco-voip ; Norton,
> Mike 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] what's the NC model of phones?
>
>
>
> NC = "Non-China COO" where COO is Country of origin ;)
>
> Case solved
>
> W dniu 17 wrz 2019, o 22:09, użytkownik Nimloth 
> napisał:
>
> Not sure. I would guess not manufactured in China
>
> W dniu 17 wrz 2019, o 22:07, użytkownik Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> napisał:
>
> So what is that, like it can't be imported and used inside of China?  Or
> that it wasn't manufactured in China?
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 3:06 PM Nimloth < niml...@nimloth.pl> wrote:
>
> Non-China to be more accurate
>
> W dniu 17 wrz 2019, o 22:05, użytkownik Nimloth < niml...@nimloth.pl>
> napisał:
>
> NC = No China
>
> W dniu 17 wrz 2019, o 22:02, użytkownik Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> napisał:
>
> I think everyone is just guessing what NC stands for.  I'd like to think
> it's because it's Not Complete, and you have to build it yourself like a
> piece of Ikea furniture.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 2:59 PM James Buchanan < james.buchan...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> With much searching, this site:
> https://itprice.com/cisco/cp-8845-nc-k9=.html indicates that the "NC"
> phone is "Non-China" Country of Origin. I don't know that for sure, but I
> thought it was an interesting, undocumented interpretation. At least it
> would explain why it's more expensive.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 8:47 PM Pawlowski, Adam < aj...@buffalo.edu>
> wrote:
>
> Slightly bigger screen, and no USB port.
>
>
>
> I still don’t know why you’d want that unless you need Bluetooth are still
> security minded (?), or you use the wall mount kit and want the same
> appearance everywhere?
>
>
>
> Also I assume it can receive video so it can be used in a lobby or
> sensitive area if you do enough video calling and have something to see.
>
>
>
> The camera feels like you can snap it off pretty easily anyways.
>
>
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Lelio
> Fulgenzi
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 17, 2019 3:44 PM
> *To:* Hunter Fuller 
> *Cc:* Norton, Mike ; voyp list, cisco-voip (
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] what's the NC model of phones?
>
>
>
> In actuality, the 8845 includes: Integrated Bluetooth + Intelligent
> Proximity over what an 8841 has.
>
>
>
> From the brochure:
>
>
>
>
> https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/products/collateral/collaboration-endpoints/unified-ip-phone-7940g/prod_brochure0900aecd800f6d4a.pdf
>
>
>
> Probably more.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Hunter Fuller 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 17, 2019 3:35 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* Charles Goldsmith ; Norton, Mike <
> mikenor...@pwsd76.ab.ca>; voyp list, cisco-voip (
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] what's the NC model of phones?
>
>
>
> But isn't an 8845 without a camera basically an 8841? ... The use case for
> such a device would have to be unbelievably slim, surely...
>
>
> --
> Hunter Fuller
> Router Jockey
> VBH Annex B-5
> +1 256 824 5331
>
> Office of Information Technology
> The University of Alabama in Huntsville
> Network Engineering
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 2:

Re: [cisco-voip] what's the NC model of phones?

[Charles Goldsmith]

More and more odd, when I searched for that part number, I couldn't find it.

Could it be a No Camera option, since it seems to only be coming up on
phones that normally have a camera?

The 8865 has a -nc but the 8851 does not

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 2:05 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> I see it in ccw. The description is a little different. IP phone vs UC
> Phone.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Charles
> Goldsmith
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 17, 2019 2:57 PM
> *To:* Norton, Mike 
> *Cc:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] what's the NC model of phones?
>
>
>
> Well, I was way off...
>
>
>
> I can't find that part number in CCW at all, and I was thinking of the NR
> version, which is no radio anyway.
>
>
>
> Lelio, where did you see CP-8845-NC-K9?
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 1:34 PM Norton, Mike 
> wrote:
>
> But I thought K9 means "strong crypto"? So NC-K9 is "no crypto *and*
> strong crypto"
>
> -mn
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of
> Charles Goldsmith
> Sent: September 13, 2019 3:30 PM
> To: Myron Young 
> Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] what's the NC model of phones?
>
> Export purposes
>
> > On Sep 13, 2019, at 4:24 PM, Myron Young 
> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe this is a silly question, but why would anyone want a no crypto
> phone?
> >
> >> On Sep 13, 2019, at 4:09 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
> >>
> >> AH. Gotcha.
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst Computing and Communications
> >> Services | University of Guelph Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition
> >> Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
> >> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
> >>
> >> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Charles Goldsmith 
> >> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2019 4:05 PM
> >> To: Lelio Fulgenzi 
> >> Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)
> >> 
> >> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] what's the NC model of phones?
> >>
> >> No crypto
> >>
> >>> On Sep 13, 2019, at 3:02 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Anyone know what the NC model of phones are?
> >>>
> >>> There's the CP-8845-K9=, but also the CP-8845-NC-K9=. And the NC
> version is more expensive with a longer lead time.
> >>>
> >>> Can't find any details on the datasheet or any google search.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst Computing and Communications
> >>> Services | University of Guelph Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition
> >>> Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
> >>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 |
> >>> le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>
> >>>
> >>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs> | @UofGCCS on
> >>> Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
> >>>
> >>> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>> ___
> >>> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] what's the NC model of phones?

[Charles Goldsmith]

Well, I was way off...

I can't find that part number in CCW at all, and I was thinking of the NR
version, which is no radio anyway.

Lelio, where did you see CP-8845-NC-K9?

On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 1:34 PM Norton, Mike 
wrote:

> But I thought K9 means "strong crypto"? So NC-K9 is "no crypto *and*
> strong crypto"
>
> -mn
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of
> Charles Goldsmith
> Sent: September 13, 2019 3:30 PM
> To: Myron Young 
> Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] what's the NC model of phones?
>
> Export purposes
>
> > On Sep 13, 2019, at 4:24 PM, Myron Young 
> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe this is a silly question, but why would anyone want a no crypto
> phone?
> >
> >> On Sep 13, 2019, at 4:09 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
> >>
> >> AH. Gotcha.
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst Computing and Communications
> >> Services | University of Guelph Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition
> >> Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
> >> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
> >>
> >> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Charles Goldsmith 
> >> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2019 4:05 PM
> >> To: Lelio Fulgenzi 
> >> Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)
> >> 
> >> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] what's the NC model of phones?
> >>
> >> No crypto
> >>
> >>> On Sep 13, 2019, at 3:02 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Anyone know what the NC model of phones are?
> >>>
> >>> There's the CP-8845-K9=, but also the CP-8845-NC-K9=. And the NC
> version is more expensive with a longer lead time.
> >>>
> >>> Can't find any details on the datasheet or any google search.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst Computing and Communications
> >>> Services | University of Guelph Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition
> >>> Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
> >>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 |
> >>> le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>
> >>>
> >>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs> | @UofGCCS on
> >>> Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
> >>>
> >>> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>> ___
> >>> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber with CCX , over MRA

[Charles Goldsmith]

A lot of good info here :
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/crs/express_12_0/design/guide/uccx_b_solution-design-guide-1201/uccx_b_solution-design-guide-1201_chapter_011.html#UCCX_RF_E796A578_00


>From the compatibility guide :
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/crs/express_compatibility/matrix/uccxcompat12_0_1.html#Endpoint_Devices
a
couple of footnotes with details:

(FN 3) For Home Agent with Extend and Connect, set Jabber to Extend Mode so
that the agents can select or edit the remote destination number.
(FN 7)  Cisco Jabber as an agent phone now supports Multiline (ACD and
non-ACD). This is applicable for versions 12.0 and above.

You have options :)




On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 12:12 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> Ok. From what I recall, it’s not that Jabber is not supported with CCX,
> but in fact, a common deployment model is not supported.
>
>
>
> I believe it has to do with the same primary extension enabled on more
> than one device, with the primary extension being the agent extension.
>
>
>
> In all my discussions, no one could tell me that if we were to choose to
> use Jabber on a desktop, on-prem, with multiple extensions (uccx primary,
> private secondary), that it wouldn’t work.
>
>
>
> The answer always came back, “but that’s not how we want to use it”.
>
>
>
> I’m eager to find out more about Jabber and CCX (and MRA).
>
>
>
> Lelio
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of 
> *Pawlowski,
> Adam
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 17, 2019 12:58 PM
> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Jabber with CCX , over MRA
>
>
>
> Good afternoon all,
>
>
>
> Just trying to get my notes together on the subject of using Jabber as an
> agent softphone, with UCCX (12) , over MRA. Recently saw some commentary
> that it is not supported, but, it’s not explicitly called out that I can
> tell.
>
>
>
> The CCX SRND mentions that Expressway is supported “as an endpoint”,
> Jabber can be used, but doesn’t call any specific limitation to the two.
> This guide does say that Multiline is not supported which seemed to be new.
>
>
>
> As far as I can tell it is working just fine to use with Finesse over MRA,
> the only thing I haven’t done yet is looked at traffic to see if it/CTI
> works because it can reach the UCM directly.
>
>
>
> Anyone have any experience with trying to implement that, or, if they know
> for sure it is problematic or … not ?
>
>
>
> Adam
> ___
> 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] what's the NC model of phones?

[Charles Goldsmith]

Export purposes 

> On Sep 13, 2019, at 4:24 PM, Myron Young  wrote:
> 
> Maybe this is a silly question, but why would anyone want a no crypto phone?
> 
>> On Sep 13, 2019, at 4:09 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>> 
>> AH. Gotcha. 
>> 
>> ---
>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
>> 2W1
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>> 
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Charles Goldsmith  
>> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2019 4:05 PM
>> To: Lelio Fulgenzi 
>> Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
>> 
>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] what's the NC model of phones?
>> 
>> No crypto
>> 
>>> On Sep 13, 2019, at 3:02 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Anyone know what the NC model of phones are?
>>> 
>>> There's the CP-8845-K9=, but also the CP-8845-NC-K9=. And the NC version is 
>>> more expensive with a longer lead time.
>>> 
>>> Can't find any details on the datasheet or any google search.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph Room 037 
>>> Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
>>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>
>>> 
>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs> | @UofGCCS on 
>>> Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>> 
>>> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 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] what's the NC model of phones?

[Charles Goldsmith]

No crypto

> On Sep 13, 2019, at 3:02 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
> 
> 
> Anyone know what the NC model of phones are?
> 
> There's the CP-8845-K9=, but also the CP-8845-NC-K9=. And the NC version is 
> more expensive with a longer lead time.
> 
> Can't find any details on the datasheet or any google search.
> 
> 
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
> 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
> 
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, 
> Twitter and Facebook
> 
> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Bulk Admin and Jabber

[Charles Goldsmith]

LOL.  Problem is, if you have a large deployment, even something as small
as 50 users, coming up with unique names is problematic.  For those of us
deploying in bulk, using the AD user-id is perfect, you can concatenate in
Excel quickly to generate the device names (CSFjsnow, TCTJSNOW, BOTJSNOW,
TABJSNOW).

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 1:07 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
>
> Interesting. I must have simply read it incorrectly. I don’t think I would
> have picked any other formatting in retrospect.
>
>
>
> What are others using?
>
>
>
> Other than Anthony, who’s focused on fruits for some reason.
>
>
>
> I’d like to be AVOCADO.
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* Charles Goldsmith 
> *Sent:* Friday, September 13, 2019 1:47 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* Anthony Holloway ; cisco-voip voyp
> list 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin and Jabber
>
>
>
> It just has to be unique, the association comes from the End User device
> association as well as the Owner User ID.  Anthony has it correct.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 12:41 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
> Ok. Hold on. Are you sure? I did mean userID. As a Cisco requirement. Not
> company standard.
>
>
>
> I’m almost 100% positive I read in the deployment guide it needs to be the
> userID. And it was the Jabber deployment guide. Which, of course, I didn’t
> save. 
>
>
>
> When asking about it, I was told, it was really the only way you could get
> a Jabber device to associate with a user after logon. How else would you?
>
>
>
> I mean, there’s nothing else I think I’d really want to use, but,
> honestly, I believe(d) it’s a requirement.
>
>
>
> Lelio
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* Anthony Holloway 
> *Sent:* Friday, September 13, 2019 12:40 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* Brian Meade ; cisco-voip voyp list <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin and Jabber
>
>
>
> "... when we know the device name for the softphones needs to be the
> userID"
>
>
>
> Just to be clear, it does not.  That was an old CUPC requirement, and the
> new requirements are as follows:
>
>
>
> CSF = could be whatever you want, e.g., banana (unless you have QM call
> recording, then it needs to be all caps CSFSOMETHING for QM)
>
> TCT = must be all caps TCTSOMETHING
>
> BOT =  must be all caps BOTSOMETHING
>
> TAB = must be all caps TABSOMETHING
>
>
>
> None of them however, need the User ID in the name.  Could be TCTBANANA
> for example.
>
>
>
> Maybe that's not what you meant.  Maybe you meant, for your company's
> standard build, but I thought I'd address that, since other people might
> have read that it needed to be that way.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:25 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
> This looks like an interesting option. I’ll have to see how much effort it
> takes to get the templates set up in order for us to use this.
>
>
>
> I didn’t like the fact that it’s asking me to fill in the device name,
> when we know the device name for the softphones needs to be the userID. So
> this is a step that could lead to errors and extra effort.
>
>
>
> I know this sounds like _*I*_ don’t want to do this stuff, but when
> you’re preparing instructions for a group of people with varying skill
> sets, the less work required the better.
>
>
>
> At least we have some options.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
&

Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin and Jabber

[Charles Goldsmith]

It just has to be unique, the association comes from the End User device
association as well as the Owner User ID.  Anthony has it correct.

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 12:41 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> Ok. Hold on. Are you sure? I did mean userID. As a Cisco requirement. Not
> company standard.
>
>
>
> I’m almost 100% positive I read in the deployment guide it needs to be the
> userID. And it was the Jabber deployment guide. Which, of course, I didn’t
> save. 
>
>
>
> When asking about it, I was told, it was really the only way you could get
> a Jabber device to associate with a user after logon. How else would you?
>
>
>
> I mean, there’s nothing else I think I’d really want to use, but,
> honestly, I believe(d) it’s a requirement.
>
>
>
> Lelio
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* Anthony Holloway 
> *Sent:* Friday, September 13, 2019 12:40 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* Brian Meade ; cisco-voip voyp list <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin and Jabber
>
>
>
> "... when we know the device name for the softphones needs to be the
> userID"
>
>
>
> Just to be clear, it does not.  That was an old CUPC requirement, and the
> new requirements are as follows:
>
>
>
> CSF = could be whatever you want, e.g., banana (unless you have QM call
> recording, then it needs to be all caps CSFSOMETHING for QM)
>
> TCT = must be all caps TCTSOMETHING
>
> BOT =  must be all caps BOTSOMETHING
>
> TAB = must be all caps TABSOMETHING
>
>
>
> None of them however, need the User ID in the name.  Could be TCTBANANA
> for example.
>
>
>
> Maybe that's not what you meant.  Maybe you meant, for your company's
> standard build, but I thought I'd address that, since other people might
> have read that it needed to be that way.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:25 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
> This looks like an interesting option. I’ll have to see how much effort it
> takes to get the templates set up in order for us to use this.
>
>
>
> I didn’t like the fact that it’s asking me to fill in the device name,
> when we know the device name for the softphones needs to be the userID. So
> this is a step that could lead to errors and extra effort.
>
>
>
> I know this sounds like _*I*_ don’t want to do this stuff, but when
> you’re preparing instructions for a group of people with varying skill
> sets, the less work required the better.
>
>
>
> At least we have some options.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* Brian Meade 
> *Sent:* Friday, September 13, 2019 11:02 AM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* Anthony Holloway ; cisco-voip voyp
> list 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin and Jabber
>
>
>
> Have you tried using the Quick/User Phone Add?  That works pretty well.
> Just assign device/line templates to user profiles and adding a
> CSF/TCT/RDP/Deskphone/TAB/BOT device for a user takes all of a minute at
> most.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:42 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
> I guess it’s a combo of built-in tools and tools people are familiar with.
>
>
>
> I like the idea, but again, adding extra steps like that might not work.
> Now, that being said, I wonder if I can modify the order in which the
> columns are presented to the import tool? If they allow headers, that
> should be ok, right?
>
>
>
> I might be stuck with looking for green columns for the first round. ☹
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* Anthony Holloway 
> *Sent:* Friday, September 13, 2019 10:31 AM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* cisco-voip voyp list 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin and Jabber
>
>
>
> "...I need to use the built-in tools..."
>
>
>
> So, Excel + BAT is built-in, and Python + AXL is not?
>
>
>
> I kid, I kid.  I get that there's a common familiarity with Excel and not
> one with Python.
>
>
>
> I have a recommendation when working with BAT import files in 

Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin and Jabber

[Charles Goldsmith]

Yeah, Hunt Groups complain, but with phone devices, I've found you can
change things around, at least when doing a partial information import with
templates.  I don't remember if I've tried to move things during an import
all phones type, but I try to steer clear of those types of imports.

Let's not even discuss MGCP gateway migration/imports.  Luckily I haven't
had to deal with them recently, but historically, they were a nightmare.

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 9:50 AM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Nope!  I actually just did this a week ago with Hunt Pilots, Hunt Lists
> and Line Groups.  The import failed when I moved the columns around, and I
> had to revert the order.  It's safe to say that the column order matters in
> some instances.  Feel free to play with it though.
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 9:42 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>> I guess it’s a combo of built-in tools and tools people are familiar
>> with.
>>
>>
>>
>> I like the idea, but again, adding extra steps like that might not work.
>> Now, that being said, I wonder if I can modify the order in which the
>> columns are presented to the import tool? If they allow headers, that
>> should be ok, right?
>>
>>
>>
>> I might be stuck with looking for green columns for the first round. ☹
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Anthony Holloway 
>> *Sent:* Friday, September 13, 2019 10:31 AM
>> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
>> *Cc:* cisco-voip voyp list 
>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin and Jabber
>>
>>
>>
>> "...I need to use the built-in tools..."
>>
>>
>>
>> So, Excel + BAT is built-in, and Python + AXL is not?
>>
>>
>>
>> I kid, I kid.  I get that there's a common familiarity with Excel and not
>> one with Python.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have a recommendation when working with BAT import files in Excel.
>> Insert a few input columns to the left of the actual data, and then drive
>> your entire spreadsheet with formulas.  This will save you from having to
>> constantly scroll left and right look for cells you need to fill in.  You
>> will have to exclude them when you export/save as csv.  However, keeping
>> the input columns together on the left should make this very easy.  You can
>> duplicate the sheet and delete them, you can have two different files: XLSX
>> and CSV, you can copy and paste into Notepad++ and CTRL+H replace tabs (\t)
>> with commas (,).  There's a few options there.  Anyway, I find it much
>> nicer to input the data this way.  I hope it helps you too.
>>
>>
>>
>> Do this:
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: image.png]
>>
>>
>>
>> Not this:
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: image.png]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 7:24 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> We really need to start to minimize the amount of custom scripts /
>> programming that we use, not increase it.
>>
>>
>>
>> It’s a bit of a long story.
>>
>>
>>
>> So I need to use the built-in tools.
>>
>>
>>
>> :(
>>
>>
>>
>> We might just stick with super copy if bulk admin doesn’t work out.
>>
>>
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>
>>
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 12, 2019, at 7:48 PM, Anthony Holloway <
>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why not roll your own build tool in Python?  You can ask questions here,
>> as lots of us have Python and AXL experience, and then more people get to
>> benefit from the collaboration.
>>
>>
>>
>> Just think how cool it would be to build your very own Jarvis:
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 5:22 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> It’s been a while since I’ve used Bulk Admin Tool.
>>
>>
>>
>> Wondering how it might help with our Jabber deployment.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’m thinking, since our requests will come in one at a time, the best
>> approach would be to create a BAT file that has a line for each device
>> type. We’ve decided to load all types so users can switch devices out/in as
>> they wish.
>>
>>
>>
>> Can you bulk load _without_ using a template?
>>
>>
>>
>> What have others done with respect to Jabber bulk loads?
>>
>>
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>
>>
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | 

Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin and Jabber

[Charles Goldsmith]

This goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway for clarification.

It will fail, if it's a required field :)

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 9:38 AM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> CUCM does not fail because of blank cells, causing lots of consecutive
> commas.  That's normal.  In fact, it's even discussed/shown in the example
> files:
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 9:28 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>> Ok. So I tested exporting CSF and TCT phones. As I suspected, they’re
>> different. There’s a whole bunch of extra columns for the available DNs for
>> CSF.
>>
>>
>>
>> If I want to import both CSF and TCT phones at the same time, I wonder
>> what the strategy is here?
>>
>>
>>
>> I’m fine with just leaving those columns blank, but will CUCM barf at
>> seeing those extra commas for the TCT phones? There’s a validation process
>> I believe – could try that too.
>>
>>
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Evgeny Izetov 
>> *Sent:* Thursday, September 12, 2019 10:33 PM
>> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
>> *Cc:* Anthony Holloway ; cisco-voip
>> voyp list 
>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin and Jabber
>>
>>
>>
>> You can use Import/Export configuration with all details. No need for
>> template and can import different types of devices at the same time.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:24 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> We really need to start to minimize the amount of custom scripts /
>> programming that we use, not increase it.
>>
>>
>>
>> It’s a bit of a long story.
>>
>>
>>
>> So I need to use the built-in tools.
>>
>>
>>
>> :(
>>
>>
>>
>> We might just stick with super copy if bulk admin doesn’t work out.
>>
>>
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>
>>
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 12, 2019, at 7:48 PM, Anthony Holloway <
>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why not roll your own build tool in Python?  You can ask questions here,
>> as lots of us have Python and AXL experience, and then more people get to
>> benefit from the collaboration.
>>
>>
>>
>> Just think how cool it would be to build your very own Jarvis:
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 5:22 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> It’s been a while since I’ve used Bulk Admin Tool.
>>
>>
>>
>> Wondering how it might help with our Jabber deployment.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’m thinking, since our requests will come in one at a time, the best
>> approach would be to create a BAT file that has a line for each device
>> type. We’ve decided to load all types so users can switch devices out/in as
>> they wish.
>>
>>
>>
>> Can you bulk load _without_ using a template?
>>
>>
>>
>> What have others done with respect to Jabber bulk loads?
>>
>>
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>
>>
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin and Jabber

[Charles Goldsmith]

This is really good advice, and how I always build out a system.  You not
only have devices to import, but line association, end-user update (add
device association to the end user) and unity connection imports.  I always
have a master XLSX file with the raw data, columns are linked into another
XLSX for each import type

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 9:31 AM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "...I need to use the built-in tools..."
>
> So, Excel + BAT is built-in, and Python + AXL is not?
>
> I kid, I kid.  I get that there's a common familiarity with Excel and not
> one with Python.
>
> I have a recommendation when working with BAT import files in Excel.
> Insert a few input columns to the left of the actual data, and then drive
> your entire spreadsheet with formulas.  This will save you from having to
> constantly scroll left and right look for cells you need to fill in.  You
> will have to exclude them when you export/save as csv.  However, keeping
> the input columns together on the left should make this very easy.  You can
> duplicate the sheet and delete them, you can have two different files: XLSX
> and CSV, you can copy and paste into Notepad++ and CTRL+H replace tabs (\t)
> with commas (,).  There's a few options there.  Anyway, I find it much
> nicer to input the data this way.  I hope it helps you too.
>
> Do this:
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> Not this:
>
> [image: image.png]
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 7:24 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>>
>> We really need to start to minimize the amount of custom scripts /
>> programming that we use, not increase it.
>>
>> It’s a bit of a long story.
>>
>> So I need to use the built-in tools.
>>
>> :(
>>
>> We might just stick with super copy if bulk admin doesn’t work out.
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>> On Sep 12, 2019, at 7:48 PM, Anthony Holloway <
>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why not roll your own build tool in Python?  You can ask questions here,
>> as lots of us have Python and AXL experience, and then more people get to
>> benefit from the collaboration.
>>
>> Just think how cool it would be to build your very own Jarvis:
>>
>> 
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 5:22 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> It’s been a while since I’ve used Bulk Admin Tool.
>>>
>>> Wondering how it might help with our Jabber deployment.
>>>
>>> I’m thinking, since our requests will come in one at a time, the best
>>> approach would be to create a BAT file that has a line for each device
>>> type. We’ve decided to load all types so users can switch devices out/in as
>>> they wish.
>>>
>>> Can you bulk load _without_ using a template?
>>>
>>> What have others done with respect to Jabber bulk loads?
>>>
>>> Lelio
>>>
>>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>>
>>>
>>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>>
>>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>>
>>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>>> N1G 2W1
>>>
>>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>> ___
>>> 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] Bulk Admin and Jabber

[Charles Goldsmith]

Yes sir, you'll find it's VERY large.

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 8:27 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> Thanks.
>
> I’m wondering, can I do an export first as a starting point?
>
> Will try it.
>
> Thx.
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> On Sep 12, 2019, at 10:33 PM, Evgeny Izetov  wrote:
>
> You can use Import/Export configuration with all details. No need for
> template and can import different types of devices at the same time.
>
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:24 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>>
>> We really need to start to minimize the amount of custom scripts /
>> programming that we use, not increase it.
>>
>> It’s a bit of a long story.
>>
>> So I need to use the built-in tools.
>>
>> :(
>>
>> We might just stick with super copy if bulk admin doesn’t work out.
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>> On Sep 12, 2019, at 7:48 PM, Anthony Holloway <
>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why not roll your own build tool in Python?  You can ask questions here,
>> as lots of us have Python and AXL experience, and then more people get to
>> benefit from the collaboration.
>>
>> Just think how cool it would be to build your very own Jarvis:
>>
>> 
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 5:22 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> It’s been a while since I’ve used Bulk Admin Tool.
>>>
>>> Wondering how it might help with our Jabber deployment.
>>>
>>> I’m thinking, since our requests will come in one at a time, the best
>>> approach would be to create a BAT file that has a line for each device
>>> type. We’ve decided to load all types so users can switch devices out/in as
>>> they wish.
>>>
>>> Can you bulk load _without_ using a template?
>>>
>>> What have others done with respect to Jabber bulk loads?
>>>
>>> Lelio
>>>
>>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>>
>>>
>>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>>
>>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>>
>>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>>> N1G 2W1
>>>
>>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin and Jabber

[Charles Goldsmith]

You can do an Export/Import > Import phones, but it's more complex.  I
always use templates for my deployments.

On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 5:22 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> It’s been a while since I’ve used Bulk Admin Tool.
>
> Wondering how it might help with our Jabber deployment.
>
> I’m thinking, since our requests will come in one at a time, the best
> approach would be to create a BAT file that has a line for each device
> type. We’ve decided to load all types so users can switch devices out/in as
> they wish.
>
> Can you bulk load _without_ using a template?
>
> What have others done with respect to Jabber bulk loads?
>
> Lelio
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
> ___
> 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] Enjoy a No-Compromise User Experience with Cisco Jabber 12.7 - Cisco Blog

[Charles Goldsmith]

Supported yes, work well, not so much :)


On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:04 AM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Funny, I was just in a situation this week where the Desk Phone control of
> the secondary line issue came up.  Looks like 12.7 solves this now.
>
> However, it still doesn't look like it solves the problem of Jabber VDI
> and Desk Phone Video though, which remains a Jabber Windows only feature.
> It's a shame too really, because back when it was called VMXE, this was
> supported.
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 6:17 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>> 12.7 has dropped.
>>
>>
>> https://blogs.cisco.com/collaboration/enjoy-a-no-compromise-user-experience-with-cisco-jabber-12-7
>>
>>
>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>> ___
>> 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] Your Associated Webex Sites

[Charles Goldsmith]

Lelio, I think this mainly applies to partners, since we can see our
customer sites.

Anthony, I don't think there is a public listing of your sites, not that
I've seen anyway.

On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 12:07 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> I’m not quite sure I understand the question.
>
> Are you asking about a public index of sites?
>
> I know that configuration-wise, you can choose to list meetings on a site.
> We’ve chosen to not do that. So the worst that can happen is some gets to
> our WebEx landing page.
>
> I’m not sure what hiding a site helps with. Or helps deter.
>
> I mean, I’ve got our site listed on our service pages. They’re not
> restricted, so anyone can find it.
>
> Logins are protected by SSO, so we’ve got that going too. Protection-wise,
> I mean.
>
> Is there something I’m missing?
>
> Are you gonna make me loose sleep now!??? :)
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> On Sep 8, 2019, at 2:45 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I want to take the pulse on a topic here, relating to your list of
> associated Webex sites, and whether or not they are private to you, or if
> they should be public information.
>
> I was talking with a colleague about this ever growing list of customers
> we work with being cataloged by Webex in the fact that we keep getting
> associated to more and more customers, and what potential issue this may
> cause if the site list were to be viewed by just anyone on the internet.
>
> Would you want your site list (whether end customer or partner admin)
> protected from view of others, or is it not that big of a deal?
>
> And I guess as a follow up, is this list protected today, or is there a
> means by which my list can be exposed to the public relatively easily?
>
> ___
> 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] Setup

[Charles Goldsmith]

Well, if your setup has 1 site, and all phone are setup the same, it is a
simple process, you can even copy a phone.  However, anything more complex
than that, and you could get bad results, like if someone dialed emergency
services and it went out the wrong location.

If you have already setup all of the call routing details, then you know
what is needed to setup a phone.

On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 12:09 PM John Huston  wrote:

> I have already done that which is why I am asking a question here for
> training. Thank you for the prompt reply.
>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, September 3, 2019, 12:07:53 PM CDT, Charles Goldsmith <
> w...@woka.us> wrote:
>
>
> John, the settings in your system are very specific to your site and
> setup.  If you are not familiar with it, I'd advise you to reach out to
> your partner / VAR for assistance.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 11:59 AM John Huston via cisco-voip <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Is there a location where I can find some slides on how to setup a phone
> in an existing system from start to finish?  The Route Groups, Route Lists
> and Route Patterns are already setup.
>
> Thank you in advance for your help.
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Setup

[Charles Goldsmith]

John, the settings in your system are very specific to your site and
setup.  If you are not familiar with it, I'd advise you to reach out to
your partner / VAR for assistance.


On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 11:59 AM John Huston via cisco-voip <
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Is there a location where I can find some slides on how to setup a phone
> in an existing system from start to finish?  The Route Groups, Route Lists
> and Route Patterns are already setup.
>
> Thank you in advance for your help.
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] CUCM SU release cycle

[Charles Goldsmith]

Cloud is good for some things, IMHO, but not a once size fit all.  As we
saw from last year, the cloud is not immune to outages.  Unless you are big
enough to get a dedicated circuit, you have QoS issues.

I have yet to see WxTeams work seamlessly on my mobile, the bug is back
where it continues to ring after I answer on elsewhere.

My cloud connected home phone is rock solid (8865 to WxTeams), aside from
the occasional QoS hiccup, but I would get that with any provider, not just
Webex.

Would I advise my bigger customers to switch?  Not yet.  Hybrid calling is
good for now and a properly built UCM cluster just can't be beat if you
have a well built network, etc.

On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:38 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
>
> Cisco is paying for clients who get “Cloud or Bust” tattoos.
>
>
>
> That’s a sign of good things to come.
>
>
>
> I’m convinced.
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* Ryan Huff 
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 15, 2019 1:31 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* Anthony Holloway ; Charles
> Goldsmith ; cisco-voip voyp list 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM SU release cycle
>
>
>
> Let’s not get ahead of ourselves there ;). Just like war, usually (but not
> always) the people who want 100% cloud calling or think it’s a great idea
> are the people who’ve never experienced it.. lol
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On Aug 15, 2019, at 13:22, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
> 
>
> You forgot how everyone will be migrating to Webex Calling before then.
> And your upgrade cycle will be out of control. Just like how Webex Teams
> has that green restart symbol every two weeks.
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uoguelph.ca%2Fccs=02%7C01%7C%7C22113f37d40644de57c608d721a523d2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637014865456429669=Pd10jsjcQBMgJXb1etRx7L0VkkiGRtg%2B06QmkUhomqY%3D=0>
> | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> *From:* Anthony Holloway 
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 15, 2019 12:05 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* Charles Goldsmith ; cisco-voip voyp list <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM SU release cycle
>
>
>
> So if I do the math...
>
>
>
> No more minor versions
>
> ...punches some keys...
>
>
>
> And 2 month SU cycles
>
> ...punches more keys
>
>
>
> With an upper limit of 3 SUs
>
> ...punches even more keys...
>
>
>
> That's a new major version every 6 months!
>
>
>
> That means we'll see
>
> ..key punching intensifies...
>
>
>
> CUCM 69 by mid-2046.  Just in time for me to retire!
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 10:57 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
> Pretty sure I remember them saying there likely wouldn’t be that many SU’s
> either, three at most?
>
>
>
> **sigh**
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uoguelph.ca%2Fccs=02%7C01%7C%7C22113f37d40644de57c608d721a523d2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637014865456439678=nPmXLEtfP23uE8IG5eNiL4ouIBaMQ0a7bU6IrVmF7Xc%3D=0>
> | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Anthony
> Holloway
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 15, 2019 11:50 AM
> *To:* Charles Goldsmith 
> *Cc:* cisco-voip voyp list 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM SU release cycle
>
>
>
> Make it SU5 in memory of the .5 releases.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 9:18 AM Charles Goldsmith  wrote:
>
> I didn't see an announcement, was just told about the change, Cisco
> doesn't like us waiting for 

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM SU release cycle

[Charles Goldsmith]

I didn't see an announcement, was just told about the change, Cisco doesn't
like us waiting for the .5 release to push out to customers.  We all know
that the .0 releases have historically been more challenging.

So now, I plan to wait until at least su2 before upgrading :)


On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 9:15 AM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Why not just all Major versions all the time?  Google Chrome is on version
> 76.
>
> But seriously though, anyone got a reference to this announcement?  I
> didn't see it in the cisco live preso linked earlier.
>
> If not, what's the reported reason for dropping minor release numbers?
>
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 5:40 AM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
>> After 12.5, no more “.5” releases, it’ll just be major versions (and the
>> SUs in between). After 12.5 we skip 13 and go right to 14 (then presumably,
>> 15 after that).
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Aug 15, 2019, at 02:05, Anthony Holloway <
>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> What's going on with .5 releases?  I don't think I heard about that.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 11:16 PM Charles Goldsmith  wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, I think with the move away from the .5 releases, we'll be getting
>>> more SU's and less major releases.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 10:58 PM Ki Wi  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Group,
>>>> in the past , the SU release is every 6 months (usually longer than
>>>> that, approximately twice a year maximum) but now Cisco is changing to
>>>> every 2 months?
>>>>
>>>> Reference : Page 20 of the link
>>>>
>>>> https://www.ciscolive.com/c/dam/r/ciscolive/us/docs/2019/pdf/PSOCOL-1000.pdf
>>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ciscolive.com%2Fc%2Fdam%2Fr%2Fciscolive%2Fus%2Fdocs%2F2019%2Fpdf%2FPSOCOL-1000.pdf=02%7C01%7C%7C8f229ab7944c4083959608d72146906c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637014459258610309=NarczWk%2BTZBuID%2FEv3VbK%2FaimdV%2BVqiQMWCvAFw6zJU%3D=0>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Ki Wi
>>>> ___
>>>> cisco-voip mailing list
>>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voip=02%7C01%7C%7C8f229ab7944c4083959608d72146906c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637014459258620303=LZk7sC4c%2BRgO5tN6qEwE8KNJe6%2Bzc9%2Bsq2f4lYHoGVY%3D=0>
>>>>
>>> ___
>>> cisco-voip mailing list
>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>> <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voip=02%7C01%7C%7C8f229ab7944c4083959608d72146906c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637014459258630302=Fzo5JMhFkhfYFgP9f2M2PuiHp7RIAJTtoowm5b%2FtSvA%3D=0>
>>>
>> ___
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>
>> https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7C8f229ab7944c4083959608d72146906c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637014459258670341sdata=2Ovozm%2FGSCWnNZNpQ4h0zz4VcUi5L%2B3gr1OsZb8FD9M%3Dreserved=0
>>
>>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM SU release cycle

[Charles Goldsmith]

Yeah, I think with the move away from the .5 releases, we'll be getting
more SU's and less major releases.

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 10:58 PM Ki Wi  wrote:

> Hi Group,
> in the past , the SU release is every 6 months (usually longer than that,
> approximately twice a year maximum) but now Cisco is changing to every 2
> months?
>
> Reference : Page 20 of the link
>
> https://www.ciscolive.com/c/dam/r/ciscolive/us/docs/2019/pdf/PSOCOL-1000.pdf
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ki Wi
> ___
> 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] Unity DRS components

[Charles Goldsmith]

Unity Connection has always been the oddball, the pub only backs it self
up, you have to schedule the sub to do it's own backup.

On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 8:30 AM Myron Young 
wrote:

> Morning,
>
> Is it just me or shouldn’t both the Unity Pub and Sub servers be shown as
> available “components registered with Disaster Recovery System” when
> running either a manual or scheduled backup?
>
>  I see all nodes in the cluster for UCM but not seeing it on the Unity
> cluster; and confirmed the DRS local and master services are running on
> both servers.
> ___
> 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] Unity Connection Mailbox

[Charles Goldsmith]

Not that I'm aware of, but there is a sloppy work around.

Go into CUC and change Diane's mailbox to a dummy number, 40019 and then
add x4001 as an alternate on Bobbie's mailbox.

Once the forward is removed, you have to manually go undo it in CUC.

I warned you, sloppy :)


On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 11:43 AM Jason Aarons (Americas) <
jason.aar...@dimensiondata.com> wrote:

>
>
> Jack on PSTN  >   Diane ext 4001  >>   Bobbie ext 4002
>
>
>
> If Jack calls Diane and Diane has call forward all to Bobbie, is there a
> way for Jack to hear Bobbie’s voicemail and not Diane’s?
>
>
>
> TAC said no.  Ask the expert at Cisco Live said no.  is the answer really
> no?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> This email and all contents are subject to the following disclaimer:
> "http://www.dimensiondata.com/emaildisclaimer;
> 
> ___
> 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] room kits - smartnet or not?

[Charles Goldsmith]

Phones are relatively inexpensive, I advise people to buy spares in case of
issues vs smartnet on every phone for large installs.  Small installs, it's
a good peace of mind.

Video units are expensive, so you are gambling that nothing is going to go
wrong.  In 2 years if something does go out on one, you have to buy another
one.  That's a business decision and I just present the facts to the bean
counters and let them make it and take the heat :)


On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 8:37 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> I remember when phones first came out, smartnet was expensive for each
> phone and the decision by many was made to leave smart net off the phones
> and use that money to replace phones as needed. Budget issues aside, it
> made sense.
>
> What are people doing for equipment of a smaller number? Say, Room Kits?
>
> I'd like to offer the products to our clients with a 5 year warranty, so
> no one has to worry about managing inventory until it's probably time to
> replace them. But 5 year warranty is about half the cost of the product.
> Doing math that says these devices will be EOL'ed within about 10 years of
> announcement (very rough guess), two 5 year warranties buys a new product.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram,
> Twitter and Facebook
>
> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> ___
> 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] Call flow for device registered to Hybrid Cloud via local PSTN

[Charles Goldsmith]

It's only a matter of time that the SCCP phones will not function with the
latest features.  I realize that the 79x5's just went EOL a couple of years
ago, but we've had SIP only phones for at least 8 years now.

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 6:22 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> Whoa.
>
> 
> Unified CM Device Requirements
>
> Hybrid Call Service is supported only with Cisco SIP phones and Cisco
> Jabber clients that are registered to Unified CM.
>
> *SCCP phones may encounter problems due to the 48-character limitation on
> the destination address. *
>
> 
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> On May 15, 2019, at 7:16 PM, Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
> You’ll need a specific Webex DNS zone and the traversal trunk really just
> needs to support pre-loaded route headers and SIP parameter preservation
> (those are the most significant differences over the traversal / neighbor
> zone you might have setup for B2B).
>
> It’s a simple enough configuration, but there are a few more moving parts
> than what the marketing may lead one to believe. Here is the configuration
> documentation:
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cloudCollaboration/spark/hybridservices/callservices/cmgt_b_ciscospark-hybrid-call-service-config-guide.html
>
> Oh and don’t forget to enable MTLS on the edge and also be aware the
> ControlHub now requires CCM 11.5.1SU3 or better (it detects CCM version via
> call connector on Exp-C). It wouldn’t allow you to enable hybrid calling on
> cloud registered devices otherwise.
>
> You can technically still get away using Expressway 8.11.4, but that’ll
> soon be a deprecated version for hybrid calling (you’ll get an alarm about
> it), so might as well go to 12.5.2 and be done with it.
>
> BTW, if you try to upgrade an 8.x Expressway to 12.5.x, you will interact
> with GLO for the 12.x release key (can’t do it from the self service portal
> because the existing 8.x virtual license is already associated to a PAK and
> GLO has to invalidate that relationship first, then hash your new keys to
> 12.5.x).
>
> Good Luck!
>
> - Ryan
>
> On May 15, 2019, at 18:42, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>
> Very good question. From what I understand, there’s a special traversal
> link built and it’s all “built-in” and uses the CSS of the remote
> destination or something like that.
>
> I’ve read absolutely zero docs about this. This is all based on a quick
> convo I had. I had the same worries and if I recall correctly, my worries
> were somewhat alleviated.
>
> However, that being said, there is only one template in control hub, so if
> your user needs a different setup on their remote destination (or something
> like that) you need to go make a manual change.
>
> It’s sorta like how there’s only one licensing template in control hub for
> new users. We’re gonna struggle with that. We might have to engage
> (professional) services which make uses of APIs to assign different
> services for different users in webex. But I digress.
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
> 
>  |
> @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> On May 15, 2019, at 5:20 PM, Jonathan Charles  wrote:
>
> Enabling Cisco hybrid call and routing calls to the PSTN using local
> gateway (via Expressway C/E pair).
>
> What search rules do we need on the E and C?
>
> How do we prevent toll fraud if we have E.164 patterns inbound on our
> Expressways?
>
> Am I being paranoid?
>
>
> 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
>
> 

Re: [cisco-voip] PUT Tool Bootables - what version?

[Charles Goldsmith]

Agree 100%, but you'd have a hard time proving that's the only thing you
changed about that iso if TAC wanted to push it.  For my customers, I just
don't chance it.

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 4:45 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:

> The checksum is written to the OS. I’ve heard tell from the old country of
> a TAC agent using it as a way out of an otherwise entitled case.
>
> If you inject a boot table from a RedHat image into a Redhat image, there
> isn’t any functional difference.
>
> I would not inject a boot table from a RedHat into a CentOS based image
> though  ;).
>
> -Ryan
>
> On May 15, 2019, at 17:26, Charles Goldsmith  wrote:
>
> I don't know how true this is, but years ago I was told that when you do
> an install, that the md5sum of the iso is written out in the install, so
> that TAC can tell if it's a legit image that is used to do the
> installation.
>
> However, at least once on a TAC supplied iso that I've gotten a failure on
> the "check installation media" portion of the install.  When I asked TAC
> about it, they told me to ignore and proceed with the install.  My guess is
> that the particular ISO I had didn't have the correct md5 on it.
>
> Others have installed just fine that I've received from them.
>
> Take that for what it's worth.
>
> Btw, you don't need to use Ultra ISO to make an iso bootable, linux tools
> can do the same thing.  Doesn't cost an Ultra ISO license and you don't
> have to download the ISO to your desktop and then upload it.  Not always
> feasible when doing things remotely.  Not that I've ever made an ISO for a
> customer, just saying :)
>
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 3:01 PM Evgeny Izetov  wrote:
>
>> I wonder if TAC also gave up - UltraISO'd it themselves and forgot to add
>> Bootable_ :-)
>>
>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 3:46 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>>
>>> I remember when it used to as simple as “format /s”
>>>
>>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>>
>>>
>>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>>
>>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>>
>>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>>> N1G 2W1
>>>
>>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
>>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uoguelph.ca%2Fccs=02%7C01%7C%7C9a1ad3c070e146b9594908d6d97c0269%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636935523970928134=K4wDMjxCTZ8cVNzghlOD89rziK4SEvuMG6lUSU67fNk%3D=0>
>>>  |
>>> @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>>
>>> On May 15, 2019, at 3:22 PM, Charles Goldsmith 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> It's not.  And just in case they changed things, I went and downloaded
>>> the latest 12.0 and 12.5 of both CUCM and CUC and none of them have the
>>> bootable part of the ISO.
>>>
>>> Simply renaming a file doesn't make it bootable :)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:36 PM Anthony Holloway <
>>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> That.  Can't.  Be.  True.  Right?  If so, Brian Meade has been wasting
>>>> his time with UltraISO.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:26 PM Evgeny Izetov 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That's good to know. Was it 12.x or 11.x?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 2:19 PM Haas, Neal 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I had a TAC Call last week, they told me to add BOOTABLE to the name
>>>>>> (in front) and that was it. They said all ISO’s are now bootable with the
>>>>>> name change…..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf
>>>>>> Of *Evgeny Izetov
>>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 15, 2019 11:17 AM
>>>>>> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
>>>>>> *Cc:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
>>>>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] PUT Tool Bootables - what version?
>>>&g

Re: [cisco-voip] PUT Tool Bootables - what version?

[Charles Goldsmith]

I don't know how true this is, but years ago I was told that when you do an
install, that the md5sum of the iso is written out in the install, so that
TAC can tell if it's a legit image that is used to do the installation.

However, at least once on a TAC supplied iso that I've gotten a failure on
the "check installation media" portion of the install.  When I asked TAC
about it, they told me to ignore and proceed with the install.  My guess is
that the particular ISO I had didn't have the correct md5 on it.

Others have installed just fine that I've received from them.

Take that for what it's worth.

Btw, you don't need to use Ultra ISO to make an iso bootable, linux tools
can do the same thing.  Doesn't cost an Ultra ISO license and you don't
have to download the ISO to your desktop and then upload it.  Not always
feasible when doing things remotely.  Not that I've ever made an ISO for a
customer, just saying :)


On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 3:01 PM Evgeny Izetov  wrote:

> I wonder if TAC also gave up - UltraISO'd it themselves and forgot to add
> Bootable_ :-)
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 3:46 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>> I remember when it used to as simple as “format /s”
>>
>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>> On May 15, 2019, at 3:22 PM, Charles Goldsmith 
>> wrote:
>>
>> It's not.  And just in case they changed things, I went and downloaded
>> the latest 12.0 and 12.5 of both CUCM and CUC and none of them have the
>> bootable part of the ISO.
>>
>> Simply renaming a file doesn't make it bootable :)
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:36 PM Anthony Holloway <
>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> That.  Can't.  Be.  True.  Right?  If so, Brian Meade has been wasting
>>> his time with UltraISO.
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:26 PM Evgeny Izetov  wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's good to know. Was it 12.x or 11.x?
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 2:19 PM Haas, Neal 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I had a TAC Call last week, they told me to add BOOTABLE to the name
>>>>> (in front) and that was it. They said all ISO’s are now bootable with the
>>>>> name change…..
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of
>>>>> *Evgeny Izetov
>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 15, 2019 11:17 AM
>>>>> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
>>>>> *Cc:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
>>>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] PUT Tool Bootables - what version?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, CUPS has always been bootable.. CUCM/CUC/CER are still not
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, what is the proper way to obtaining bootable iso's now? Let's say
>>>>> a CUCM 11.5 SU6 needs to be reinstalled, and there's no bootable because 
>>>>> it
>>>>> was upgraded from an earlier SU. PUT does not have bootable SU6 and 
>>>>> neither
>>>>> does Enterprise Agreement. Is TAC the only way to get the bootable for a
>>>>> specific SU? I believe there used to be a time when everyone was advised
>>>>> that TAC is not able to provide bootables?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 12:18 PM Lelio Fulgenzi 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Same with CUPS if I’m not mistaken.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>>>>
>>>>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>>>>
>>>>> 

Re: [cisco-voip] PUT Tool Bootables - what version?

[Charles Goldsmith]

It's not.  And just in case they changed things, I went and downloaded the
latest 12.0 and 12.5 of both CUCM and CUC and none of them have the
bootable part of the ISO.

Simply renaming a file doesn't make it bootable :)


On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:36 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That.  Can't.  Be.  True.  Right?  If so, Brian Meade has been wasting his
> time with UltraISO.
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:26 PM Evgeny Izetov  wrote:
>
>> That's good to know. Was it 12.x or 11.x?
>>
>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 2:19 PM Haas, Neal 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I had a TAC Call last week, they told me to add BOOTABLE to the name (in
>>> front) and that was it. They said all ISO’s are now bootable with the name
>>> change…..
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of 
>>> *Evgeny
>>> Izetov
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 15, 2019 11:17 AM
>>> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
>>> *Cc:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] PUT Tool Bootables - what version?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, CUPS has always been bootable.. CUCM/CUC/CER are still not
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So, what is the proper way to obtaining bootable iso's now? Let's say a
>>> CUCM 11.5 SU6 needs to be reinstalled, and there's no bootable because it
>>> was upgraded from an earlier SU. PUT does not have bootable SU6 and neither
>>> does Enterprise Agreement. Is TAC the only way to get the bootable for a
>>> specific SU? I believe there used to be a time when everyone was advised
>>> that TAC is not able to provide bootables?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 12:18 PM Lelio Fulgenzi 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Same with CUPS if I’m not mistaken.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>>
>>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>>
>>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>>> N1G 2W1
>>>
>>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
>>> <https://gcc01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uoguelph.ca%2Fccs=02%7C01%7Cnhaas%40fresnocountyca.gov%7Cabd25657699a414cd03a08d6d9618de6%7C3ccce0182cd74123960d6cc1d47e3550%7C1%7C0%7C636935410356509995=jjznrZifNJrZ2fihXdwSkDj6b0FIj9VjvKtFFpDLRDM%3D=0>
>>> | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of 
>>> *Charles
>>> Goldsmith
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 15, 2019 12:09 PM
>>> *To:* Evgeny Izetov 
>>> *Cc:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] PUT Tool Bootables - what version?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Plus, UCCX is shipping bootables (filename doesn't reflect it).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Description :
>>>
>>> UCCX 12.0(1) image for fresh install and upgrades.
>>>
>>> UCSInstall_UCCX_12_0_1_UCOS_12.0.1.1-24.sgn.iso
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 11:04 AM Evgeny Izetov 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Wasn't their excuse with not providing bootables that it was based on
>>> Red Hat? It's CentOS now, and still a struggle..
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 11:52 AM Brian Meade  wrote:
>>>
>>> I've given up on trying to get bootables.  I haven't had any issues with
>>> ones made with UltraISO.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 11:39 AM Lelio Fulgenzi 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Just wondering what the Put Tool Bootables are at now? We're planning on
>>> upgrading to v11.5.1 SU6 due to the field notice and I'd like to have the
>>> bootable available.
>>>
>>> Otherwise it's opening a case with the TAC, etc.
>>>
>>> Is it just a matter of submit request and check the filename?
>>>
>>> Lelio
>&g

Re: [cisco-voip] PUT Tool Bootables - what version?

[Charles Goldsmith]

I've always opened a TAC case, specified the reason for needing bootable
(rebuilding a cluster usually), and they provided it.  I've never had an
issue getting them, just takes a bit of time.

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:16 PM Evgeny Izetov  wrote:

> Yeah, CUPS has always been bootable.. CUCM/CUC/CER are still not
>
> So, what is the proper way to obtaining bootable iso's now? Let's say a
> CUCM 11.5 SU6 needs to be reinstalled, and there's no bootable because it
> was upgraded from an earlier SU. PUT does not have bootable SU6 and neither
> does Enterprise Agreement. Is TAC the only way to get the bootable for a
> specific SU? I believe there used to be a time when everyone was advised
> that TAC is not able to provide bootables?
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 12:18 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Same with CUPS if I’m not mistaken.
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of 
>> *Charles
>> Goldsmith
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 15, 2019 12:09 PM
>> *To:* Evgeny Izetov 
>> *Cc:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] PUT Tool Bootables - what version?
>>
>>
>>
>> Plus, UCCX is shipping bootables (filename doesn't reflect it).
>>
>>
>>
>> Description :
>>
>> UCCX 12.0(1) image for fresh install and upgrades.
>>
>> UCSInstall_UCCX_12_0_1_UCOS_12.0.1.1-24.sgn.iso
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 11:04 AM Evgeny Izetov  wrote:
>>
>> Wasn't their excuse with not providing bootables that it was based on Red
>> Hat? It's CentOS now, and still a struggle..
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 11:52 AM Brian Meade  wrote:
>>
>> I've given up on trying to get bootables.  I haven't had any issues with
>> ones made with UltraISO.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 11:39 AM Lelio Fulgenzi 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Just wondering what the Put Tool Bootables are at now? We're planning on
>> upgrading to v11.5.1 SU6 due to the field notice and I'd like to have the
>> bootable available.
>>
>> Otherwise it's opening a case with the TAC, etc.
>>
>> Is it just a matter of submit request and check the filename?
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>> ---
>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs> | @UofGCCS on Instagram,
>> Twitter and Facebook
>>
>> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>> ___
>> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] PUT Tool Bootables - what version?

[Charles Goldsmith]

Plus, UCCX is shipping bootables (filename doesn't reflect it).

Description : UCCX 12.0(1) image for fresh install and upgrades.
UCSInstall_UCCX_12_0_1_UCOS_12.0.1.1-24.sgn.iso


On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 11:04 AM Evgeny Izetov  wrote:

> Wasn't their excuse with not providing bootables that it was based on Red
> Hat? It's CentOS now, and still a struggle..
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 11:52 AM Brian Meade  wrote:
>
>> I've given up on trying to get bootables.  I haven't had any issues with
>> ones made with UltraISO.
>>
>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 11:39 AM Lelio Fulgenzi 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Just wondering what the Put Tool Bootables are at now? We're planning on
>>> upgrading to v11.5.1 SU6 due to the field notice and I'd like to have the
>>> bootable available.
>>>
>>> Otherwise it's opening a case with the TAC, etc.
>>>
>>> Is it just a matter of submit request and check the filename?
>>>
>>> Lelio
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>>> N1G 2W1
>>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>>
>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on
>>> Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>>
>>> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] Softphones

[Charles Goldsmith]

https://community.cisco.com/t5/collaboration-voice-and-video/jabber-multiline-is-here/ta-p/3643644


On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 4:01 PM Matthew Loraditch <
mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:

> Jabber multiline has been out since 12.0. FYI
>
> Get Outlook for iOS 
>
>
> Matthew Loraditch​
> Sr. Network Engineer
> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*   |
> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com* 
> [image: Helion Technologies] 
> [image: Facebook] 
> [image: Twitter] 
> [image: LinkedIn] 
> --
> *From:* cisco-voip  on behalf of
> Parker Pearson - Donoma 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 20, 2019 1:55 PM
> *To:* Lisa Notarianni; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Softphones
>
>
> Speaking as an end user – our geo-diverse team uses Cisco softphone
> functionality *heavily.  *I’d go so far as to say I could not do my job
> without it.  I work from a home office and I travel.  My company did not
> have to buy a handset for me to have in my home office, (Thereby saving a
> decent chunk of change) and when I shut my laptop at night, I don’t have to
> hear it ring.
>
>
>
> I really loved the old Cisco IP Communicator.  It had the familiar phone
> look I could keep open on a second screen, and here’s the kicker… it
> provided multi-line support.  Now I use Jabber as my softphone, and it does
> a decent job… except that missing second line.  Not having that is killin’
> me smalls!  ☺
>
>
>
> Cisco keeps promising this feature (CiscoLive 2017 and 18) but I haven’t
> seen it yet.  Our support staff knows how bad some of us need that second
> line feature – I am confident they would not have kept it a secret if it
> showed up in 12.
>
>
>
> We noticed some weird interoperability on single number reach and running
> Jabber on multiple devices.  If you as the user weren’t super careful about
> close the apps out (hard to remember when you run iOS for example) then
> call functionality went sideways in unpredictable ways.
>
>
>
> Hope that gives you some input from the UX side of things.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Parker Pearson
>
>
> [image: Donoma Software Web Page] 
> Parker
> Pearson
> Vice President, Marketing & Business Development
> Donoma Software
> 1750 Kraft Dr. Suite 1200 Blacksburg, VA 24060
> t: *540.443.3577* <540.443.3577>
> e: *par...@donomasoftware.com* 
> *w: www.donomasoftware.com* 
> [image: Facebook] 
> [image: Twitter] 
> [image: LinkedIn] 
> The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for
> the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
> confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission,
> dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon
> this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient
> is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and
> destroy any copies of this information.​
>
> *From: *cisco-voip  on behalf of Lisa
> Notarianni 
> *Date: *Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 4:36 PM
> *To: *"cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" 
> *Subject: *[cisco-voip] Softphones
>
>
>
> We have a few staff who travel and would make good use of a softphone.  We
> have not implemented them or had anyone use them before.  Call Manager
> version 11.5.1.13039-1
>
>
>
> Any good or bad experiences or words of wisdom before I begin research?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Lisa
>
> [image: Lisa Notarianni Telecom 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] Softphones

[Charles Goldsmith]

Jabber multi-line is there, you need 11.5.1su3 or higher and a cop file,
IIRC.

And it works nicely.

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 3:55 PM Parker Pearson - Donoma <
par...@donomasoftware.com> wrote:

> Speaking as an end user – our geo-diverse team uses Cisco softphone
> functionality *heavily.  *I’d go so far as to say I could not do my job
> without it.  I work from a home office and I travel.  My company did not
> have to buy a handset for me to have in my home office, (Thereby saving a
> decent chunk of change) and when I shut my laptop at night, I don’t have to
> hear it ring.
>
>
>
> I really loved the old Cisco IP Communicator.  It had the familiar phone
> look I could keep open on a second screen, and here’s the kicker… it
> provided multi-line support.  Now I use Jabber as my softphone, and it does
> a decent job… except that missing second line.  Not having that is killin’
> me smalls!  ☺
>
>
>
> Cisco keeps promising this feature (CiscoLive 2017 and 18) but I haven’t
> seen it yet.  Our support staff knows how bad some of us need that second
> line feature – I am confident they would not have kept it a secret if it
> showed up in 12.
>
>
>
> We noticed some weird interoperability on single number reach and running
> Jabber on multiple devices.  If you as the user weren’t super careful about
> close the apps out (hard to remember when you run iOS for example) then
> call functionality went sideways in unpredictable ways.
>
>
>
> Hope that gives you some input from the UX side of things.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Parker Pearson
>
>
> [image: Donoma Software Web Page] 
> Parker
> Pearson
> Vice President, Marketing & Business Development
> Donoma Software
> 1750 Kraft Dr. Suite 1200 Blacksburg, VA 24060
> t: *540.443.3577* <540.443.3577>
> e: *par...@donomasoftware.com* 
> *w: www.donomasoftware.com* 
> [image: Facebook] 
> [image: Twitter] 
> [image: LinkedIn] 
> The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for
> the person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
> confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission,
> dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon
> this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient
> is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and
> destroy any copies of this information.​
>
> *From: *cisco-voip  on behalf of Lisa
> Notarianni 
> *Date: *Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 4:36 PM
> *To: *"cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" 
> *Subject: *[cisco-voip] Softphones
>
>
>
> We have a few staff who travel and would make good use of a softphone.  We
> have not implemented them or had anyone use them before.  Call Manager
> version 11.5.1.13039-1
>
>
>
> Any good or bad experiences or words of wisdom before I begin research?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Lisa
>
> [image: Lisa Notarianni Telecom 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] Webex Control Hub Question (SSO and External Administrators)

[Charles Goldsmith]

True, but when you are the partner and your SSO is unavailable :)

On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 3:59 PM Brian Meade  wrote:

> Your Cisco partner can have external admin accounts for your org to
> disable SSO if needed as well.
>
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 4:16 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>>
>> OK - Here's a chicken and egg question.
>>
>> Unlike with Webex legacy admin console, when you enable SSO on Control
>> Hub, everyone uses it, including administrators accessing Control Hub
>> itself.
>>
>> If SSO breaks, what happens? The only thing I see is asking Cisco to
>> disable it and you then login using a previously defined administrator
>> account that was activated before SSO was configured and hope you remember
>> the old password.
>>
>> The only other option I can see is using an external administrator
>> account, which can only be a paid account. This means, collaborating with
>> other organizations to reciprocally provide each other an account, or going
>> out and buying a one-off teams account for $25/mo.
>>
>> What are others doing out there?
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram,
>> Twitter and Facebook
>>
>> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Webex Control Hub Question (SSO and External Administrators)

[Charles Goldsmith]

Ask Cisco to disable SSO if you run into an issue, yes, it's happened to us
once and we had to get it disabled.  :)


On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 3:16 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> OK - Here's a chicken and egg question.
>
> Unlike with Webex legacy admin console, when you enable SSO on Control
> Hub, everyone uses it, including administrators accessing Control Hub
> itself.
>
> If SSO breaks, what happens? The only thing I see is asking Cisco to
> disable it and you then login using a previously defined administrator
> account that was activated before SSO was configured and hope you remember
> the old password.
>
> The only other option I can see is using an external administrator
> account, which can only be a paid account. This means, collaborating with
> other organizations to reciprocally provide each other an account, or going
> out and buying a one-off teams account for $25/mo.
>
> What are others doing out there?
>
> Lelio
>
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram,
> Twitter and Facebook
>
> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> ___
> 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] 12.5(1) dropped

[Charles Goldsmith]

12.0 CUCM was not bootable except what was on PUT of course. 

I haven’t seen any indication that 12.5 was to be different. 

> On Jan 28, 2019, at 11:44 AM, Brian Meade  wrote:
> 
> Pretty easy with UltraISO.  I do it all the time with no issues. 
> https://htluo.blogspot.com/2010/04/how-to-make-non-bootable-iso-image.html
> 
> There's no difference at all from the official bootable assuming you do it 
> correctly.
> 
> Newer Cisco releases with CentOS should be bootable by default on cisco.com.  
> I haven't tested the 12.5 ISO yet though.
> 
>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 12:26 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>>  
>> 
>> How hard is it to do this? Does Cisco know from the install files whether or 
>> not this was done? I mean, yeah, production I’d get it from PUT, but in a 
>> crunch – it could be useful.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> ---
>> 
>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>> 
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>> 
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
>> 2W1
>> 
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> From: Ryan Huff  
>> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 8:13 AM
>> To: Lelio Fulgenzi 
>> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list 
>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 12.5(1) dropped
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> For lab purposes, you can make your own bootable image. That’s what I did 
>> for my 12.5 lab that I built. I deployed 11.5, then upgraded to 12.5 to 
>> observe any issues that I encountered.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> 
>> On Jan 25, 2019, at 07:33, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> CCO has 12.5(1) non-bootable iso upgrade from 12.0 available as of Jan 22. 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I was reading that PUT access for bootable and upgrade from v11(?) is 
>> delayed but will be available soon. 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> -sent from mobile device-
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>> 
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>> 
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
>> 2W1
>> 
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7Cc58eb463070044c0d22708d682c14555%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636840163931929820sdata=OSRMjiGoidwSTRKG83sUBoElb7I67KmJoMRigP3Xd9A%3Dreserved=0
>> 
>> ___
>> 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] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5

[Charles Goldsmith]

Granted, I wouldn’t do a cp or scp unless in a maintenance window.  If you are 
just running a hypervisor, much like most of our install base uses, there are 
no tools to do this without spending money, at least that I’m aware of. 



> On Jan 21, 2019, at 10:33 AM, Anthony Holloway 
>  wrote:
> 
> But it says: " To prevent performance... related issues"  So, it's not just 
> about "how" you want to do it, rather, you could impact the other running VMs 
> (should there be any).  Also, in my experience, cp ans scp are very slow 
> compared to tool meant for moving VMs around (E.g., Veeam Backup/Copy and 
> VMware OVATool).  Anyway, I'm not saying that I know best, I'm just saying, 
> that's what the vendor says.
> 
>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 11:02 AM Matthew Loraditch 
>>  wrote:
>> Yes VMWare clone changes macs and such. Only move keeps them but in this 
>> instance you actually don’t want them to change so CP would be the way to do 
>> it to make sure they didn’t change so you can put them back.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> Matthew Loraditch​
>> Sr. Network Engineer
>> p: 443.541.1518
>> w: www.heliontechnologies.com |  e: 
>> mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of UC Penguin
>> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2019 11:54 AM
>> To: Lelio Fulgenzi 
>> Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I’m curious why using cp would really matter besides the possibility of 
>> duplicate MAC and UUIDs, which would be an issue if the vms were both 
>> powered on at the same time.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> If you had shared storage and multiple hosts you could be running VMs on 
>> different ESXi versions anyhow, without the copy step.
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Perhaps this is just vmware CYA for duplicate MACs, UUIDs and guest 
>> licensing? I’m guessing there copy steps change the uuid and macs?
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I’ve moved production UC apps with cp over SSH and had no issues. Not saying 
>> that is going to be the case with every scenario, but so far so good fwiw...
>> 
>> 
>> On Jan 21, 2019, at 09:43, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>> 
>> Ya. Sorry. Didn’t explain I wanted interim local storage that I could move.  
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I’ll have to put more thought into it. 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I might even consider a direct connected pc. Evaluate the time and effort vs 
>> speed of export/import. 
>> 
>> -sent from mobile device-
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>> 
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>> 
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
>> 2W1
>> 
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jan 21, 2019, at 8:38 AM, Charles Goldsmith  wrote:
>> 
>> Never tried, probably so.  SFTP/scp over the network would be faster. 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Your original request was a local copy. 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jan 21, 2019, at 7:22 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Can I copy this to USB? Would I have to somehow mount/format  the portable 
>> file system?
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I’m intrigued!
>> 
>> -sent from mobile device-
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>> 
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>> 
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
>> 2W1
>> 
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jan 20, 2019, at 11:38 PM, Charles Goldsmith  wrote:
>> 
>> Shut the VM down, ssh or console in, copy the directory.  On Linux, it’s cp 
>> -R dir/ new-dir/
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Of course, it’s easier to cd into the datastore 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Once it’s copied, go into the vsphere client, browse the datastore into the 
>> new dir and import the vmx 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> I’ve done this to make backup copies in addition to DRS for an upgrade
>> 
>> 
>

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5

[Charles Goldsmith]

Never tried, probably so.  SFTP/scp over the network would be faster. 

Your original request was a local copy. 

> On Jan 21, 2019, at 7:22 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
> 
> 
> Can I copy this to USB? Would I have to somehow mount/format  the portable 
> file system?
> 
> I’m intrigued!
> 
> -sent from mobile device-
> 
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
> 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>  
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>  
> 
> 
> On Jan 20, 2019, at 11:38 PM, Charles Goldsmith  wrote:
> 
>> Shut the VM down, ssh or console in, copy the directory.  On Linux, it’s cp 
>> -R dir/ new-dir/
>> 
>> Of course, it’s easier to cd into the datastore 
>> 
>> Once it’s copied, go into the vsphere client, browse the datastore into the 
>> new dir and import the vmx 
>> 
>> I’ve done this to make backup copies in addition to DRS for an upgrade
>> 
>> On Jan 20, 2019, at 9:19 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> Yes - I was quite surprised with the amount of time exporting/importing 
>>> requires. Especially because, as far as I know, there is no way to export 
>>> to a locally attached storage then pop that out/in and import. It has to be 
>>> done via vsphere client and pc. We ended up putting a laptop on the same 
>>> switch to speed things up a bit. 
>>> 
>>> I really wish there was a quicker way. 
>>> 
>>> Note: were using local storage on all our be7h servers. 
>>> 
>>> -sent from mobile device-
>>> 
>>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
>>> 2W1
>>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>>  
>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jan 20, 2019, at 9:03 PM, James Andrewartha 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> For a major upgrade it seems pretty reasonable to me. I'd consider doing 
>>>> it just for testing even if I upgraded the production servers directly 
>>>> rather than shut them down and start up the upgraded ones. And if I was 
>>>> going to do a parallel upgrade, I'd probably upgrade once to test, then 
>>>> copy the production servers across again and do it for real. One thought 
>>>> that comes to mind is how quickly you can copy back the VMs from AWS to 
>>>> your production environment.
>>>> 
>>>> "Everybody has a testing environment. Some people are lucky enough enough 
>>>> to have a totally separate environment to run production in." 
>>>> https://twitter.com/stahnma/status/634849376343429120
>>>> 
>>>>> On 21/01/19 09:52, Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Perhaps. But it’s an option.
>>>>> 
>>>>> My preference would be to use on premise resources to create the offline 
>>>>> network. This part of the discussion was focused on how you could use VWC 
>>>>> on AWS to accomplish this if you didn’t have resources. The CSR would, if 
>>>>> it works, allow you to connect devices on prem to the offline servers to 
>>>>> do a more complete testing. But it’s not entirely necessary. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> It’s all what your more comfortable with, I guess. I’d rather double the 
>>>>> amount of prep time to complete the upgrades offline in order to reduce 
>>>>> the downtime to the production service. Especially when both CUCM and 
>>>>> UCCX need to be upgraded simultaneously due to version compatibility. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -sent from mobile device-
>>>>> 
>>>>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>>>>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>>>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | 
>>>>> N1G 2W1
>>>>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>>>>  
>>>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Jan 20, 2019, at 8

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5

[Charles Goldsmith]

lastic IP, route the private IPs 
>>>>>> across the VPN.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 9:31 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Very interesting! 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Having private IPs on a secondary switch is great. But if I can’t 
>>>>>>> connect, then I can’t do full tests. We end up doing some mock 
>>>>>>> migrations and stuff. Also testing phones, etc. 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> But hey, still worth a shot!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -sent from mobile device-
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>>>>>>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>>>>>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | 
>>>>>>> N1G 2W1
>>>>>>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Jan 18, 2019, at 5:05 PM, Dave Goodwin  
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If you want to bring your own IPs to AWS instances instead of using 
>>>>>>>> their Elastic IPs, you can do that now from what I understand:
>>>>>>>> https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2018/10/announcing-the-general-availability-of-bring-your-own-ip-for-amazon-virtual-private-cloud/
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I don’t know if that functionality is compatible with VMC-AWS or not. 
>>>>>>>> Also, I’d think just like Charles suggested that you could use your 
>>>>>>>> own IPs on a private vSwitch or VM network. 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 4:04 PM Charles Goldsmith 
>>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Not sure, but let us know once you talk with your AWS / VMware sales 
>>>>>>>>> team.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> If you need one, let me know and I'll put you in touch :)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 3:01 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I wonder if there are additional services you could subscribe to. 
>>>>>>>>>> Front it with VPN/IP extension service so the vSwitch can be 
>>>>>>>>>> configured with any VLAN that the extra layer offers.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, 
>>>>>>>>>> ON | N1G 2W1
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> From: Charles Goldsmith  
>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2019 3:51 PM
>>>>>>>>>> To: Lelio Fulgenzi 
>>>>>>>>>> Cc: Matthew Collins ; 
>>>>>>>>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5

[Charles Goldsmith]

Not sure, but let us know once you talk with your AWS / VMware sales team.

If you need one, let me know and I'll put you in touch :)

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 3:01 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> I wonder if there are additional services you could subscribe to. Front it
> with VPN/IP extension service so the vSwitch can be configured with any
> VLAN that the extra layer offers.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* Charles Goldsmith 
> *Sent:* Friday, January 18, 2019 3:51 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* Matthew Collins ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5
>
>
>
> From what I understand, you cannot extend your IP, it's IP's assigned from
> AWS.  At least for public facing.  I'm assuming you can spin up another
> vswitch on the vsphere side and have private IP's, just like we can locally.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 2:48 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
> Hmmm, in actuality, VMware on AWS seems like it will be the best
> replacement for a physical stack of bare metal servers for temporary use.
> As long as the IP address space was the same, you could simply shut them
> down and export after the migration was complete.
>
>
>
> Side question…
>
>
>
> Anyone know how that works? Can you extend your IP address space into AWS
> without much effort?
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* Charles Goldsmith 
> *Sent:* Friday, January 18, 2019 3:12 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* Matthew Collins ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5
>
>
>
> If you are one of my customers, I can arrange that.  Do we have a web page
> where you can just go sign up, no.  But there are services that let you
> rent bare metal servers.
>
>
>
> VMware and AWS are teaming up to rent you vsphere on AWS bare metal.
>
>
> On Jan 18, 2019, at 1:45 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
> This should be a signal to professional services orgs out there to rent
> out UCS systems for offline upgrades. :)
>
>
>
>
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 18, 2019, at 5:24 AM, Matthew Collins  wrote:
>
> Agree with Lelio but sometimes parallel upgrade are just not possible.
>
>
>
> I’ve done 3 x 10.5 to 11.6 direct upgrade recently any only had one issue
> that wasn’t directly related to the upgrade. Other than that they have been
> pretty smooth.
>
>
>
> In your pre-checks don’t just check DB replication but also CUC and UCCX
> replication on the respective servers (utils uccx/cuc dbreplication
> status). Plus check from the pub and sub as on a CUC upgrade recently it
> kept failing, Turned out CUC replication wasn’t set up correctly. Ran the
> command from the Pub and it stated everything was good, Ran from the Sub
> said it was failed. Ended up re-building the CUC Sub. The issue came about
> from a host name change years back and some of the tables where not updated
> on the sub.
>
>
>
> Also double check the memory requirements. As 11.x requires 2 extra gig
> most of the OVA’s.
>
>
>
> Upgrade timings going from 10.5 to 11.5/6
>
>
>
> Memory upgrade where completed prior to upgrades.
>
> CUCM Upgrade Pub 90 Mins 7.5k OVA
> CUCM Upgrade Subs 60 Mins
> IM Upgrade Pub 70 Mins 5K OVA
> IM Upgrade Sub 50 Mins
>
> CUCM Switch Versions Pub 40 Mins
> CUCM Switch Versions Subs 30 Mins
> IM Switch Versions Pub 30 Mins
> IM Switch Vers

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5

[Charles Goldsmith]

>From what I understand, you cannot extend your IP, it's IP's assigned from
AWS.  At least for public facing.  I'm assuming you can spin up another
vswitch on the vsphere side and have private IP's, just like we can locally.

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 2:48 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> Hmmm, in actuality, VMware on AWS seems like it will be the best
> replacement for a physical stack of bare metal servers for temporary use.
> As long as the IP address space was the same, you could simply shut them
> down and export after the migration was complete.
>
>
>
> Side question…
>
>
>
> Anyone know how that works? Can you extend your IP address space into AWS
> without much effort?
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* Charles Goldsmith 
> *Sent:* Friday, January 18, 2019 3:12 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* Matthew Collins ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5
>
>
>
> If you are one of my customers, I can arrange that.  Do we have a web page
> where you can just go sign up, no.  But there are services that let you
> rent bare metal servers.
>
>
>
> VMware and AWS are teaming up to rent you vsphere on AWS bare metal.
>
>
> On Jan 18, 2019, at 1:45 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
> This should be a signal to professional services orgs out there to rent
> out UCS systems for offline upgrades. :)
>
>
>
>
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
> On Jan 18, 2019, at 5:24 AM, Matthew Collins  wrote:
>
> Agree with Lelio but sometimes parallel upgrade are just not possible.
>
>
>
> I’ve done 3 x 10.5 to 11.6 direct upgrade recently any only had one issue
> that wasn’t directly related to the upgrade. Other than that they have been
> pretty smooth.
>
>
>
> In your pre-checks don’t just check DB replication but also CUC and UCCX
> replication on the respective servers (utils uccx/cuc dbreplication
> status). Plus check from the pub and sub as on a CUC upgrade recently it
> kept failing, Turned out CUC replication wasn’t set up correctly. Ran the
> command from the Pub and it stated everything was good, Ran from the Sub
> said it was failed. Ended up re-building the CUC Sub. The issue came about
> from a host name change years back and some of the tables where not updated
> on the sub.
>
>
>
> Also double check the memory requirements. As 11.x requires 2 extra gig
> most of the OVA’s.
>
>
>
> Upgrade timings going from 10.5 to 11.5/6
>
>
>
> Memory upgrade where completed prior to upgrades.
>
> CUCM Upgrade Pub 90 Mins 7.5k OVA
> CUCM Upgrade Subs 60 Mins
> IM Upgrade Pub 70 Mins 5K OVA
> IM Upgrade Sub 50 Mins
>
> CUCM Switch Versions Pub 40 Mins
> CUCM Switch Versions Subs 30 Mins
> IM Switch Versions Pub 30 Mins
> IM Switch Versions Sub 30 Mins
>
> UCCX Upgrade Pub 80 Mins – 300 Agent OVA
> UCCX Upgrade Sub 60 Mins
> UCCX Switch Versions Pub 45 Mins
> UCCX Switch Versions Sub 30 Mins
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Matthew Collins
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Lelio
> Fulgenzi
> *Sent:* 17 January 2019 16:37
> *To:* SK ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5
>
>
>
>
>
> I will say one thing, if you have the opportunity to duplicate the
> environment in an off-line network and perform the upgrades there, then
> your migration will basically be downtime involved with shutting down old
> servers and turning up new servers. This is not trivial, by any stretch of
> the imagination. However, once you put some thought into it, I think you’ll
> find this method extremely valuable.
>
>
>
> You work out all the kinks in the offline network and repeat until you are
> satisfied.
>
>
>
> You’ll ne

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5

[Charles Goldsmith]

If you are one of my customers, I can arrange that.  Do we have a web page 
where you can just go sign up, no.  But there are services that let you rent 
bare metal servers.  

VMware and AWS are teaming up to rent you vsphere on AWS bare metal. 

> On Jan 18, 2019, at 1:45 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
> 
> This should be a signal to professional services orgs out there to rent out 
> UCS systems for offline upgrades. :)
> 
> 
> 
> -sent from mobile device-
> 
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
> 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>  
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>  
> 
> 
> On Jan 18, 2019, at 5:24 AM, Matthew Collins  wrote:
> 
>> Agree with Lelio but sometimes parallel upgrade are just not possible.
>>  
>> I’ve done 3 x 10.5 to 11.6 direct upgrade recently any only had one issue 
>> that wasn’t directly related to the upgrade. Other than that they have been 
>> pretty smooth.
>>  
>> In your pre-checks don’t just check DB replication but also CUC and UCCX 
>> replication on the respective servers (utils uccx/cuc dbreplication status). 
>> Plus check from the pub and sub as on a CUC upgrade recently it kept 
>> failing, Turned out CUC replication wasn’t set up correctly. Ran the command 
>> from the Pub and it stated everything was good, Ran from the Sub said it was 
>> failed. Ended up re-building the CUC Sub. The issue came about from a host 
>> name change years back and some of the tables where not updated on the sub.
>>  
>> Also double check the memory requirements. As 11.x requires 2 extra gig most 
>> of the OVA’s.
>>  
>> Upgrade timings going from 10.5 to 11.5/6
>>  
>> Memory upgrade where completed prior to upgrades.
>> 
>> CUCM Upgrade Pub 90 Mins 7.5k OVA
>> CUCM Upgrade Subs 60 Mins
>> IM Upgrade Pub 70 Mins 5K OVA
>> IM Upgrade Sub 50 Mins
>> 
>> CUCM Switch Versions Pub 40 Mins 
>> CUCM Switch Versions Subs 30 Mins
>> IM Switch Versions Pub 30 Mins
>> IM Switch Versions Sub 30 Mins
>> 
>> UCCX Upgrade Pub 80 Mins – 300 Agent OVA
>> UCCX Upgrade Sub 60 Mins
>> UCCX Switch Versions Pub 45 Mins
>> UCCX Switch Versions Sub 30 Mins
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Regards
>>  
>> Matthew Collins
>>  
>>  
>> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Lelio 
>> Fulgenzi
>> Sent: 17 January 2019 16:37
>> To: SK ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5
>>  
>>  
>> I will say one thing, if you have the opportunity to duplicate the 
>> environment in an off-line network and perform the upgrades there, then your 
>> migration will basically be downtime involved with shutting down old servers 
>> and turning up new servers. This is not trivial, by any stretch of the 
>> imagination. However, once you put some thought into it, I think you’ll find 
>> this method extremely valuable.
>>  
>> You work out all the kinks in the offline network and repeat until you are 
>> satisfied.
>>  
>> You’ll need a couple of things to make this work, namely, a change freeze 
>> window and the “pre 8.0” enterprise parameter.
>>  
>> We’ve done this twice now and it’s worked like a charm.
>>  
>> I would hate to do upgrades on live systems.
>>  
>> Lelio
>>  
>>  
>> ---
>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
>> 2W1
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>  
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of SK
>> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2019 10:48 AM
>> To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM upgrade from 10.5 to 11.5
>>  
>> We are planning upgrade for our CUCM - CUC -UCCX platform from 10.5 to 11.5 
>> soon  . UCCX will be on 11.6.2 mostly .
>>  
>> I will appreciate any pointers on known bugs / challenges .
>>  
>> Thank you . 
> ___
> 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] vCME (Virtual Communications Manager Express) now available on CSR1000v IOS XE Gibraltar 16.10

[Charles Goldsmith]

Lelio, that's a different animal.  The 5000 series doesn't mention UC apps
at all, it just supports some voice modules.  I think it assumes you will
be managing those modules via CUCM.   I didn't dig through all of the docs.

It's an interesting product.

On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 11:58 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> I wonder how this compares with
>
>
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/routers/5000-series-enterprise-network-compute-system/index.html
>
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> On Dec 4, 2018, at 6:54 PM, Daniel via cisco-voip <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
> See
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/routers/csr1000/release/notes/xe-16/csr1000v_rn-16-10-book.html#concept_c5q_vrf_5fb
> and
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucme/admin/configuration/manual/cmeadm/cmevir.html
>
> ___
> 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] Fixed in?

[Charles Goldsmith]

I recently dealt with a customer's cert renewal on 10.5.1 base (has the bug
about case sensitivity) and digicert.  They can manually make changes on
the CSR/cert to give you exactly what you need, but you have to request
it.  Customers just love to put the server names in all upper case.  We
spent several hours renaming servers to work around the bug because they
can't upgrade right now.  Fun times!

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 6:21 PM Jason Aarons (Americas) <
jason.aar...@dimensiondata.com> wrote:

>
>
> I know the guy submitting the CSR to digicert did it wrong ;) However
> Digicert also told him they only return CSR lowercase.
>
> I just want to know that if 11.5.1 SU5 that CUCM won't care about case for
> when we retry it.
>
> Get Outlook for Android 
>
> --
> *From:* Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 12, 2018 3:20:46 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi; Jason Aarons (Americas)
> *Cc:* cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Fixed in?
>
> Anything with that “98000” is typically a development branch for the next
> release, so this one should be in 11.5 base for sure. It should have been
> updated with the version that went to cisco.com but I guess back in 2014
> there was a hiccup.
>
> Are you checking to make sure or are you seeing evidence that the fix
> isn’t there?
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Sep 12, 2018, at 9:54 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>
> It certainly should be a lot easier to figure this out. I looked at the
> readme for each 11.5 release and couldn’t find the bug listed. Doesn’t mean
> it’s not there, could have been rolled into 11.5.1 which is deferred with
> no readme available.
>
>
>
>
> ---
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <(519)%20824-4120> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
> 
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Jason
> Aarons (Americas)
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 12, 2018 12:09 AM
> *To:* cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Fixed in?
>
>
>
>
> So if bug is fixed in version CUCM 11.5(0.98000.126) and I am running
> 11.5.1.15900-18 I already have the fix?
>
> Wanting to verify SU5 has the bug fix for case sensitivity in CSR.
> CSCur46416
>
> -jason
>
>
> Get Outlook for Android 
>
>
>
> This email and all contents are subject to the following disclaimer:
> "http://www.dimensiondata.com/emaildisclaimer;
> 
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>
>
> This email and all contents are subject to the following disclaimer:
> "http://www.dimensiondata.com/emaildisclaimer;
> 
> ___
> 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] UCCX Call Redirect and Called Address Reset

[Charles Goldsmith]

Anthony, wouldn't your CSS on cti ports (via the call control group)
determine what transformation is applied to the call?


On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 4:58 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I didn't know this, and so I thought I'd share, but who knows, maybe it
> was common knowledge.
>
> If you use the Call Redirect step in UCCX to send a call directly to a
> mailbox/call handler in CUC, and thus, your Destination is the VM Pilot,
> while your target object in CUC is your Called Adddress, like so:
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> Then either one of two things will happen (only one of them I'm ok with):
>
> 1) If there is a pattern in CUCM for which 1000 will match; say a Route
> Pattern such as 1XXX which prefixes an 8 and route calls to a 3rd Party
> PBX, then CUCM will use the Called Number Transformations on this Route
> Pattern to prefix the 8 on your 1000, and then send the call to CUC with
> 81000 as the Redir number, and you'll be all messed up.  Actually, you'll
> just get the opening greeting, but still...g
>
> 2) If there is no pattern in CUCM for which 1000 will match, then CUCM
> sends the call to CUC, and the redir is 1000 and everything works fine.
>
> I'll let you guess which one I'm ok with, and which one I'm not.
>
> Why in the hell is CUCM performing number transformations on this call
> flow like that?  It makes no sense.  What am I missing here?
> ___
> 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] recovery disk - what's it worth?

[Charles Goldsmith]

Recovery disks are used when your CUCM won't boot or you can't login.
There is a file repair utility, as well as a password reset utility, plus
something else I don't remember.  It has 4 options on the menu.  In the
lab, I've also used it to get into the system as root and mount the
partitions, used it to delete logs that were filling up from that nasty
vmtools bug we had about a year ago.

You can probably mount that ISO into an empty VM and boot it to see it.

On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 10:43 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> Our disaster recovery plan has always been boot with disk/ios image and
> restore from latest backup. We’ve tested this on a few occasions and it
> works well. Well, as good as documentation can be expected.
>
> We typically try to do this as quickly as possible after an upgrade to
> ensure the bootables we have work and we have the appropriate inline
> upgrade ISO images. We get the bootables through PUT when required and the
> upgrades through CCO software downloads. We usually also try to get the
> bootables published by the TAC for us. For example, PUT only has
> v11.5(1)SU3b bootables, not SU4.
>
> The question is… what scenarios are the recovery disks used for? Have
> people used those? Have they worked?
>
> For some reason, I’m flashbacking to wordperfect recovery software that
> never recovered a single file. 
>
>
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <(519)%20824-4120> | le...@uoguelph.ca le...@uoguelph.ca>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram,
> Twitter and Facebook
>
> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> ___
> 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] Jabber edit forward list...

[Charles Goldsmith]

Have you compared the forward numbers in jabber to what is shown in the
self care portal?  Looking at my setup, I can forward to voicemail and
Work:, latter which is defined by AD.  If I add numbers, it's just that, I
cannot associate a label and it only remembers the last number entered.
These are reflected in the self-care portal, but none of the AD numbers are
listed there.

This is all on an 11.5.1su3 system

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 12:48 PM Jonathan Charles  wrote:

> These are the labeled forward numbers... they are being pulled from
> somewhere, we just can't find them (nothing in AD)...
>
> We are running 11.9 of Jabber
>
>
> Jonathan
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:07 AM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I feel like we're flip flopping between directory supplied entries and
>> local user supplied entries (where I started).  The way you would know is,
>> the directory ones have a word in front, like "Home" and the user ones just
>> have the number.  Screenshot?
>>
>> Ok, so now I think I we are talking about local user supplied forward to
>> destinations, which takes us all the way back to my original reply.  I said
>> that if I reset Jabber, they went away.  Have them try that.
>>
>> I also noted that the  jabberLocalConfig.dat file updates when you add a
>> new forward to destination, so it makes sense that it's stored in there.
>>
>> I then tested your statement that they follow logins across computers,
>> and I found this to not be true, unless I left the forwarding on while I
>> signed in to the other computer.  Which makes sense, because the forwarding
>> is then held on the DN in CUCM, and when my other computer signs into
>> Jabber, CUCM tells Jabber that the line is forwarded and to where.  So, if
>> your user does see the other forwarding on another machine, that might
>> explain the scenario.  I suppose they could have entered the destinations
>> on both machines, but that seems unlikely that they would have done it
>> incorrectly twice.  But maybe.
>>
>> You also never supplied your Jabber version or platform, which may cause
>> a difference in behavior.  Again, my testing is with J4W 12.0(1).
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 4:29 PM Jonathan Charles 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> We have confirmed that AD does not have these numbers, nor are they in
>>> CUCM... customer entered them with the wrong offnet access code and needs
>>> to change them, there appears to be no method to do that
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 2:30 PM, Anthony Holloway <
>>> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 That is one scenario I didn't try, as a reset of the client killed the
 setting.

 to be clear, I created a custom one, and that's what I thought you were
 getting at.  However, I do have one for my mobile number, which does come
 from the server.  Is that what you're asking for?

 If so, from what I can gather, only Home and Mobile are field which
 will show up here.  So, if your CUCM Directory has these values populated,
 or your AD does, then Jabber should show them.


 On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 1:46 PM Jonathan Charles 
 wrote:

> I had a user log into jabber on another machine, and his CF's were
> there automatically... it has to be pulling them from somewhere.. (11.5
> CUCM/IMP)
>
> These should be editable, right?
>
>
> Jonathan
>
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> FWIW, I'm using 12.0(1), and I just created one, tried to find it on
>> my local machine, couldn't find it, then signed-out and reset Jabber, and
>> now it's gone.  That tells me it's stored locally.
>>
>> The file %appdata%\Cisco\Unified
>> Communications\Jabber\CSF\Config\jabberLocalConfig.dat changes when you 
>> add
>> new ones, so I'm guessing it's in that file.  Unfortunately, that file is
>> encrypted, so there's no editing it.
>>
>> So, my conclusion would be, you can only nuke all of them, you cannot
>> selectively remove or edit any, and an addition would likely take the 
>> work
>> of something like AutoHotKey to send the proper keystrokes/mouse clicks 
>> to
>> the client.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 12:56 PM Jonathan Charles 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> How can we edit the Forward to list in Jabber?
>>>
>>> Where are these stored?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net

Re: [cisco-voip] multi-SAN / server certificates vs individual certs (CUCM/IMP)

[Charles Goldsmith]

No problem, thanks for adding your insight.

There are a couple of other providers that do duplication as well, they
just call it something different, but I haven't worked with them directly.
I'm told godaddy now supports it, but they only sell the SANs in blocks of
5.


On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 10:39 AM Bill Talley  wrote:

> Scrolling through my phone and inadvertently replied to Charles email when
> it popped up instead of Lelio’s.  Sorry for duplicating what Charles said 浪
>
>
> Sent from an iOS device with very tiny touchscreen input keys.  Please
> excude my typtos.
>
> On Jun 28, 2018, at 10:24 AM, Charles Goldsmith 
> wrote:
>
> Generate a CSR from each server type (CUCM, CUC, UCCX, and each
> expressway) and load all hostnames into each server, including your cluster
> name of the expressway and the domain name.  At Digicert, load your csr,
> make sure the Common name matches the CSR that the server came from.  Once
> you have one cluster done, go back into the order and request duplicate,
> load your 2nd csr, check the common name and issue the duplicate.  Rinse
> and repeat for all systems.
>
> Expressway clusters do not support multi-san, so just duplicate for each
> node.
>
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 10:17 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>> Wait. What? I understand how the internals of CUCM and IMP can distribute
>> one multi-san cert (built on the publisher’s CSR) to each CUCM and IMP node
>> and uses private keys to ensure they load, but….
>>
>>
>>
>> How the heck do you install a cert that was built on the pub’s CSR into
>> CUC and UCCx? Or Expressway for that matter?
>>
>>
>>
>> We are a digicert client, so if you have specific breadcrumbs / drop down
>> options, feel free to share.
>>
>>
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <(519)%20824-4120> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Charles Goldsmith 
>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 28, 2018 10:40 AM
>> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
>> *Cc:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] multi-SAN / server certificates vs
>> individual certs (CUCM/IMP)
>>
>>
>>
>> I've used multi-san certs on at least a dozen installs and have had no
>> issues at all.  In fact, with a good SSL provider, you can use the same
>> Multi-SAN on CUCM, CUC, UCCX, Expressways.  I like how Digicert does it,
>> just duplicate the cert and make sure all of the hostnames are listed in
>> the SAN.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:37 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>>
>>
>> We're in the process of installing signed certs and we have the choice
>> between multi-SAN cert with the publisher CSR and rely on the internals to
>> have that cert distributed to the subs and the imp nodes -OR- go with
>> individual certs.
>>
>> It's a last minute thing, so I still need to do some research, but I'm
>> wondering what people have been doing out there. We're less concerned with
>> cost than we are future stability. I know that this multi-san support is
>> recent with v10.x - have they ironed out the bugs? We're going with 11.5.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> ---
>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <(519)%20824-4120> | le...@uoguelph.ca> le...@uoguelph.ca>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs> | @UofGCCS on Instagram,
>> Twitter and Facebook
>>
>> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>> ___
>> 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] multi-SAN / server certificates vs individual certs (CUCM/IMP)

[Charles Goldsmith]

Generate a CSR from each server type (CUCM, CUC, UCCX, and each expressway)
and load all hostnames into each server, including your cluster name of the
expressway and the domain name.  At Digicert, load your csr, make sure the
Common name matches the CSR that the server came from.  Once you have one
cluster done, go back into the order and request duplicate, load your 2nd
csr, check the common name and issue the duplicate.  Rinse and repeat for
all systems.

Expressway clusters do not support multi-san, so just duplicate for each
node.

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 10:17 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> Wait. What? I understand how the internals of CUCM and IMP can distribute
> one multi-san cert (built on the publisher’s CSR) to each CUCM and IMP node
> and uses private keys to ensure they load, but….
>
>
>
> How the heck do you install a cert that was built on the pub’s CSR into
> CUC and UCCx? Or Expressway for that matter?
>
>
>
> We are a digicert client, so if you have specific breadcrumbs / drop down
> options, feel free to share.
>
>
>
> Lelio
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <(519)%20824-4120> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* Charles Goldsmith 
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 28, 2018 10:40 AM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] multi-SAN / server certificates vs individual
> certs (CUCM/IMP)
>
>
>
> I've used multi-san certs on at least a dozen installs and have had no
> issues at all.  In fact, with a good SSL provider, you can use the same
> Multi-SAN on CUCM, CUC, UCCX, Expressways.  I like how Digicert does it,
> just duplicate the cert and make sure all of the hostnames are listed in
> the SAN.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:37 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>
> We're in the process of installing signed certs and we have the choice
> between multi-SAN cert with the publisher CSR and rely on the internals to
> have that cert distributed to the subs and the imp nodes -OR- go with
> individual certs.
>
> It's a last minute thing, so I still need to do some research, but I'm
> wondering what people have been doing out there. We're less concerned with
> cost than we are future stability. I know that this multi-san support is
> recent with v10.x - have they ironed out the bugs? We're going with 11.5.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <(519)%20824-4120> | le...@uoguelph.ca le...@uoguelph.ca>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs> | @UofGCCS on Instagram,
> Twitter and Facebook
>
> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> ___
> 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] multi-SAN / server certificates vs individual certs (CUCM/IMP)

[Charles Goldsmith]

I've used multi-san certs on at least a dozen installs and have had no
issues at all.  In fact, with a good SSL provider, you can use the same
Multi-SAN on CUCM, CUC, UCCX, Expressways.  I like how Digicert does it,
just duplicate the cert and make sure all of the hostnames are listed in
the SAN.


On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:37 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> We're in the process of installing signed certs and we have the choice
> between multi-SAN cert with the publisher CSR and rely on the internals to
> have that cert distributed to the subs and the imp nodes -OR- go with
> individual certs.
>
> It's a last minute thing, so I still need to do some research, but I'm
> wondering what people have been doing out there. We're less concerned with
> cost than we are future stability. I know that this multi-san support is
> recent with v10.x - have they ironed out the bugs? We're going with 11.5.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <(519)%20824-4120> | le...@uoguelph.ca le...@uoguelph.ca>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram,
> Twitter and Facebook
>
> [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> ___
> 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] CAD EOL

[Charles Goldsmith]

Resurrecting an old topic with a new subject, we ran across this recently
and wanted to give a reminder and PSA.

The EOL announcement for 10.x and 11.0 do NOT mention the different EOL
date for CAD.
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/customer-collaboration/unified-contact-center-express/eos-eol-notice-c51-737425.html


Even though 10.x is not EOL yet, the CAD agent loses support on July 31st,
2018, per
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/customer-collaboration/unified-contact-center-express/eos-eol-notice-c51-733719.html

Charles



-- Forwarded message --
From: Kevin Przybylowski 
Date: Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 8:49 AM
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] FYI: UCCx v9.0 EOL announced...
To: "cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" 


Nice – thanks for the heads up.  I knew it was coming, I like the note
below from the EOL:



In addition to the SKUs listed in this notification, the same End of
Software Maintenance and End of Support milestones will apply to the Cisco
Agent Desktop (CAD), Cisco Supervisor Desktop (CSD) and Cisco Desktop
Administrator (CDA) features on CCX 10.0, 10.5 and 10.6.



*From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
Of *Lelio Fulgenzi
*Sent:* Monday, January 19, 2015 9:37 AM
*To:* voip puck
*Subject:* [cisco-voip] FYI: UCCx v9.0 EOL announced...




In three parts...

   1. http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/customer-
   collaboration/unified-contact-center-express/eos-eol-notice-
   c51-733721.html
   

   2. http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/customer-
   collaboration/unified-contact-center-express/eos-eol-notice-
   c51-733720.html
   

   3. http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/customer-
   collaboration/unified-contact-center-express/eos-eol-notice-
   c51-733719.html
   




Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
University of Guelph

519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
le...@uoguelph.ca
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1



___
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