Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco UC on Dell VxRail ?

[James Buchanan]

Yes--that extra storage would allay my concerns--the hardware is great but
it's the standalone storage that concerns me.

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 11:56 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> We’ve been on be7h hardware for years without an issue.
>
> If Cisco had appliance level shared storage I’d be on board.  But at last
> check, it was all still specs.
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 22, 2022, at 3:12 AM, James Buchanan 
> 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
>
> Totally agree re: both Simplivity and vxRail. No concerns at all at this
> point. I'd be more concerned running a standalone UCS C-series.
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 2:37 AM James Andrewartha <
> jandrewar...@ccgs.wa.edu.au> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We're running CUCM/CIMP/CUC on HPE Simplivity, it's been fine so far.
>> We're a small site (400 phones, one pub/sub for each app) and TAC hasn't
>> had a problem when I opened a case about CIMP publisher CPU usage (lots
>> of keytool, disabling Cisco Intercluster Sync Agent stopped it, went in
>> and deleted an old, unused GoDaddy CA from everywhere fixed it).
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> James Andrewartha
>> Network & Projects Engineer
>> Christ Church Grammar School
>> Claremont, Western Australia
>> Ph. (08) 9442 1757
>> Mob. 0424 160 877
>>
>> On 22/3/22 02:51, Loren Hillukka wrote:
>> > I know of a few places running Cisco UC (and UCCE) on vxRail, working
>> > fine. Follow the specs-based guidelines.
>> >
>> > Loren
>> >
>> >> On Mar 21, 2022, at 12:45 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi 
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> 
>> >>
>> >> Did you check the specs based listing for the versions? Is it local
>> >> storage or shared storage? Shared storage has specific requirements as
>> >> well.
>> >>
>> >> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of
>> >> *Countryman, Edward
>> >> *Sent:* Monday, March 21, 2022 1:20 PM
>> >> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> >> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Cisco UC on Dell VxRail ?
>> >>
>> >> We’ve the need to move cucm/unity/ER subscriber nodes to a new data
>> >> center.
>> >>
>> >> The new DC runs all dell VxRail hyperconverged hardware.
>> >>
>> >> Anyone aware of any concerns with cisco UC apps running on this
>> hardware?
>> ___
>> 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] Just an FYI

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

I think I mentioned this once on this forum, but I did have a problem with
12.5 re: MOH due to an unclean shutdown. Rebuilding was the only option. In
my case, the shutdown had happened with 10.5 but carried through
apparently. Very mysterious! Still, the rebuild fixed it.

Thanks,

James

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 3:51 AM russon81 via cisco-voip <
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> wrote:

> I've already rebuilt 3 clusters because of this.  Thanks Cisco!
>
>  Original message 
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi 
> Date: 3/21/22 8:23 PM (GMT-08:00)
> To: Kent Roberts 
> Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Just an FYI
>
> As far as I know, the COP file doesn’t fix anything.  It just removes the
> warning.  TAC can still see an ungraceful shutdown happened and can still
> direct you to rebuild.
>
> And yes. It’s ridiculous that there isn’t a way to do a system check to
> determine whether or not the system is operating ok.
>
>
> https://www.cisco.com/web/software/286319173/139477/ciscocm.add_utils_ungraceful_warn_disable_v1.0.cop-README.pdf
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 21, 2022, at 11:05 PM, Kent Roberts  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
>
>
> Intersting that TAC didn’t offer that as a solution nor could they provide
> any way to validate the box was safe for production.
>
>
>
> On Mar 21, 2022, at 9:03 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>
> Yes.  This has been making the rounds in some forums and spaces.
>
>
> Great thing is… there’s a COP file to remove the warning from the login
> screen.
>
>
> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Mar 21, 2022, at 11:00 PM, Kent Roberts  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
>
>
>
> Just through I would share.  For those that don’t know…
>
>
> New in CUCM 12.5 su4, a excellent new feature (a stupid one) was added….
> If a CUCM node takes an unscheduled power down…it must be rebuilt.  There
> is no way to remove the ungraceful shutdown alert that becomes present.
>  Only way to recover is via DRS, so make sure your DRS backups are
> working.A snapshot backup will trigger the same event as it wasn’t a
> clean power down. If no DRS is available, its a complete removal of the
> entire node, and rebuild from scratch.
>
>
> So, once you complete your upgrade, run a full backup.
>
>
> Just thought I would share…...
>
> ___
>
> 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 UC on Dell VxRail ?

[James Buchanan]

Totally agree re: both Simplivity and vxRail. No concerns at all at this
point. I'd be more concerned running a standalone UCS C-series.

On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 2:37 AM James Andrewartha <
jandrewar...@ccgs.wa.edu.au> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We're running CUCM/CIMP/CUC on HPE Simplivity, it's been fine so far.
> We're a small site (400 phones, one pub/sub for each app) and TAC hasn't
> had a problem when I opened a case about CIMP publisher CPU usage (lots
> of keytool, disabling Cisco Intercluster Sync Agent stopped it, went in
> and deleted an old, unused GoDaddy CA from everywhere fixed it).
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> James Andrewartha
> Network & Projects Engineer
> Christ Church Grammar School
> Claremont, Western Australia
> Ph. (08) 9442 1757
> Mob. 0424 160 877
>
> On 22/3/22 02:51, Loren Hillukka wrote:
> > I know of a few places running Cisco UC (and UCCE) on vxRail, working
> > fine. Follow the specs-based guidelines.
> >
> > Loren
> >
> >> On Mar 21, 2022, at 12:45 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
> >>
> >> 
> >>
> >> Did you check the specs based listing for the versions? Is it local
> >> storage or shared storage? Shared storage has specific requirements as
> >> well.
> >>
> >> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of
> >> *Countryman, Edward
> >> *Sent:* Monday, March 21, 2022 1:20 PM
> >> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> >> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Cisco UC on Dell VxRail ?
> >>
> >> We’ve the need to move cucm/unity/ER subscriber nodes to a new data
> >> center.
> >>
> >> The new DC runs all dell VxRail hyperconverged hardware.
> >>
> >> Anyone aware of any concerns with cisco UC apps running on this
> hardware?
> ___
> 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] Where are our Speed Dials!!!

[James Buchanan]

Ah, the old debate. We've all been fighting this since we ripped out the
first Avaya/NEC/Nortel/YouNameIt phones. I remember having to use 7931s
just to keep a phased migration moving. I guess now it's the 7861.

It's a great thread--definitely a trip down memory lane!

On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 7:37 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
>
> https://www.askamanager.org/2022/02/our-phones-have-fewer-speed-dial-buttons-and-everyone-is-freaking-out.html
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> ___
> 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 11.5 Upgrade Question

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

I've upgraded by changing the vmx file and it worked fine. That said,
depending on how many times you upgraded in the past, it might be worth
doing a fresh build. I did an upgrade from 11.5 to 12.5. After the upgrade,
MOH did not work from one subscriber. I opened a TAC case and TAC said the
issue was due to an unclean power outage when the server was running 10.5.
So, they recommended a rebuild of that subscriber. I admit I was skeptical
but eventually did the rebuild and MOH worked fine after that. Strange but
true.

Thanks,

James

On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 7:34 AM JASON BURWELL via cisco-voip <
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> wrote:

> I’m planning an upgrade from CUCM 11.5x up to either 12.5x or 14.0x. It
> appears I’m going to either have to build new servers from an updated ova
> or make changes to the vmx file to upgrade the virtual hardware version
> which looks to be a supported path from Cisco as they provide a doc to do
> this. Just wanted to throw out the question from those who have done this
> upgrade and took the path of changing the vmx file rather than building new
> servers; Did you have any challenges in doing this? Any reason to lean hard
> one way or the other? Any input is appreciated. 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

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco VOIP System

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

How many users are you looking to support? Might Webex Calling make more sense?

Thanks,
James

> On 28 Jan 2022, at 18:41, harbor235  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> 
> Looking to put together a small biz Cisco Voice solution, ISR4331-V bundle, 
> 4FXO, CME and I also need voicemail.  Voicemail is my issue, looks like CUE 
> 9, 10 are EOL or soon will be. I am unclear what the replacement is? Can 
> someone shed some light? I am not seeing it clearly in the config too either, 
> VM, L-CME-CUE?
> 
> 
> help!!
> 
> 
> Mike
> 
> ___
> 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] ATA 186 question

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

There is also the option of keeping a few of the switches that were
refreshed to use for the ATAs.

Thanks,

James

On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 10:10 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> Something to try is to get a cheap DLINK or Linksys switch and insert it
> between the new 9300uxm and the ata.  It might give you some options to get
> them working until you can replace them.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 27, 2022, at 4:41 PM, Lisa Notarianni 
> 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
>
> Thank you all for your quick responses.  We will go beg for funding and
> replace the ATAs.  We cannot set speed to 10 since it is not an option
> according to our network engineer.
>
>
>
> Lisa
>
> *From:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 27, 2022 4:26 PM
> *To:* Lisa Notarianni 
> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] ATA 186 question
>
>
>
>
>
> You might want to double check that. From this, 17.3, it shows 10 is a
> valid option.
>
>
>
>
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/lan/catalyst9300/software/release/17-3/configuration_guide/int_hw/b_173_int_and_hw_9300_cg/configuring_interface_characteristics.html#task_uw1_3wc_g1b
> 
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On Jan 27, 2022, at 3:45 PM, Lisa Notarianni 
> 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
>
>
>
> We just began Cisco switch upgrade to 9300s and ran into an unexpected
> issue.
>
>
>
> We have many ATA 186s out there (about 100) and did not budget for
> replacement as we were gratefully approved for the massive overhaul of the
> switches.  This ended up being an unforeseen glitch.
>
>
>
> We cannot get the ATA 186s to work on this switch with this IOS
> version:   1 65 C9300-48UXM 17.03.04
> CAT9K_IOSXE INSTALL
>
> However, the 186s are working on this switch with this IOS
> version:  1 64 C9300-48P 16.9.5
> CAT9K_IOSXE INSTALL
>
>
>
> I know it is not an apples to apples comparison but I was wondering if
> anyone had a workaround for the newer model/IOS.
>
>
>
> We believe the problem is that the ATA186s are hard coded at 10Mbps/half
> duplex.  Even if we change the switch port parameter from 0x to
> 0x00ff  the ATA will not register.  The switch port is also configured
> at duplex auto but the slowest we can make the port is 100Mbps.
>
>
>
> Is this not possible?  I am hoping you Cisco geniuses have a solution 
>
>
>
> *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
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] CUC 10.5 to 14 ER Not working

[James Buchanan]

That’s a needle in the haystack! Thanks for sharing the fix!

> On 3 Jan 2022, at 20:47, Mathew Miller  wrote:
> 
> 
> It was failing the upgrade, so I went to try the tool again. It seems I had 
> an expired ip-sec cert which was causing the problem. I regenerated that and 
> a couple of magic reboots and it seems to be working now. 
> 
>>> On Jan 3, 2022, at 11:46 AM, Matthew Loraditch 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>> 
>> It won’t upgrade or you are running the check and it’s failing?  It’s been a 
>> while since I’ve done one of these myself, but if it’s just the  check tool, 
>> try to just run the actual upgrade.
>>  
>> I believe the tool is intended to be run on all servers before you start 
>> anything.
>>  
>> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Mathew 
>> Miller
>> Sent: Monday, January 3, 2022 1:54 PM
>> To: James Buchanan 
>> Cc: Cisco VOIP 
>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUC 10.5 to 14 ER Not working
>>  
>> [EXTERNAL]
>>  
>> The subscriber will not upgrade.
>> I'm getting a failure on the pre-upgrade check for the subscriber.
>>  
>> 1.1  FAIL  Network status (NTP, DNS, Cluster Connectivity)
>>  validate_network: Error, intra-cluster communication is broken, 
>> unable
>>  to connect to X.X.X.X
>>  
>>  
>> On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 10:22 AM James Buchanan  
>> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>  
>> Have you upgraded the subscriber? That needs to be done before database 
>> replication will work. 
>>  
>> Thanks?
>>  
>> James
>> 
>> 
>> On 3 Jan 2022, at 18:15, Mathew Miller  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Hello,
>>  
>> Working on an upgrade from CUC 10.5 to 14.
>>  
>> Publisher finished and didn't seem to have any issues.
>>  
>> After running the post upgrade check COP file it fails
>>  
>> 1.1  FAIL  Cluster Database Status (Node authentication and replication 
>> status)
>>  
>>  
>> When I do a utils dbreplication status it shows
>>  
>> Enterprise Replication not active  (62)
>> command failed -- unable to connect to server specified  (5)
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> utils dbreplication runtimestate it says
>>  
>>  
>> Cluster Detailed View from CUC-01 (2 Servers):
>> 
>>   PING  DB/RPC/   REPL.
>> ReplicationREPLICATION SETUP
>> SERVER-NAME IP ADDRESS(msec)DbMon?QUEUEGroup ID  
>>  (RTMT) & Details
>> --- -------   -
>> -----
>> CUC-01   X.X.X.X 0.018 Y/Y/Y --   (-)(-) 
>> Replication Not Setup
>> CUC-02   X.X.X.X 0.125 Y/Y/Y --   (-)(-) 
>> DB-diff
>>  
>>  
>> I've attempted to reset replication this way.
>>  
>> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unity-connection/116942-technote-uc-00.html
>>  
>>  
>> It doesn't seem to be working for me. Replication status always just says 
>> not setup
>>  
>> Any ideas?
>>  
>>  
>> ___
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] CUC 10.5 to 14 ER Not working

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

Have you upgraded the subscriber? That needs to be done before database 
replication will work. 

Thanks?

James

> On 3 Jan 2022, at 18:15, Mathew Miller  wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Working on an upgrade from CUC 10.5 to 14.
> 
> Publisher finished and didn't seem to have any issues. 
> 
> After running the post upgrade check COP file it fails
> 
> 1.1  FAIL  Cluster Database Status (Node authentication and replication 
> status)
> 
> 
> When I do a utils dbreplication status it shows
> 
> Enterprise Replication not active  (62)
> command failed -- unable to connect to server specified  (5)
> 
> 
> 
> utils dbreplication runtimestate it says 
> 
> 
> Cluster Detailed View from CUC-01 (2 Servers):
> 
>   PING  DB/RPC/   REPL.
> ReplicationREPLICATION SETUP
> SERVER-NAME IP ADDRESS(msec)DbMon?QUEUEGroup ID   
> (RTMT) & Details
> --- -------   -
> -----
> CUC-01   X.X.X.X 0.018 Y/Y/Y --   (-)(-) 
> Replication Not Setup
> CUC-02   X.X.X.X 0.125 Y/Y/Y --   (-)(-) 
> DB-diff
> 
> 
> I've attempted to reset replication this way. 
> 
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unity-connection/116942-technote-uc-00.html
> 
> 
> It doesn't seem to be working for me. Replication status always just says not 
> setup
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Low space on partitions in CUCM

[James Buchanan]

Oh right...

1. Delete old firmware files.
2. Delete unused MOH sources.
3. Use the free space .cop file.

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 12:32 PM Matthew Huff  wrote:

> The alert that is being triggered isn’t the LogPartition space, it’s the
> active partition space, which I believe is a separate area. Any suggestion
> on how to cleanup space on the active parttion?
>
>
>
> *Matthew Huff* | Director of Technical Operations | OTA Management LLC
>
>
>
> *Office: 914-460-4039*
>
> *mh...@ox.com  | **www.ox.com <http://www.ox.com>*
>
>
> *.......*
>
>
>
> *From:* James Buchanan 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 29, 2021 6:39 AM
> *To:* Matthew Huff 
> *Cc:* Cisco VoIP Group 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Low space on partitions in CUCM
>
>
>
> Hi Matthew,
>
>
>
> I totally agree but I think you'll be OK. I've done it when at a similar
> level and it's helped.
>
>
>
> Another thing you might do is to download all the log files and set them
> to delete when you download them. That might get you at a safer level.
>
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 11:36 AM Matthew Huff  wrote:
>
> If it was like 92%, fixing the log threshold would make me feel less
> nervous. At 98%, I’m more concerned. Maybe I shouldn’t be?
>
>
>
> *Matthew Huff* | Director of Technical Operations | OTA Management LLC
>
>
>
> *Office: 914-460-4039*
>
> *mh...@ox.com  | **www.ox.com <http://www.ox.com>*
>
>
> *...*
>
>
>
> *From:* James Buchanan 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 29, 2021 6:33 AM
> *To:* Matthew Huff 
> *Cc:* Cisco VoIP Group 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Low space on partitions in CUCM
>
>
>
> Hi Matthew,
>
>
>
> Have you tried adjusting the log file thresholds in RTMT? See
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-callmanager/200581-Procedure-to-Adjust-WaterMark-in-RTMT-of.html
> for more details.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 11:28 AM Matthew Huff  wrote:
>
> After upgrading from 11.5 to 14, I’m at 98% on publisher/subscriber on the
> active partition. Cisco TACs only suggestion is to redeploy from scratch
> from 14 ova. Given the issues with certs, trusts, licensing, etc, I’m
> loathe to do that. Anyone have any suggestions?
>
>
>
>
>
> *Matthew Huff* | Director of Technical Operations | OTA Management LLC
>
>
>
> *Office: 914-460-4039*
>
> *mh...@ox.com  | **www.ox.com <http://www.ox.com>*
>
>
> *...*
>
>
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Low space on partitions in CUCM

[James Buchanan]

Hi Matthew,

I totally agree but I think you'll be OK. I've done it when at a similar
level and it's helped.

Another thing you might do is to download all the log files and set them to
delete when you download them. That might get you at a safer level.

Kind Regards,

James

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 11:36 AM Matthew Huff  wrote:

> If it was like 92%, fixing the log threshold would make me feel less
> nervous. At 98%, I’m more concerned. Maybe I shouldn’t be?
>
>
>
> *Matthew Huff* | Director of Technical Operations | OTA Management LLC
>
>
>
> *Office: 914-460-4039*
>
> *mh...@ox.com  | **www.ox.com <http://www.ox.com>*
>
>
> *.......*
>
>
>
> *From:* James Buchanan 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 29, 2021 6:33 AM
> *To:* Matthew Huff 
> *Cc:* Cisco VoIP Group 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Low space on partitions in CUCM
>
>
>
> Hi Matthew,
>
>
>
> Have you tried adjusting the log file thresholds in RTMT? See
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-callmanager/200581-Procedure-to-Adjust-WaterMark-in-RTMT-of.html
> for more details.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 11:28 AM Matthew Huff  wrote:
>
> After upgrading from 11.5 to 14, I’m at 98% on publisher/subscriber on the
> active partition. Cisco TACs only suggestion is to redeploy from scratch
> from 14 ova. Given the issues with certs, trusts, licensing, etc, I’m
> loathe to do that. Anyone have any suggestions?
>
>
>
>
>
> *Matthew Huff* | Director of Technical Operations | OTA Management LLC
>
>
>
> *Office: 914-460-4039*
>
> *mh...@ox.com  | **www.ox.com <http://www.ox.com>*
>
>
> *...*
>
>
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Low space on partitions in CUCM

[James Buchanan]

Hi Matthew,

Have you tried adjusting the log file thresholds in RTMT? See
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-callmanager/200581-Procedure-to-Adjust-WaterMark-in-RTMT-of.html
for more details.

Thanks,

James

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 11:28 AM Matthew Huff  wrote:

> After upgrading from 11.5 to 14, I’m at 98% on publisher/subscriber on the
> active partition. Cisco TACs only suggestion is to redeploy from scratch
> from 14 ova. Given the issues with certs, trusts, licensing, etc, I’m
> loathe to do that. Anyone have any suggestions?
>
>
>
>
>
> *Matthew Huff* | Director of Technical Operations | OTA Management LLC
>
>
>
> *Office: 914-460-4039*
>
> *mh...@ox.com  | **www.ox.com *
>
>
> *...*
>
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Finesse crashing and agents being disconnected

[James Buchanan]

Hi Myron,

Pardon my asking a really dumb question--but after applying the ES, did you
have users clear their browser cache? I saw this very issue, applied the
ES, and once clearing the cache didn't see it again.

Thanks,

James

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 7:36 AM Myron Young 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> So it seems after finally completing a long awaited system upgrade, we’ve
> hit a bug (CSCvq11478 and CSCvx73795) with Finesse that no known workaround
> is helping.
>
> Currently we are running 12.5 cucm and ccx 12.5 su1 running HA over WAN
> and have had agents experience session crash whereby Finesse displays error
> with notification service as well as device operation error message.
>
> TAC had advised the issue is being caused by new changes on the web
> browser side so we can disable the throttling from each agent browser
> client as well as implementing an Engineering Service patch to both CCX
> nodes. None of these things have helped and I’m now looking at a possible
> rebuild of the cluster.
>
> Has anyone experienced this or going through these issues as well?
> ___
> 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 skill manager page

[James Buchanan]

Mobile Skill Manager is gone:
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/crs/express_12_5/release/guide/uccx_b_uccx-solution-release-notes-125.pdf

On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 6:31 PM James Dust 
wrote:

> Afternoon all,
>
>
>
> We have recently moved our users on a version ‘’12.5.1’’ UCCX cluster, and
> apparently our supervisors were able to access skill’s page on the previous
> version via this link ‘’ https://hostname/mobileskillmanager/index.html’’
>
>
>
> As this no longer appears to be working, is this a feature that’s been
> withdrawn of something that needs to be enabled?
>
>
>
> Many thanks in advance.
>
>
>
> James
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *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] Cube call disconnect while doing Transfer call

[James Buchanan]

I'd agree on the codec. I'd also check the mid-call signalling settings
(see
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/voice/cube/configuration/cube-book/voi-cube-midcall-reinvite.html
).

On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:09 PM neil dsilva  wrote:

> Ok, thanks.
>
> On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 at 9:04 am, Kent Roberts  wrote:
>
>> Usually thats a classic sign of codec mis-match.
>>
>> > On Feb 11, 2021, at 2:33 PM, neil dsilva  wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi There,
>> >
>> > Anyone experience this issue. When A transfer the call to B mobile
>> through CUBE, B can see Mobile phone is ringing, But when he answered the
>> call, Call disconnect. Any idea ?
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > ND
>> > ___
>> > 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] Keeping my phone clean in the age of Covid-19 and other nasty germs

[James Buchanan]

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

Re: [cisco-voip] Deprecated phones in CUCM 14

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

I know the security argument is valid in some respects. But, if I have an
insecure IoT device on the network, like a temperature control system, I
don't have the option of replacing it. So, I ring fence it. I isolate it so
that it can't be exploited, etc. Maybe I'm missing something, but isn't
that what we can do to workaround the security issues?

Thanks,

James

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:36 PM James Andrewartha <
jandrewar...@ccgs.wa.edu.au> wrote:

> We’re still running 10 year old 79x5s (despite their cold boot RAM failure
> issue) and won’t be replacing them until next year at the earliest, I think
> most organisations would want to sweat at least 10 years out of their
> handsets. I mean what features does an 8800 have over an old 7940 if all
> you want is dialtone? Yes security etc, but why pay for new handsets when
> you get nothing for it? Plus I bet COVID is making business reconsider
> upgrading handsets in empty offices.
>
>
>
> --
>
> James Andrewartha
>
> Network & Projects Engineer
>
> Christ Church Grammar School
>
> Claremont, Western Australia
>
> Ph. (08) 9442 1757
>
> Mob. 0424 160 877
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Anthony
> Holloway
> *Sent:* Thursday, 24 September 2020 10:30 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Deprecated phones in CUCM 14
>
>
>
> This statement from the link is interesting to me:
>
>
>
> "...opportunity to move to newer phone models and clients at a pace that
> is reasonable."
>
>
>
>- 8800 series was released 8 years ago
>- 7940's have been end of support since 5 years ago
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 8:20 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
> Yeah, there was some talk about this in the forums. Someone from Cisco
> said, “watch the page for some changes we think you’ll like”.
>
>
>
> Wish they would update the “updated” date.
>
>
>
> Lelio
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *James
> Buchanan
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 24, 2020 7:49 AM
> *To:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Deprecated phones in CUCM 14
>
>
>
> *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
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> So, Cisco changed their mind for now:
>
>
>
>
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/trouble/14_0_1/fieldNotices/cucm_b_deprecated-phones-14.html
>
>
>
> 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
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Deprecated phones in CUCM 14

[James Buchanan]

Maybe Cisco needs to buy up all those 7940s from eBay to get them off the
market for good :-).

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:30 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> This statement from the link is interesting to me:
>
> "...opportunity to move to newer phone models and clients at a pace that
> is reasonable."
>
>
>- 8800 series was released 8 years ago
>- 7940's have been end of support since 5 years ago
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 8:20 AM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>> Yeah, there was some talk about this in the forums. Someone from Cisco
>> said, “watch the page for some changes we think you’ll like”.
>>
>>
>>
>> Wish they would update the “updated” date.
>>
>>
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *James
>> Buchanan
>> *Sent:* Thursday, September 24, 2020 7:49 AM
>> *To:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Deprecated phones in CUCM 14
>>
>>
>>
>> *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
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>>
>>
>> So, Cisco changed their mind for now:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/trouble/14_0_1/fieldNotices/cucm_b_deprecated-phones-14.html
>>
>>
>>
>> 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

[cisco-voip] Deprecated phones in CUCM 14

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

So, Cisco changed their mind for now:

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/trouble/14_0_1/fieldNotices/cucm_b_deprecated-phones-14.html

Thanks,

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

Re: [cisco-voip] call forward is not working in this scenario

[James Buchanan]

That was for call pickup, not forwarding. They eventually made it a mainstream 
feature.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 2 Jun 2020, at 18:16, Norton, Mike  wrote:
> 
> 
> I haven’t been into CUCM in ages, but there used to be a secret field in some 
> advanced area I forget the name of, where you could type in the name of a 
> particular Cisco Bug ID, and then when you go to a hunt pilot there will 
> magically be call forwarding settings there that you can specify directly on 
> the hunt pilot.
> 
> -mn
>  
> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Arun Kumar
> Sent: June 2, 2020 6:25 AM
> To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [cisco-voip] call forward is not working in this scenario
>  
> Hi
>  
> can anybody please help to fix this call flow issue
>  
> the call flow is like this
>  
> Hunt pilot number --> linegroup --> algorithm set as broadcast and LG - Phone 
> ext() set CFA To Mobile number(X). Please let me know is there any 
> alternate for apart from SNR ?
> --
> Thanks,
> Arun
> ___
> 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] DRS Message Restore & DRS File Decrypter Updated

[James Buchanan]

I used it with CUCM in the past.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 21 May 2020, at 21:34, Brian V  wrote:
> 
> 
> I was looking at this tool on CiscoUnityTools.com and it doesn't explicitly 
> state that it works with anything other than Unity Connection. 
> I'm guessing it *should* work with any VOS platform that uses DRS.  I haven't 
> had a chance to test yet.
> Has anyone had a chance to play with it?
> Help File Link:  
> http://www.ciscounitytools.com/Applications/CxN/DRSMessageFisher/DRSDecrypter/Help/DRSBackupDecrypter.htm
> 
> 
>> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 3:53 PM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>> Cool man! Take a victory lap cause Cisco is no longer going to play “hide 
>> the cheese” with you each time they tweak the salt functions in new 
>> versions. Think of all the free time!
>> 
>> Lol... cheers Pete.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On May 11, 2020, at 16:23, Pete Brown  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Yes, all that’s been ironed out.  Jeff had to deal with a ridiculous amount 
>>> of red tape to make it happen.  Plus he did a great job of cleaning up the 
>>> code (packaging, logging, error handing, etc).
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> I’m just happy that it’s now a “blessed” utility instead of something 
>>> that’s frowned on in the Community forums.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> From: Anthony Holloway
>>> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 12:20 PM
>>> To: Pete Brown
>>> Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] DRS Message Restore & DRS File Decrypter Updated
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Are these based off of your tools?  If so, are you credited in any way?
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 12:36 PM Pete Brown  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Just a heads up, Cisco has made some updates to the DRS file decryption 
>>> tool and released it for customer use.  Jeff Lindborg has also updated the 
>>> DRS Message Restore (fka DRS Message Fisher) tool .  Both are available 
>>> here.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> http://www.ciscounitytools.com/Applications/CxN/DRSMessageFisher/DRSMessageFisher.html
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> I’m leaving my tools page and GitHub repo up, but I’d recommend using 
>>> Cisco’s version going forward.  It’s been fun!  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 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://eur05.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7C35d15450ed2a4b40e1f608d7f5e92b1a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C637248254103371770sdata=vLOBtpIK0PS497%2FbxcG113xKYbtmSVZL7KGxsuMAMVU%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] Microsoft Direct Routing

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

The trial Ribbon SBC has to be dealt with by a Ribbon reseller. They can do
this, but they have to issue a zero-dollar PO in order to do this as I
understand it.

Thanks,

James

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 6:50 AM James Andrewartha <
jandrewar...@ccgs.wa.edu.au> wrote:

> On 16/3/20 6:37 am, Myron Young wrote:
> > Anyone know where i can get a free or temporary version of the Ribbon
> SBC 1000 or something similar? I’m trying to see about deploying Microsoft
> Direct routing with Office 365 Teams and CUCM for our organization.
>
> Probably worth asking Cisco when their SBCs will be certified for direct
> routing too.
>
> --
> 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] migrating mpp phones to callmanager (and back)

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

Just one point to clarify--MPP to CUCM is not free unless you are using
Flex licensing. There is a special license you must buy to do this. So, if
you buy MPP phones, you will have a pile of bricks unless you get the
license or are a Flex subscriber.

Thanks,

James

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 4:32 PM NateCCIE  wrote:

> MPP to CUCM free, but cannot go back without a paid license, which happens
> to be included with cloud flex.
>
> No advantage to buying MPP if you're going to register them to CUCM.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Lelio
> Fulgenzi
> Sent: Monday, March 2, 2020 8:44 AM
> To: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)
> 
> Subject: [cisco-voip] migrating mpp phones to callmanager (and back)
>
>
> Is there anything specially about an mpp phone that wouldn't allow you to
> load CUCM software on it? And then go back to MPP when needed?
>
>
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[cisco-voip] UCCE 12.5?

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

Anyone gone to UCCE 12.5 yet? Anything to share about it? How was the
migration to Smart Licensing?

Thanks,

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

[cisco-voip] Field Notice from Cisco making Secure LDAP mandatory

[James Buchanan]

Hello folks,

I know you all needed some more work. I sure did! So here you are!

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/trouble/12_5_1/fieldNotice/cucm_b_fn-secure-ldap-mandatory-ad.html


I'm interested in any early thoughts on other integrations--vCenter, ISE,
VPN, TACACS, etc. I assume it applies across the board.

Thanks,

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

Re: [cisco-voip] Offline Analog Call Recording

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

The last time I had to record analog, I had to force the call out of the
analog gateway to another analog gateway (basically) and capture the data
in between. I used ZOOM CallREC to capture the recording. That said, with
the new media forking available in the gateways, you might be able to
hairpin that call through a VoIP dial peer to get it to fork. I've done
that with a PRI before and sent the forked stream to MediaSense. Not ideal,
but worked. I've attached that config for your reference.

Thanks,

James

On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 2:33 PM Pawlowski, Adam  wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I'm trying to find a solution that will support not only BiB call
> recording for IP Phones and Jabber, of which there are many, but, also
> analog lines. However, we're not looking to record them from a VG. These
> lines are used as a backup during maintenance to the VoIP system, or when
> the facility is isolated from the network or VoIP is otherwise down. We'd
> like to record the audio from them and either spool it to be sent to the
> recording server later, or, less ideally, the recording server would be a
> physical server located at that site so that our network interruptions
> aren't their network interruptions.
>
> I can find any number of solutions that will work for the BiB devices,
> but, not this analog scenario. I've seen some options from Revcord and
> HigherGround which sort of can accomplish this but are larger software
> suites.
>
> Anyone aware of anything that can do this?
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Adam Pawlowski
>
> SUNYAB
>
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
!
version 15.4
service timestamps debug datetime msec
service timestamps log datetime msec
no service password-encryption
!
hostname BE6K_Router
!
boot-start-marker
boot-end-marker
!
aqm-register-fnf
!
card type t1 0 0
logging buffered 51200 warnings
!
no aaa new-model
network-clock-participate wic 0 
network-clock-select 3 T1 0/0/0
!
!
!
!
ip dhcp excluded-address 10.10.10.1
!
ip dhcp pool ccp-pool
 import all
 network 10.10.10.0 255.255.255.248
 default-router 10.10.10.1 
 lease 0 2
!
!
!
ip domain name dsot.local
ip name-server 192.168.221.154
ip cef
no ipv6 cef
multilink bundle-name authenticated
!
!
!
!
isdn switch-type primary-4ess
!
!
!
!
voice service voip
 address-hiding
 mode border-element 
 allow-connections sip to sip
 fax protocol t38 version 0 ls-redundancy 0 hs-redundancy 0 fallback none
 sip
!
!
!
!
voice translation-rule 1
 rule 1 /\(.*\)/ /888\1/
!
voice translation-rule 2
 rule 2 /888\(.*\)/ /\1/
!
voice translation-rule 3
 rule 1 /3\(.*\)/ /\1/
!
!
voice translation-profile OutboundIntl
 translate called 3
!
voice translation-profile prefix
 translate called 1
!
voice translation-profile strip
 translate called 2
!
!
!
media profile recorder 1
 media-recording 20
!
media class 3
 recorder profile 1
!
license udi pid CISCO2901/K9 sn FJC1912A1VV
hw-module pvdm 0/0
!
hw-module pvdm 0/1
!
!
!
redundancy
!
!
controller T1 0/0/0
 cablelength long 0db
 pri-group timeslots 1-24
 description Linefromadtran
!
!
!
!
!
interface Loopback0
 ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.255
!
interface Embedded-Service-Engine0/0
 no ip address
 shutdown
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0
 description $ETH-LAN$$ETH-SW-LAUNCH$$INTF-INFO-GE 0/0$
 ip address 10.10.10.1 255.255.255.248
 duplex auto
 speed auto
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
 description Trunk to POE switch
 no ip address
 duplex auto
 speed auto
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/1.1
 description Data VLAN sub-interface
 encapsulation dot1Q 1 native
 ip address 192.168.221.253 255.255.255.0
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/1.75
 description BE6K Voice VLAN sub-interface
 encapsulation dot1Q 75
 ip address 192.168.122.254 255.255.255.0
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/1.100
 description uc500 voice vlan 100
 encapsulation dot1Q 100
 ip address 192.168.222.254 255.255.255.0
!
interface Serial0/0/0:23
 no ip address
 encapsulation hdlc
 isdn switch-type primary-ni
 isdn incoming-voice voice
 no cdp enable
!
ip forward-protocol nd
!
ip http server
ip http authentication local
ip http secure-server
ip http timeout-policy idle 60 life 86400 requests 1
!
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.221.254
ip route 192.168.221.70 255.255.255.255 192.168.221.254
ip route 192.168.221.117 255.255.255.255 192.168.221.254
ip route 192.168.221.154 255.255.255.255 192.168.221.254
!
!
!
access-list 23 permit 10.10.10.0 0.0.0.7
!
control-plane
!
!
voice-port 0/0/0:23
 !
 !
 !
 !
!
mgcp
mgcp call-agent 192.168.122.201 2427 service-type mgcp version 0.1
mgcp rtp unreachable timeout 1000 action notify
mgcp modem passthrough voip mode nse
mgcp package-capability rtp-package
mgcp package-capability sst-package
mgcp package-capability pre-package
no mgcp package-capability res-package
no mgcp timer receive-rtcp
mgcp sdp simple
mgcp fax t38 inhibit
mgcp behavior rsip-range tgcp-only
mgcp behavior comedia-role 

Re: [cisco-voip] 988 Suicide Hotline

[James Buchanan]

I think you could add this to a route filter nonetheless but believe the
988 will override if you give it urgent priority.

On Friday, December 13, 2019, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> I’m hoping a simple 988 route pattern will work here and 9.@ route
> patterns won’t interfere. Otherwise, would we see a COP file update
> sometime?
>
> https://www.bostonglobe.com/2019/12/12/business/fcc-votes-
> set-up-3-digit-988-suicide-hotline-number/
>
> *-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

Re: [cisco-voip] big news - Microsoft and Cisco collaborating again!

[James Buchanan]

I didn't see anything in the announcement about CUCM period. I thought it
was really the ability to join each other's meetings from each other's
room-based video systems. Issues such as federation, etc. don't seem to be
addressed in the announcement.

On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 1:49 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

> It will be interesting to see how much CUCM integration there is. From
> what I gather, it's going to be Webex room kits that are cloud registered
> that will have access. But, who knows, could be 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
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of James
> Andrewartha
> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 10:41 PM
> To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] big news - Microsoft and Cisco collaborating
> again!
>
> On 5/11/19 8:21 pm, Palmer, Brian wrote:
> > I always figured that Microsoft would utilize Office365 to push more
> > away from Cisco products and into the Microsoft Realm.  Microsoft will
> > offer enterprise products for free in order to pull them into the fold.
> > I figure all Microsoft needs now is to just buy a company that can
> > fill the void they lack in the collaboration space and then they can
> > attempt to offer an even fuller offering with office included.
>
> Microsoft is trying to build out their cloud PBX product, but it's nowhere
> near enterprise. My suspicion is that some big Microsoft O365 customers
> with complicated CUCM environments wanted to connect it to MS Teams, and
> Cisco didn't want people to rip out Webex room systems for MS Teams Room
> systems.
>
> Personally I'm quite happy since we fall into the first category, we're
> heavily into the Microsoft ecosystem but have CUCM, and were looking at
> ripping it out so we could get Teams integration, but concluded that Teams
> Phones and Cloud PBX wasn't mature enough for us (yet).
>
> --
> 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
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] CCX CTI Managers

[James Buchanan]

Hi Myron,

I believe you can only have two CTI managers in the list in CCX. When you
try to add the third, you'll get an error telling you it can't be done.

Thanks,

James

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 4:06 PM Myron Young 
wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I have just inherited a UCM 9.1 and CCX 9.0 cluster and not sure why but
> looks as though only two CTI managers, one subscriber and the publisher,
> were selected on the CM configuration page in CCX web admin.
>
> I just verified call manager and CTI manager services are running on all
> subscriber nodes. So now I want to add the other subscriber nodes to the
> selected CTI managers list from CCX CM configuration page.
>
> Does anyone think this would be service impacting? I’m really hesitant to
> do any changes at all especially during the day since this system is EOL
> and TAC has already indicated they won’t really get involved with any
> issues until we upgrade; which is probably 6 months to a year away.
> ___
> 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?

[James Buchanan]

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  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
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *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 2:30 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
> Hmmm, no camera would make sense.
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *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:* Tuesday, September 17, 2019 3:14 PM
> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* Norton, Mike ; voyp list, cisco-voip (
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] what's the NC model of phones?
>
>
>
> 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:
> 

Re: [cisco-voip] PSA: Hunt Groups and Alerting Names

[James Buchanan]

...and I just realized I did it in 12.5. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On 1 Aug 2019, at 18:32, Anthony Holloway  
> wrote:
> 
> I tried the double quote trick at first, based on a forum post I saw, but it 
> didn't work for me.
> 
> In the same post, someone posted a sample Lua script, but that also did not 
> work for me, so I wrote my own.
> 
> Post in question:
> https://community.cisco.com/t5/unified-communications/hunt-pilot-alerting-name-not-working-in-11-5-su6/td-p/3867489
>   
> 
> YMMV.
> 
>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 12:09 PM James Buchanan  
>> wrote:
>> You can also put the alerting name in double-quotes and get the same result, 
>> but I like the LUA script better. I used it a few days ago.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On 1 Aug 2019, at 18:05, Jinto Alakkal Kunjumon  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Thanks for sharing this Anthony, cool stuff. I am also sharing a link which 
>>> might be helpful for everyone.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> https://community.cisco.com/t5/collaboration-voice-and-video/a-guide-to-sip-normalization-on-cucm-and-lua-scripting/ba-p/3099409
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Jinto.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Anthony 
>>> Holloway
>>> Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2019 12:40 PM
>>> To: Cisco VoIP Group 
>>> Subject: [cisco-voip] PSA: Hunt Groups and Alerting Names
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> I was configuring some new stuff for a customer recently, and as I was 
>>> making test calls, I noticed the 7800/8800 series phones were not showing 
>>> the Hunt Pilot Alerting Name like I'm used to.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> I found a defect (CSCvn39109) which basically says that CUCM 11.5(1)SU5+ 
>>> was updated to change the way it presents the Hunt Pilot name to the phone, 
>>> and the phone firmware has not been updated to parse it.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> I implemented a SIP Normalization script on the SIP Profile applied to the 
>>> phones, which rolls back the format to pre- CUCM 11.5(1)SU5.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> That Lua script looks like this:
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> M = {}
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> local function hunt_uri_rollback(msg)
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> local old_call_info = msg:getHeader("Call-Info")
>>> 
>>> local new_call_info = string.gsub(old_call_info, 
>>> "huntpiloturi=\"%%22(.*)%%22(.*)\";", "huntpiloturi=\"%1\"%2;")
>>> 
>>> msg:modifyHeader("Call-Info", new_call_info)
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> end
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> M.outbound_INVITE = hunt_uri_rollback
>>> 
>>> M.outbound_UPDATE = hunt_uri_rollback
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> return M
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Again, you apply it to a SIP Profile, which you then apply to the phone.  
>>> Then restart the phone.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> The Pre-Lua script Call-Info header looks like this:
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Call-Info: ; security= Unknown; orientation= 
>>> from; gci= 4-166949; huntpiloturi="%22Your Hunt Pilot 
>>> Name%22"; isVoip; call-instance= 1
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> The Post-Lua script Call-Info header looks like this:
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Call-Info: ; security= Unknown; orientation= 
>>> from; gci= 4-166949; huntpiloturi="Your Hunt Pilot 
>>> Name"; isVoip; call-instance= 1  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Seeing the alerting name on the phone is a really useful feature in my 
>>> opinion, and so I hope this helps you out until Cisco fixes this with a 
>>> software patch.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> PS Make sure you have the CM Advanced Service Parameter set to True 
>>> (default): Display Hunt Pilot Name or DN for Hunt Group Calls When Alerting.
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 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] PSA: Hunt Groups and Alerting Names

[James Buchanan]

You can also put the alerting name in double-quotes and get the same result, 
but I like the LUA script better. I used it a few days ago.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 1 Aug 2019, at 18:05, Jinto Alakkal Kunjumon  wrote:
> 
> Thanks for sharing this Anthony, cool stuff. I am also sharing a link which 
> might be helpful for everyone.
>  
> https://community.cisco.com/t5/collaboration-voice-and-video/a-guide-to-sip-normalization-on-cucm-and-lua-scripting/ba-p/3099409
>  
> Jinto.
>  
>  
> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Anthony 
> Holloway
> Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2019 12:40 PM
> To: Cisco VoIP Group 
> Subject: [cisco-voip] PSA: Hunt Groups and Alerting Names
>  
> I was configuring some new stuff for a customer recently, and as I was making 
> test calls, I noticed the 7800/8800 series phones were not showing the Hunt 
> Pilot Alerting Name like I'm used to.
>  
> I found a defect (CSCvn39109) which basically says that CUCM 11.5(1)SU5+ was 
> updated to change the way it presents the Hunt Pilot name to the phone, and 
> the phone firmware has not been updated to parse it.
>  
> I implemented a SIP Normalization script on the SIP Profile applied to the 
> phones, which rolls back the format to pre- CUCM 11.5(1)SU5.
>  
> That Lua script looks like this:
>  
> M = {}
>  
> local function hunt_uri_rollback(msg)
>  
> local old_call_info = msg:getHeader("Call-Info")
> local new_call_info = string.gsub(old_call_info, 
> "huntpiloturi=\"%%22(.*)%%22(.*)\";", "huntpiloturi=\"%1\"%2;")
> msg:modifyHeader("Call-Info", new_call_info)
>  
> end
>  
> M.outbound_INVITE = hunt_uri_rollback
> M.outbound_UPDATE = hunt_uri_rollback
>  
> return M
>  
> Again, you apply it to a SIP Profile, which you then apply to the phone.  
> Then restart the phone.
>  
> The Pre-Lua script Call-Info header looks like this:
>  
> Call-Info: ; security= Unknown; orientation= 
> from; gci= 4-166949; huntpiloturi="%22Your Hunt Pilot 
> Name%22"; isVoip; call-instance= 1
>  
> The Post-Lua script Call-Info header looks like this:
>  
> Call-Info: ; security= Unknown; orientation= 
> from; gci= 4-166949; huntpiloturi="Your Hunt Pilot 
> Name"; isVoip; call-instance= 1  
>  
> Seeing the alerting name on the phone is a really useful feature in my 
> opinion, and so I hope this helps you out until Cisco fixes this with a 
> software patch.
>  
> PS Make sure you have the CM Advanced Service Parameter set to True 
> (default): Display Hunt Pilot Name or DN for Hunt Group Calls When Alerting.
> ___
> 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] TFTP deactivation and reactivation - i recall this was necessary for some reason

[James Buchanan]

Hi Lelio,

I found this note from December 2016 from Nick Barnett:

"I just thought I would share what happened with this, even though it is
super old. Changing the node names to FQDN was mostly painless. The one
thing that bit me was bug CSCuy13916. After changing the names of the
nodes, the TFTP service needs to be DEACTIVATED and then re-activated in
order to fully update the certificates.  Before taking those steps, I kept
getting certificate errors from CuciLync, but afterwards, everything worked
as designed."

That's all I've got.

Thanks,

James

On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 11:42 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> I'm scheduled to install the latest dev pack on our cluster. Because we're
> on 11.5(1)su4, we need to restart.
>
> I remember some time ago that a restart was not enough for some task
> execution, and that it actually required deactivating and reactivating the
> TFTP server to make things work.
>
> Does anyone remember this?
>
> ---
> 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] QM Backup recording server

[James Buchanan]

Hi Ahmed.

I misunderstand part of your original question I think. I'm afraid I
haven't any experience with the Cisco QM product.

Thanks,

James

On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 2:42 PM Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman <
ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com> wrote:

> Hi James,
>
>
>
> Ok this is from CUCM side, what about the backup QM recording server side
> installation and configuration?
>
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
>
> Senior Network Engineer
>
>
>
> *From:* James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 13, 2019 4:28 PM
> *To:* Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman 
> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] QM Backup recording server
>
>
>
> Hi Ahmed,
>
>
>
> In CUCM, you create a SIP trunk to each recorder. Those two recorders are
> placed in a route group configured as top down. That route group is put
> into a route list, and the route pattern used to invoke the recorders is
> pointed to that route list. That route pattern is referenced in your
> Recording Profile.
>
>
>
> If I remember correctly, CUCM 12.5 allows you to point to both recorders
> at the same time but don't quote me on that.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 2:01 PM Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman <
> ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Gents,
>
>
>
> I have a setup of CUCM 11.5 cluster , CCX 11.6 cluster, AQM 11.5 single
> server for call recording, all is working fine.
>
>
>
> Now we are implementing a backup QM recording server and the Cisco
> documents lack to enough details.
>
>
>
> I’m using Automatic Silent IP Phones Based Recording (BiB), recording
> route pattern, recording profile, and SIP trunk pointing to current QM
> recording server on the CUCM.
>
>
>
> So I do appreciate if anyone has already implemented this redundant QM
> recording server to give me a guidance on how this backup server should be
> implemented.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
>
> Senior Network 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] QM Backup recording server

[James Buchanan]

Hi Ahmed,

In CUCM, you create a SIP trunk to each recorder. Those two recorders are
placed in a route group configured as top down. That route group is put
into a route list, and the route pattern used to invoke the recorders is
pointed to that route list. That route pattern is referenced in your
Recording Profile.

If I remember correctly, CUCM 12.5 allows you to point to both recorders at
the same time but don't quote me on that.

Thanks,

James

On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 2:01 PM Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman <
ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com> wrote:

> Dear Gents,
>
>
>
> I have a setup of CUCM 11.5 cluster , CCX 11.6 cluster, AQM 11.5 single
> server for call recording, all is working fine.
>
>
>
> Now we are implementing a backup QM recording server and the Cisco
> documents lack to enough details.
>
>
>
> I’m using Automatic Silent IP Phones Based Recording (BiB), recording
> route pattern, recording profile, and SIP trunk pointing to current QM
> recording server on the CUCM.
>
>
>
> So I do appreciate if anyone has already implemented this redundant QM
> recording server to give me a guidance on how this backup server should be
> implemented.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
>
> Senior Network 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] PCI DSS compliance for Cisco IPT/UCCX

[James Buchanan]

Shall we also go stone tablets instead of email while we're at it?

Anyway, a few notes:

1. If agents take payments over the phone, you will need to ensure some way
of the customer entering the digits. The agents must not be able to
distinguish the DTMF tones and the tones will need to be entered into a
payments screen of some sort. This is generally a custom development effort.
2. In reference to #1, if agents take payments over the phone, you will
need to ensure your call recording solution has pause/resume capability to
prevent the credit card number from being recording.
3. To avoid being able to sniff the traffic in the CUBE (for self-service
payment scenarios) you may need to harden your CUBE or firewall it.

That's my two cents from a few customers I've assisted in this effort.

Now, some customers will simply not take payments over the phone anymore
and will go fully self-service for credit card payments.

Regarding TLS 1.2, you need to do that one way or the other. Browsers are
beginning to enforce this more and more, and you don't want to be stuck in
the past. Also, any kind of penetration test would note this and have you
fix it. It's not hard, but could require some upgrading (CUCM 10.5 to 11.5,
e.g.).

On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 6:16 AM Ki Wi  wrote:

> Hi Group,
> thanks!
> I think TLS 1.2 is pretty tricky and since it is not compulsory now then I
> will avoid it. TLS 1.1 seems good enough for now.
>
> The main problem will revolve around enable voice encryption on existing
> cluster. This will be quite a major effort. If this is deem necessary, I
> will get customer to create a standalone cluster just for UCCX else
> potentially it will cost them more $$ to enable end to end encryption on
> all existing sites.
>
> The PCI compliance consultant they have hired, recommended them to go
> digital phones or analogue phones which is kind of weird.
>
> Regards,
> Ki Wi
>
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 11:56 PM Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratl...@cisco.com> wrote:
>
>> BRKCOL-2009 is a good Cisco Live session entirely dedicated to the impact
>> of PCI requirements on collab (TLS 1.2 particularly).
>>
>> Transport Layer Security (TLS) 1.0 is being deprecated and may not
>> provide the level of security required by an organization anymore. The
>> Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) is for example
>> requiring vendors to use newer versions of TLS for encrypted
>> communications. This session will discuss the support of TLS 1.2 in the
>> Cisco On-Premises Collaboration products. It will also cover the ability to
>> disable TLS 1.0 and/or TLS 1.1, the interfaces that are affected by this,
>> and the implications on the Cisco Collaboration solution. Finally, it will
>> discuss limitations when older phones are still used in a environment where
>> TLS 1.0 has been disabled.
>>
>>
>>  - Ryan Ratliff
>>
>> On Jan 22, 2019, at 8:18 AM, Lamont, Joshua 
>> wrote:
>>
>> The complete guide is located here:
>> https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/documents/Protecting_Telephone_Based_Payment_Card_Data_v3-0_nov_2018.pdf
>>
>> This was updated in November for the first time in seven years. If you
>> are a business accepting credit cards this is definitely something you
>> should read through.
>>
>> Joshua Lamont
>> Senior Telecommunications Engineer
>> Brown University
>> office (401) 863-1003
>> cell(401) 749-6913
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 7:36 AM Ryan Huff  wrote:
>>
>>> At a high level I’d think you’ll need to look into SRTP (aka voice
>>> encryption) enabled system-wide, no call recording (which you can’t do with
>>> SRTP anyway) and possibly no call monitoring too (at least on the PII
>>> calls).
>>>
>>> Then adhere to all the physical access rules for servers that store or
>>> transmit PII (personally identifiable information).
>>>
>>> You may need to research database storage requirements as it relates to
>>> PCI. I’m assuming the UCCX environment is what will be dealing with the
>>> PII; while UCCX doesn’t have the capacity to outright store CC info, it may
>>> be possible that some of that info is captured in logs, depending on how
>>> your environment is set up.
>>>
>>> You’d have to do a lot of dry runs in the UCCX environment and run all
>>> the calling scenarios that interact with PII to ensure traces of it do not
>>> get logged.
>>>
>>> Obviously nothing can be done to the UCCX database outside of what Cisco
>>> supports, like encrypt table values that aren’t encrypted.. etc
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> > On Jan 22, 2019, at 01:23, Ki Wi  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi Group,
>>> > I have a customer who is querying on how can we make their existing
>>> Cisco IPT (with UCCX) PCI DSS compliance since the new upcoming site we are
>>> planning to deploy will handle sensitive data such as credit cards
>>> information.
>>> >
>>> > Any folks out there have experience doing this?
>>> >
>>> > Do we need voice encryption? Turn on TLS v1.1 ? etc?
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Ki Wi
>>> 

[cisco-voip] Expressway 12.5

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

I just saw this is out. Check out the release notes, including support for
Let's Encrypt.

Thanks,

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

Re: [cisco-voip] 88XX Phone VPN broke on 12.5 firmware

[James Buchanan]

Merry Christmas from your friends at Cisco!

On Tuesday, December 25, 2018, Brian Meade  wrote:

> Heads up on this one.  Upgrading to 12.5 firmware on 88xx phones breaks
> Phone VPN completely.  There's a Sev1 bug on this now-
> https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvn76864
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] 8851 call with headset and ahndest

[James Buchanan]

Hi Reto,

With the newer phones, and I believe even with 7961/62 phones, Cisco
separated the audio interfaces physically, making this former functionality
impossible. The best thing to do is to use a Y-adapter quick disconnect
cable to have two headsets on at the same time or use some sort of
monitoring/barge software like Cisco Finesse offers.

Thanks,

James

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 11:59 AM Reto Gassmann  wrote:

> Hallo Group
>
> We are currently changing our old 7960 phones to 8851.
> With the old phones it was possible to use the headset and the handset at
> the same time. So it was possible to coach new workers during a call.
> Now with the 8851 this is no longer possible. Only headset or handset.
> Is there a setting to change that or does anyone know an other solution?
>
> Thanks Reto
> ___
> 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] "*" makes the SIP provider put a person on hold, or something like that

[James Buchanan]

You guys crack me up. Thanks for the good laugh!

On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 3:28 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Following the emergence of the Me Too movement in 2017, allegations
> against [Crunchman], some dating back decades, surfaced in public
> concerning inappropriate sexual behavior."
> Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Draper
>
> No say it aint so.
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 7:10 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>>
>> Cap’n Crunch is out there swinging his whistle and laughing his head off
>> with this one.
>>
>> *-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 Aug 9, 2018, at 6:05 PM, James Buchanan 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Here's a weird one. I had a guy who, when he received an email, would get
>> disconnected from his phone calls. The caller would hear MOH generated from
>> the SIP provider.
>>
>> It turns out his email tone matched the "*", and that * was causing the
>> SIP provider to put the party on hold.
>>
>> Now, any thoughts on why the SIP provider would be doing this?
>>
>> 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
>>
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[cisco-voip] "*" makes the SIP provider put a person on hold, or something like that

[James Buchanan]

Hi folks,

Here's a weird one. I had a guy who, when he received an email, would get
disconnected from his phone calls. The caller would hear MOH generated from
the SIP provider.

It turns out his email tone matched the "*", and that * was causing the SIP
provider to put the party on hold.

Now, any thoughts on why the SIP provider would be doing this?

Thanks,

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

[cisco-voip] Single-button Barge on 8851 phones

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

Barge works great on 8851 phones with CUCM 11.5 and firmware 12.0(1).
However, no matter what I do, I can't get single-button barge to work. Any
ideas?

Thanks,

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

Re: [cisco-voip] SIP header modification

[James Buchanan]

Hello everyone,

This one was due to a Cisco bug, documented here:
https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvd30171.

Thanks,

James

On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Evgeny Izetov  wrote:

> Looks like the variable in the replace string doesn't have brackets for
> it. The only brackets are taken by the \1 variable. You'd need a second set
> of brackets to insert the \u01 variable.
>
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018, 12:29 PM James Buchanan 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am trying to take a REFER header, copy it to a copy list, and use it to
>> modify the To: header.
>>
>> I have an inbound dial peer using:
>>
>> voice class sip copy-list 1
>> sip-header Refer-To
>>
>>
>> and I have the following SIP profile in place for the outgoing dial peer:
>>
>> voice class sip-profiles 1
>>  request ANY sip-header Refer-To copy "Refer-To:> custID=1234567;telNum=5551212>)" u01
>>
>>  request INVITE sip-header To modify "(To: " "\1\u01"
>>
>>
>> Whenever I run this through the SIP profile test tool (at
>> https://cway.cisco.com/tools/SipProfileTest/) it give me the properly
>> modified To: header. However, whenever, I run it through CUBE, I get this:
>>
>> To: >
>> I'm sure there's something simple I'm missing. Any suggestions?
>>
>> 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

[cisco-voip] SIP header modification

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

I am trying to take a REFER header, copy it to a copy list, and use it to
modify the To: header.

I have an inbound dial peer using:

voice class sip copy-list 1
sip-header Refer-To


and I have the following SIP profile in place for the outgoing dial peer:

voice class sip-profiles 1
 request ANY sip-header Refer-To copy
"Refer-To:)"
u01

 request INVITE sip-header To modify "(To: " "\1\u01"


Whenever I run this through the SIP profile test tool (at
https://cway.cisco.com/tools/SipProfileTest/) it give me the properly
modified To: header. However, whenever, I run it through CUBE, I get this:

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

Re: [cisco-voip] CMR and the SD-WAN

[James Buchanan]

Painful as this was, hats off to you for writing this up and sharing. Much
appreciated!

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Ryan Huff  wrote:

> So here is a *neat* little situation I ran into recently, and is worth
> sharing and reading; if this saves a life it was worth the crap I had to go
> through …..
>
>
>
> == The Scenario ==
>
>
>
>- Expressway C/E 8.10.3 cluster over wan (2 Control Peers, 2 Edge
>Peers)
>- Customer deployed and managed SD-WAN solution in front of the Edge
>cluster to the Internet (with two separate transport carriers). I think it
>was Palos, but we’ll call it a whitebox’ed solution for our purposes
>- Using MRA and B2B Expressway configs
>- UAT for MRA and B2B is accepted and works great
>
>
>
> == The Problem ==
>
>
>
> The customer applies the zone/search rule config in Expressway for CMR and
> notices that randomly, during a presentation session in the CMR, the BFCP
> server (AKA, the WebEx meeting) will close the BFCP presentation to the
> endpoint coming from the customer’s Expressway; all other BFCP clients are
> still receiving the BFCP presentation. That’s right, it *appears* that
> WebEx *kicked* the BFCP participant coming from the customer’s Edge, but
> not because the BFCP server closed the session (all other participants
> remain)! Although it was happening randomly’ish in length of time into the
> presentation, it would always happen at some point to the endpoint,
> generally around the 2 minute’ish mark.
>
>
>
> == The diagnosis ==
>
>
>
> Although random, a consistent’ish length would seem to suggest a timer /
> re-invite of some flavor, and that would be wrong, as ultimately uncovered.
> Sparing you all the gory tales of escalation and vendor bus underskirt
> sliding; the issue was in fact, the SD-WAN solution itself.
>
>
>
> == The Explanation & The Fix ==
>
>
>
> What was happening is that every 120 seconds or so, the BFCP server (WebEx
> meeting) would send a UDP BFCP packet to all the BFCP presentation
> subscribers. The customer’s SD-WAN solution was *identifying* these
> packets according to the customer (gotta love layer 7 capable firewalls )
> and queueing them onto a physically different link than which the stream
> was on, thus creating *physical asymmetry, delay and latency*. I
> specifically requested that all inspection capabilities be turned off for
> the traffic but I guess that isn’t the same as “identifying the traffic” ….
> Lol. In a TCP stream, this would likely be tolerated to a degree as packet
> loss or delay and/or jitter and would simply re transmit ….. but we are
> dealing with *UDP* here, no bueno.
>
>
>
> To resolve, the customer had to identify and classify the traffic and
> force a active/failover transmission through the SD-WAN solution for that
> traffic, rather than a “load balance” transmission behavior.
>
>
>
> == Sleuthing & The Closing ==
>
>
>
> In hind sight, seems simple and makes perfect sense right? However, when
> your only visibility into the network is the Expressway servers themselves,
> it can be *very* challenging to discover because at that point in the
> topology, everything looks like it is coming from and going to the VIP on
> the firewall pair. So how do you catch something like this when you can’t
> see everything? *PCAPs*. *Literally counting f**king packet sequence
> numbers for 6 hours and identifying a consistent pattern of packets coming
> out of order and being “lost”.*
>
>
>
> -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

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM UCCX email to Comcast

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

Before Unity Connection supported Office365 for Single Inbox, I had to
create my own SMTP server to relay emails over to Office 365. So, I created
a Windows VM and added the Windows SMTP server to it, allowing only CUC to
relay from it. It worked fine. It doesn't have to be a Windows SMTP server
of course.

Thanks,

James

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 7:54 PM, Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> So you basically need pubic DNS, a public IP Address, and Firewall rules
> to allow the external to external communication.
>
> I have not done this before either, just thinking out loud.
>
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 1:34 PM Carlo Calabrese via cisco-voip <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
>>   Hi all,
>>  I have a customer that we are installing a CUCM, CUC and UCCX. the
>> problem is that what it total separate from their data network so I have a
>> connection to Comcast. I need to setup the email for outbound.
>>
>> Has anybody done this.
>> Or is this possible
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Carlo.
>>
>> ___
>> 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 confirm an application user's password

[James Buchanan]

If it's an end user, you could use the Cisco TSP and see if you see any
controlled phones from it.

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 9:42 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> I've got an application user that I need to figure out what the password
> is.
>
> I've tried logging in to the admin page and user page, but I suspect this
> won't work since it really only has CTI app role assignments.
>
> I don't want to change the role in any way.
>
> What options do I have to test authentication?
>
>
>
> ---
> 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] Cisco 8865 with UCCE 11.6 - No Whisper or Silent Monitor support

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

Does anyone have any insight into why UCCE 11.6 does not support using the
8845/8865 for Whisper or Silent Monitor even though the other 88XX models
are supported?

Thanks,

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

[cisco-voip] CUCM 11.5(1)SU3

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

So, this is out. I noticed that there is a requirement for an encryption
license when using mixed mode. Anyone have any data on that?

Thanks,

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

[cisco-voip] License File

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

I just had a license file reissued in five minutes. If you need a license,
right now might be just the right moment.

Thanks,

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

Re: [cisco-voip] can make conference call when i use IP communicator (same settings as 7942), but the conference call is not working when i use 7942 phone

[James Buchanan]

I had this very issue about 6 or 7 years ago, and had to upgrade firmware.
The bug was triggered by having G722 disabled on the phone, but having the
phone's built-in-bridge enabled for recording.

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:19 AM, naresh rathore  wrote:

> it started working for one spoke site but other spoke sites are still not
> working.
>
>
>
> will check tomorrow.
>
>
>
> --
> *From:* cisco-voip  on behalf of
> naresh rathore 
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 4, 2017 6:10 AM
> *To:* Ryan Huff
> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] can make conference call when i use IP
> communicator (same settings as 7942), but the conference call is not
> working when i use 7942 phone
>
>
> Upgraded the phone firmware and it started working
>
>
> --
> *From:* cisco-voip  on behalf of
> naresh rathore 
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 4, 2017 5:51 AM
> *To:* Ryan Huff
> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] can make conference call when i use IP
> communicator (same settings as 7942), but the conference call is not
> working when i use 7942 phone
>
>
> both IP communicator and 7942 access MRGL via same device pool. Also, it
> remote site and using the CUBE at HQ site.  both IP Communicator and 7942
> phone use G729 to make external calls and use CUBE MRGL having hardware
> Conference as first preference and Hardware Transcoding  as second
> preference.
>
>
>
> remote site: region is LID
>
> HQ: region is HQ
>
> its set to use 8Kbps
>
>
> Device Pool on Hardware Conf use HQ Region
>
>
> Device pool on Hardware Transcoder use Moh region (G711 with every other
> region)
>
>
>
> The thing is I used the Same device pool on IP Communicator but conference
> call on IP communicator is working fine. may be i am connected to HQ via
> vpn and the CUBE is also in HQ. but device pool is same as remote /spoke
> site.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
> Naresh Rathore
>
>
> --
> *From:* Ryan Huff 
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 4, 2017 5:14 AM
> *To:* naresh rathore
> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] can make conference call when i use IP
> communicator (same settings as 7942), but the conference call is not
> working when i use 7942 phone
>
> Couple of questions ...
>
> Do both devices have access to the same MRGL/MRG in CUCM?
>
> Does the 7942's audio codec region match the region of where the
> disconnected party comes from (ex. PSTN gateway) or does it need transcoded?
>
> -Ryan
>
>
> On May 3, 2017, at 8:04 PM, naresh rathore  wrote:
>
> hi,
>
>
>
> I am facing this  issue in which, when i use the 7942 phone, the
> conference call fails. it disconnect one of the party and keep it as point
> to point call. but when i use same settings on ip communicator (connected
> via vpn), the conference call works. 7942 firmware version
> SCCP42.9-3-1SR3-1S
>
>
>
> CUCM Version: 9.1.2.11900-12
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Naresh Rathore
>
> ___
> 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 11.5 license question

[James Buchanan]

Can you send us a screenshot showing the licenses from License Usage in ELM?

On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman <
ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com> wrote:

> Hi Gents,
>
>
>
> I have extra available units in CUWL standard license, and despite of that
> once I add any VM to a user the PLM give me a shortage in the basic
> messaging license, as per the documents CUWL standard license includes VM
> feature so why VM is not consuming from the CUWL standard license and
> showed separately as basic messaging with shortage counts??
>
>
>
> Any clues?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
>
> Senior Network 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] Migrating IP space

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

This is expected behavior if I read this correctly:
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/install/9_0_1/ipchange/CUCM_BK_C936116C_00_changing-ipaddress-hostname-cucm-90.html#wp69916%0A
.

Thanks,

James

On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Ben Amick  wrote:

> V9.1.2, yeah, just IP change, along with DNS and NTP change as well
> because we were migrating entire IP scopes, but no hostname or cluster
> changes, no.
>
>
>
> *Ben Amick*
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> *From:* Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 30, 2017 7:04 AM
> *To:* Gary Bates_Command Solutions 
> *Cc:* Ben Amick ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Migrating IP space
>
>
>
> Ben,
>
>
>
> The "Prepare Cluster for Rollback to Pre 8.0" parameter in part, is used
> to empty out the ITL and CTL files on each phone (the process to do that
> involves more than just setting that parameter though).
>
>
>
> As I recall, you enable the parameter, bounce TVS on each server to clear
> out all entries in the ITL/CTL files of each phone in TFTP, then bounce
> TFTP on all nodes to refresh the cache list; lastly, reboot all phones to
> trigger an ITL/CTL download from TFTP. You would check a the phones and
> ITL/CTL should be empty.
>
>
>
> This allows the phone to "blindly" trust new ITL/CTL connections without
> verification. This is what you typically did when moving SBD phones between
> clusters when the certs were different.
>
>
>
> Now why an IP change ONLY caused that, I'm not sure specifically without
> seeming the files per-change compared to post-change.  Other than to say
> given the way ITL/CTL works; it suggests something changed with how the
> ITL/CTL files on TFTP were signed and when the phones downloaded them after
> the change, they couldn't verify ("trust") them with what they already had.
>
>
> All you changed was the IP address of CUCM correct, nothing else? What
> version of CUCM?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Ryan
>
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 30, 2017, at 6:20 AM, Gary Bates_Command Solutions <
> gba...@commandsolutions.com.au> wrote:
>
> Very odd bug fix
>
> I not encountered this before,
>
>
>
> I thout the idea of named hostnames for the server wod alleviate the need
> for any IP address dependency
>
>
>
> Did it resolve the phone connection bug ?
>
>
>
> Gary
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On 30 Apr 2017, at 3:19 pm, Ben Amick  wrote:
>
> So I was performing an IP migration of systems tonight, and ran into an
> issue where the ITL files on every system refused to connect to the new
> IPs, despite the fact that the ITLs were based on the hostname of the
> systems. I was instructed by TAC afterwards while trying to fix it that the
> proper method, regardless of version change or not, if changing any
> attributes of the CM, is to enable the enterprise parameter of something
> along the lines of “Prepare for rollback for pre 8.0 migration”
>
>
>
> Anyone else familiar with this procedure? I find that to be a strange name
> for something that needs to be turned on for so many different pieces of
> work.
>
>
>
> *Ben Amick*
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. 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
> 
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is 

Re: [cisco-voip] Cluster Migration IM and Presence

[James Buchanan]

Do you have users set with the correct Home Cluster in UCM? Also, did you
create peer links in IM between the two sides?

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Matthew Loraditch <
mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:

> So I was apparently overthinking this, setup ILS, setup Jabber Inter
> cluster, but can’t IM back and forth.. any ideas what logs I need to look
> at?
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R, CCDA
> Network Engineer
> Direct Voice: 443.541.1518 <(443)%20541-1518>
>
> Facebook  | Twitter
>  | LinkedIn
>  |
> G+ 
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
> Of *Matthew Loraditch
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 30, 2017 9:12 AM
> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Cluster Migration IM and Presence
>
>
>
> We are working on migrating a Customer from one set of CUCM/IM to a new
> one to facilitate a dialplan cleanup and expansion.
>
>
>
> Both clusters are LDAP/ADFS-SSO integrated, all users are on the same AD
> domain with the same UPN (@customer.com). MRA is not in the picture.
>
>
>
> Directory URI is set to Email Address. IM Address Scheme is the same as
> email as well.
>
>
>
> We’ve never done something like this before, is there a way to make this
> work w/o having folks have different IM schemes between the clusters?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R, CCDA
> Network Engineer
> Direct Voice: 443.541.1518 <(443)%20541-1518>
>
> Facebook  | Twitter
>  | LinkedIn
>  |
> G+ 
>
>
>
> ___
> 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 MRA question

[James Buchanan]

Also, regarding your DNS SRV, just pick a cluster to return in the query
and ILS takes it from there.

Check out the DNS section in this doc:
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/unified-communications/expressway-series/products-installation-and-configuration-guides-list.html

Thanks,

James

On 12 Mar 2017 16:56, "Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman" <ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com>
wrote:

> Also if the Expressway supports working with multiple CUCM/IMP clusters,
> how can it determine to which cluster it will direct the user client
> registration request ?
>
>
>
> Also as mentioned there is single DNS and single domain for the whole 4
> clusters, so how the SRV records will be added for service discovery
> specially from inside the company to direct each user to its correct
> cluster?
>
>
>
> For example, this is one of the SRV records that should be added to the
> internal DNS and answers the queries with CUCM IP address: (
> _cisco-uds._tcp.*domain*.com), so how such record will work properly to
> direct each user request to its own cluster CUCM if all 4 clusters are
> having the same DNS system and same domain ?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
>
> Senior Network Engineer
>
>
>
> Hi James,
>
>
>
> Yes currently all the 4 clusters' users can talk to each others via
> inter-cluster trunks over WAN links.
>
>
>
> Kindly if you have any documents explaining such setup please share it
> with me.
>
>
>
> Appreciated.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> BR
>
> Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
>
> Senior Network Engineer
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
> On Mar 12, 2017, at 5:51 PM, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com<
> mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> It is indeed possible. You use one cluster as a sort of "hub" cluster.
> Then, just make sure the users in each cluster have the Home Cluster
> parameter checked, but make sure it is only checked in one cluster. Also,
> you have to make sure you are using ILS and have peer links in IM between
> all the clusters. If all the Jabber users can talk to each other today in
> all the various clusters, then you're already grand for using Expressway in
> that scenario.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> James
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman <
> ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com<mailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Gents,
>
>
>
> If we have 4 standalone clusters each of them has its own CUCM and IM
> servers (version 11.5), I’d like to know if it’s possible to have only 1
> Expressway C and E system to serve all the 4 cluster with MRA service ?
>
>
>
> Taking into consideration that all the 4 clusters are using the same DNS
> system and same domain name (company.com<http://company.com>).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
>
> Senior Network Engineer
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
>
> cisco-voip mailing list
>
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
>
> cisco-voip mailing list
>
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Expressway MRA question

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

It is indeed possible. You use one cluster as a sort of "hub" cluster.
Then, just make sure the users in each cluster have the Home Cluster
parameter checked, but make sure it is only checked in one cluster. Also,
you have to make sure you are using ILS and have peer links in IM between
all the clusters. If all the Jabber users can talk to each other today in
all the various clusters, then you're already grand for using Expressway in
that scenario.

Thanks,

James

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman <
ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com> wrote:

> Hi Gents,
>
>
>
> If we have 4 standalone clusters each of them has its own CUCM and IM
> servers (version 11.5), I’d like to know if it’s possible to have only 1
> Expressway C and E system to serve all the 4 cluster with MRA service ?
>
>
>
> Taking into consideration that all the 4 clusters are using the same DNS
> system and same domain name (company.com).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards
>
>
>
> Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
>
> Senior Network 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] CAD vs Finesse Differences

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

One note I'll make is this:

When an agent opens Finesse, by default they are accessing a Live Data feed
of their entire team. This will show the usual info of Logged In, Ready,
etc. That sounds nice, but what if your Team is large?

In one migration, we had a remote site with a team of 50 members. Also,
this site had a 6mbit WAN link back to where the servers were located. Now,
there were improvements to be made in both of these areas. However, with
CAD and CSD, there had never been any issues with bandwidth.

We ran the bandwidth calculator, and according to the calculator, we were
supposed to use about 8.8kbps per agent, making a total of 440kbps for all
agents, plus a few supervisors. The bandwidth consumption on day 1 was
about 5mbps (on a 6mbps link). This wreaked havoc on the rest of the
customer's operations (CRM, email, etc).

The long and short of it is this: Cisco did not take into account the Live
Data feeds when creating the bandwidth calculator. We ended up with bug ID
CSCuz74851 that tracks the defect.

Anyway, I know the 50-agent-in-a-team situation is abnormal, but I do think
you need to be aware of it. To workaround the issue, we moved the Agent
Team Summary report to its own tab, and when agents felt they needed to see
it, they could click on it. Otherwise, when not on the front screen, it
wouldn't continue to pull information, thereby conserving bandwidth.

I know this is tangential to the original post, but hope it was helpful.

James

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I was about to blast that document for being really old, but then I
> clicked it, and I now see that it was updated last month.  That's
> encouraging.  At least Spark hasn't stolen the UCCX documentation team away
> from us.
>
> The document is still missing a few key things though.
>
> As one example, CAD use to show the bread crumb trail for the call, so if
> you wanted to know which number they dialed, queue they arrived to you
> from, and if they spoke to any other agents, or were in any other CSQs,
> that was all in CAD by default.  Finesse doesn't have this.  So, you need
> to fake it with Enterprise Data Fields, and it's still not as good, plus
> you have to have some complex scripting using session variables, etc.  It's
> not really practical to expect us Engineers to just boiler plate that in to
> every Finesse greenfield.
>
> Then, there's probably other things you need to consider too, which are
> not exactly a comparison of clients, but rather a list of items which need
> to be addressed on Finesse.  For example, if you're a Supervisor and a
> Reporting person, your Finesse Live Data gadgets will now show every single
> Agent and CSQ, instead of just those for which you supervise.  You'll need
> to follow this reference
> 
> to have that corrected.
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Pavan K  wrote:
>
>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/customer-co
>> llaboration/finesse/white-paper-c11-730883.html
>>
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2016 8:47 AM, "JASON BURWELL" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Is there a summary or matrix that shows the feature differences between
>>> CAD and Finesse that would be on UCCX 10.6x? I have seen threads mentioning
>>> some feature deficiencies with earlier versions of Finesse but would like
>>> to know the overall differences on current versions.  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
>
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Are there any gotchas to watch out for switching to FQDN server names from IP address server names?

[James Buchanan]

If the endpoint is 8000 miles away from you and located in a nuclear power
plant, that TFTP interruption wasn't so trivial.

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Ben Amick <bam...@humanarc.com> wrote:

> An endpoint in the middle of an upgrade has already entirely downloaded
> the firmware into memory, and would not be affected. If it is mid-download
> then it would have no affect other than breaking the operation and perhaps
> requiring a manual restart if it is coming off a factory reset
>
>
>
> *Ben Amick*
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
> Of *Anthony Holloway
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 01, 2016 5:08 PM
> *To:* Nick Barnett <nicksbarn...@gmail.com>
> *Cc:* Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Are there any gotchas to watch out for
> switching to FQDN server names from IP address server names?
>
>
>
> Is TFTP really that trivial?  What would happen to an endpoint, which is
> in the middle of a firmware upgrade, when you deactivate TFTP?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Nick Barnett <nicksbarn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I figured that a reboot would work, but TAC told me it wouldn't... and
> rather than experimenting, I just did what they said to do :)   Besides,
> deactivating TFTP is trivial and in a properly laid out deployment should
> have 0 impact.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 8:28 AM, NateCCIE <natec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> A reboot does work. What the deal is the new https version of tftp (port
> 6972) does not restart with the service restart.  So it continues to use
> the old cert. But it does stop and start with a service deactivation and
> reactivation.  Before cucm 11 the tftp over http was only plain text (port
> 6970)
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Nov 30, 2016, at 1:12 AM, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> If I remember right, it actually has to be deactivated under Service
> Management. It's not just restarting the service.
>
> Thanks,
>
> James
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Derek Andrew <derek.and...@usask.ca>
> wrote:
>
> Would a simple reboot accomplish the same as deactivating and activating?
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Nick Barnett <nicksbarn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I just thought I would share what happened with this, even though it is
> super old. Changing the node names to FQDN was mostly painless. The one
> thing that bit me was bug CSCuy13916. After changing the names of the
> nodes, the TFTP service needs to be DEACTIVATED and then re-activated in
> order to fully update the certificates.  Before taking those steps, I kept
> getting certificate errors from CuciLync, but afterwards, everything worked
> as designed.
>
>
>
> Other than that, any CTI route points (and any other device as well) that
> exist will fall to another node in the CMG. Not a big deal, just something
> to be aware of.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Nick Barnett <nicksbarn...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> We are on 10.0 and this cluster has been upgraded over the years from 8.0
> to 8.6 to 10.0.  I know it used to be common practice to rip the host name
> out of a new node and put in the IP address. That's how we are set up...
> but now that I need to do some work with certs so that jabber and cucilync
> work properly, it's time to fix this.
>
>
>
> Is there anything I should watch out for? Anything that may bite me in
> rare cases? We have CER, CVP, CUC, UCCE and a rarely used IMP.
>
>
>
> I checked that each node has DNS enabled by looking at "show network eth0"
> on each sub. I also then looked up each FQDN from each node and they all
> resolve properly. As far as I know, that's about it.
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
>
> nick
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Copyright 2016 Derek Andrew (excluding quotations)
>
> +1 306 966 4808 <(306)%20966-4808>
>
> Communication and Network Services
>
> Information and Communications Technology
>
> Infrastructure Services
>
> *University of Saskatchewan *Peterson 120; 54 Innovation Boulevard
> Saskatoon,Saskatchewan,Canada. S7N 2V3
> Timezone GMT-6
>
> Typed but not read.
>
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> <http://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoQd6Qm7HKcThKOrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQs

Re: [cisco-voip] Does CCX enforce licensing?

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

UCCX enforces agent licenses by concurrently logged in agents. So, if you
have ten licenses and ten agents or supervisors are logged in, the eleventh
login will be rejected.

Thanks,

James

On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Ben Amick  wrote:

> I was curious about this, I know QM enforces licensing by not letting you
> toggle in users for licensing, and I know CUCM and Unity enforce licensing
> though PLM, but does UCCX enforce licensing? We’re coming up quick on our
> license cap right now and I’m debating if I should be scrambling to get
> licensing or just persist in current state while we’re evaluating upgrade
> costs.
>
>
>
> *Ben Amick*
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. 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] testing voip list activity

[James Buchanan]

Ever since Cisco released that fix that corrected every outstanding bug and
added every feature request, we'd had little to talk about.

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> hmmm no messages for three days, gotta get my fix.
>
>
> ---
> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco ATA 186

[James Buchanan]

According to the Device Defaults in CUCM, what is the default firmware
version for the ATA 186?

On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Asim Mekki Basheer 
wrote:

>
> Yes its ATA 186
>
> --
> *From:* Lisa Notarianni 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 5, 2016 6:15 AM
> *To:* Asim Mekki Basheer; Ashwani Ranpise; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* RE: [cisco-voip] Cisco ATA 186
>
>
> I have had this issue but the network configuration did not allow it to
> register or the device type is different than what you are actually trying
> to configure.  It is a ATA 186 correct?
>
>
>
> [image: Lisa Notarianni White Logo Business Card]
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
> Of *Asim Mekki Basheer
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 05, 2016 9:13 AM
> *To:* Ashwani Ranpise ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco ATA 186
>
>
>
>
>
> please see the attached still showed rejected even after assigned The DN
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> ASIM
> --
>
> *From:* Ashwani Ranpise 
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 5, 2016 5:55 AM
> *To:* Asim Mekki Basheer
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco ATA 186
>
>
>
> Asim,
>
> I dont see any DN has been assigned.  Assign the DN to your ATA-186 device
> and it will work.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ashwani
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Asim Mekki Basheer 
> wrote:
>
> Hello Everyone
>
>
>
> we have CCM 7.5 ,recently we faced issue with fax the ATA showed rejected
> in the call manager we make factory reset the same  issue
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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 ATA 186

[James Buchanan]

Hello,


Browse to the IP address of the ATA and send the firmware version. I
remember having to upgrade beyond the 1.03 firmware version years ago in
order to get these to work again.

Thanks,

James

On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Asim Mekki Basheer 
wrote:

> Hello Everyone
>
>
> we have CCM 7.5 ,recently we faced issue with fax the ATA showed rejected
> in the call manager we make factory reset the same  issue
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Serious 11.5 installation defect

[James Buchanan]

Let's all make a pact to set all our passwords as cisco/cisco. Who's game?

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Scott Voll  wrote:

> Sounds like one we had with Cisco Security Manager.  it would send a
> password under 15 characters correct because it encrypted the whole
> password.  but after 15 characters it would encrypt the 15 characters and
> add padding to the addition characters after the encryption. rather than
> sending the password with padding than encrypting it.
>
> Reminder that if it's Cisco to make sure your password is less than 16
> characters ;-)
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 10:43 PM, Daniel Ohnesorge via cisco-voip <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
>> In this case, the customer has a strict password policy and the password
>> was generated via an internal web app. Normally I would also not use one
>> that long!
>>
>>
>> On 2016-08-22 13:57, Anthony Holloway wrote:
>>
>> Wow, good to know, but I cannot say that I have ever seen a password that
>>> long on a server before.  That's a first for me.  I tend to still use 8
>>> character length.  Old habit, I'm sure.
>>>
>>> Are you consistently deploy 16+ character passwords now a days?
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Daniel Ohnesorge via cisco-voip <
>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi All,

 Just wanted to make you all aware of a serious installation defect with
 11.5 that the Cisco DE's are currently investigating and will soon be
 raising a new defect against.

 Basically, the CUCM Publisher installation goes ahead fine but once you
 try to install any subscriber (including the CUPS DB PUB), the installation
 will fail after all Network and Connectivity checks passed. It has taken
 TAC, BU and DE's 2 weeks to figure out what was going wrong, it turns out
 that the password used for the Application User is too long (even though it
 is withing documentation guidelines). The password I used was 1 Uppercase,
 14 lowercase, 1 number and 1 special character (underscore). DE's have been
 able to replicate the issue in the lab using the same complexity. When
 using a password such as ipcbu123 the installation is successful. This
 affects CUCM, CUPS and CUC.

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

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

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.6 with 7911 - Transfer Button disabled

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

Do you see the Transfer button at all but it just won't work?

Thanks,

James

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 1:43 AM, Tim Smith  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> What is your max calls set to on the DN ?
> Perhaps it is 1 and there is not another line available?
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Tim Smith
> Technical Consultant | Enject Technology Solutions
> e: tim.sm...@enject.com.au | m: +61 408 801 844
>
> On 20/07/2016, 11:09, "cisco-voip on behalf of Isamar Maia" <
> cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net on behalf of isa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> I have a 7911 phone, in a CUCM 8.6 environment, and its Transfer
> button is disabled.
>
> I am trying to figure out to fix that out and any tip will be welcomed.
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
> --
> Isamar Maia
> Cel. VIVO SSA:  (55) 71-99146-8575
> Cel. TIM   SSA:  (55) 71-99289-5128
> Cel. OI SSA: (55) 71-99940-2012
> Fixo:  (55) 71-4062-8688
> Skype ID: isamar.maia
> ___
> 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] Expressway Design for new startup

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

I don't believe that's the case. According to Cisco, you register the
phones directly to Spark. Check out
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/unified-communications/hosted-collaboration-solution-hcs/datasheet-c78-736823.html#_Toc444123188
.

This could eliminate the need for a UCM at all as well as voice gateways if
I understand it correctly.

Thanks,

James

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Ki Wi <kiwi.vo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi James,
> It definitely make more sense. However, if this is to go to spark, I will
> need similar equipment upfront as well.
>
> First create a UCM cluster.
> Establish hybrid spark connectivity (this requires additional expressway C
> instance for host connector stuff on top of expressway C pair)
>
> Since I have 3 locations with voice gateways, it make sense to have 3
> expressway (C) at least? If not, I can imagine that when I'm in US
> calling someone US, the spark will connect to the UCM cluster located in
> SG via that only expressway located in SG. The voice quality will be very
> bad due to latency. The PSTN option directly via spark is very limited
> currently.
>
> The setup is more or less the same eventually. Most likely we might be
> able to save on CUWL license cost if those roaming users doesn't need a
> phone profile in CUCM?
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:16 PM, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I wonder if a cloud-based solution such as Spark wouldn't make more sense
>> than implementing an on-premise system.
>>
>> James
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:14 AM, Ki Wi <kiwi.vo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Group,
>>> I have this customer requirement where they have 3 locations (Singapore,
>>> US and UK) . Majority of their users will be on the move (around the
>>> world). Users have to connect to the phone system via Internet.
>>>
>>> The intention is to have the UCM cluster in Singapore and have the
>>> expressway C/E pair in all the 3 locations mentioned. With the help of
>>> GeoDNS solution, the jabber shall be able to look for the nearest
>>> expressway to connect to. Optimize resource assignment (ie.
>>> CFB/xcoder) nearest to them shall be taken care of by configuring device
>>> mobility related profiles.
>>>
>>> Will this work? Since they have small amount of users, having multiple
>>> clusters might not make sense and the users will be roaming across cluster
>>> often + I don't see any benefits by doing so?
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Ki Wi
>>>
>>> ___
>>> cisco-voip mailing list
>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ki Wi
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Expressway Design for new startup

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

I wonder if a cloud-based solution such as Spark wouldn't make more sense
than implementing an on-premise system.

James

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:14 AM, Ki Wi  wrote:

> Hi Group,
> I have this customer requirement where they have 3 locations (Singapore,
> US and UK) . Majority of their users will be on the move (around the
> world). Users have to connect to the phone system via Internet.
>
> The intention is to have the UCM cluster in Singapore and have the
> expressway C/E pair in all the 3 locations mentioned. With the help of
> GeoDNS solution, the jabber shall be able to look for the nearest
> expressway to connect to. Optimize resource assignment (ie.
> CFB/xcoder) nearest to them shall be taken care of by configuring device
> mobility related profiles.
>
> Will this work? Since they have small amount of users, having multiple
> clusters might not make sense and the users will be roaming across cluster
> often + I don't see any benefits by doing so?
>
>
> --
> 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] CUIC Reports

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

It's not elegant, but you can use a Set Enterprise Data step with each menu
option and set a variable with a particular text value. Then, you could use
the Call Custom Variables report to report against these options.

Not pretty, but gets the job done.

Thanks,
James

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 6:04 PM,  wrote:

>
>
> I have a queue  that allows callers to press 1, 2 or 3 to direct them to
> other queues. Is there a way to track how many times 1, 2 or 3 is pressed.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Norm Nicholson*
>
> *Telecom Analyst*
>
> *City of Kitchener*
>
> *(519) 741-2200 x 7000 <%28519%29%20741-2200%20x%207000>*
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Constantly having db replication issues

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

Even though you are not using DNS, do you have DNS servers and a domain
name configured? If so, you should have forward and reverse entries
configured for all servers. When you look in Unified Reporting, do you see
anything about the rhosts under Database Status?

Thanks,

James

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Nick Barnett 
wrote:

> Thanks Ryan.
>
> We have 3 CCM and 1 TFTP node in each of our two data centers. The main
> data center is here, and that is where our DRS sftp server (and publisher)
> is located. Nothing is using DNS right now, all of the servers are entered
> into CUCM as IP addresses... this cluster has been around for years. It was
> upgraded from 7.BeforeMyTime to 8.6 to 10.0.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
>> Hi Nick.
>>
>> Let me ask you a few things;
>>
>> - How is the cluster laid out (how many nodes in the cluster and what
>> nodes are in which DC)?
>>
>> - Are you using DNS and if so, where is the DNS server located and do you
>> have redundant DNS in both DCs?
>>
>> - Where is your DRS server in relation to the cluster publisher (same DC
>> or no)?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>> On Apr 20, 2016, at 11:09 AM, Nick Barnett 
>> wrote:
>>
>> I'm wondering how many others have had as many issues with db
>> replication? It seems that any time we lose a connection to our 2nd data
>> center (even a 2 minute MPLS planned maintenance outage causes the issue),
>> our database synchronization has errors.  After a WAN blip, within an hour
>> or so, I get a message from RTMT about a subscriber being in "blocked"
>> state:
>>
>> %[AppID=Cisco Database Layer
>> Monitor][ClusterID=ProdVoiceCluster][NodeID=XXX1]: A change
>> notification client is busy (blocked). If the change notification client
>> continues to be blocked for 10 minutes, the system automatically clears the
>> block and change notification should resume successfully."
>>
>>
>> After that, if I run utils dbreplication status, it will have errors...
>> so then I run the "repair all" option and it fixes it. Then I'm good for a
>> few weeks until something else happens that starts the whole cycle over.
>>
>> Something else that happens after a WAN blip is that DRS begins to fail,
>> so we have to restart the master DRS and the subsequent DRS services on the
>> subs. Am I doing something wrong? Is this normal?
>>
>> I'm on CUCM 10.0.1.12900-2.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Nick
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Upgrade IM version 9.1.2 to Version 11.0.1.10000-6

[James Buchanan]

I agree. I did it just this way recently, and lost nothing. It MAY have
involved an extra 30-60 minutes to get contacts and settings re-done, but
that was minor compared to trying and retrying to upgrade it.

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Brian Meade  wrote:

> I would say it's not even worth upgrading IM unless it's already on
> 10.x.  So many changes there and the upgrade process doesn't always work.
> I would just build IM fresh on 11.0.1 and then import contacts from the
> 9.1.1 version.
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 5:14 AM, bertacco.alessan...@alice.it <
> bertacco.alessan...@alice.it> wrote:
>
>> Hi Guys, strange Issue during Cluster Upgrade from 9.1.2 to 11.x
>>
>> Customer Topology:
>>
>> One Publisher in version 9.1.2
>> One Im Server in version 9.1.1
>> One Unity Connection in version 9.1.2
>>
>> First: Upgrade of the Publisher CUCM to 11.0.1.2-2 complete
>> successfully
>>
>> Upgrade of the Im Serve complete without errors But, appliance
>> reboot int the 9.1.1 and inactive partitions was deleted. No trace of the
>> Upgraded version 11.0.1.1-6
>>
>> Any Idea?
>>
>> Thank you!
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Alessandro
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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 woes

[James Buchanan]

It's P1 TAC case time!

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Andy Carse  wrote:

> I thought I was home and dry with this upgrade, but it would seem that the
> gods have deserted me.
>
> I upgraded to 10.5.2.13900-12 after some issue with GBNP, everything
> seemed ok.
> This morning I've come in to find that the database on the publisher won't
> start.
> So I've tried
> 1. reboot of the cluster (its not gone live yet) no change.
> 2. Utils service start A Cisco DB
> 2. tried dbreplication stop on the subs, then the publisher.
>dbreplication dropddmindb on the subs
>dbreplication dropadmindb on the pub
> The pub comes back with "DropAdminDB cannot be executed on standalone or
> Cores cluster"
>
> I can't even web to ccmadmin on the pub and I forgot to carry out the
> "Golden Rule" of taking a backup soon after the upgrade.
> If I try to RTM that also fails..
>
> Is it time for a start from scratch moment?
>
>
>
> --
> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] Standalone CUIC in UCCX 11

[James Buchanan]

Yep, that did it. Right-click on Reports on the RIGHT side, and you get
"Export". The import worked beautifully and report ran flawlessly. Thanks!



On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Brian Meade <bmead...@vt.edu> wrote:

> Maybe I spoke too soon,  I thought the stock reports were in there but
> maybe not.  You should be able to export them from co-res CUIC and then
> import them to your standalone.
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:01 AM, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Hello again,
>>
>> How do the stock reports get into the standalone CUIC from the on-prem
>> CUIC? I have this integration done, but the reports are not there.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> James
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Brian Meade <bmead...@vt.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Yep, all of the stock reports should be there as well.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:58 AM, James Buchanan <
>>> james.buchan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks for the info. Can you run the UCCX stock reports from the
>>>> standalone CUIC also? That'd be great. Then, you could run SocialMiner and
>>>> all UCCX reports from the same interface.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Brian Meade <bmead...@vt.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> CUIC always pulls from UCCX.  Having a standalone CUIC allows you to
>>>>> make custom reports and run them directly on the same server.  Right now,
>>>>> you have to use a standalone CUIC to build custom reports and then import
>>>>> those to UCCX co-res CUIC to run them.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:42 AM, James Buchanan <
>>>>> james.buchan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What purpose does the standalone CUIC configuration serve in UCCX
>>>>>> 11.0? Does it send data to CUIC? Does it pull data from CUIC? Does it 
>>>>>> allow
>>>>>> you to use the standalone CUIC to run the same UCCX reports you run from
>>>>>> the on-prem CUIC? I have looked and looked to see why you would even
>>>>>> configure this integration, and have found nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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] Standalone CUIC in UCCX 11

[James Buchanan]

I was right-clicking on the left side, not on the right..I'll let you know
how it turns out!

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Brian Meade <bmead...@vt.edu> wrote:

> Maybe I spoke too soon,  I thought the stock reports were in there but
> maybe not.  You should be able to export them from co-res CUIC and then
> import them to your standalone.
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:01 AM, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Hello again,
>>
>> How do the stock reports get into the standalone CUIC from the on-prem
>> CUIC? I have this integration done, but the reports are not there.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> James
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Brian Meade <bmead...@vt.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Yep, all of the stock reports should be there as well.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:58 AM, James Buchanan <
>>> james.buchan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks for the info. Can you run the UCCX stock reports from the
>>>> standalone CUIC also? That'd be great. Then, you could run SocialMiner and
>>>> all UCCX reports from the same interface.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Brian Meade <bmead...@vt.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> CUIC always pulls from UCCX.  Having a standalone CUIC allows you to
>>>>> make custom reports and run them directly on the same server.  Right now,
>>>>> you have to use a standalone CUIC to build custom reports and then import
>>>>> those to UCCX co-res CUIC to run them.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:42 AM, James Buchanan <
>>>>> james.buchan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What purpose does the standalone CUIC configuration serve in UCCX
>>>>>> 11.0? Does it send data to CUIC? Does it pull data from CUIC? Does it 
>>>>>> allow
>>>>>> you to use the standalone CUIC to run the same UCCX reports you run from
>>>>>> the on-prem CUIC? I have looked and looked to see why you would even
>>>>>> configure this integration, and have found nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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] Standalone CUIC in UCCX 11

[James Buchanan]

Hello again,

How do the stock reports get into the standalone CUIC from the on-prem
CUIC? I have this integration done, but the reports are not there.

Thanks,

James

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Brian Meade <bmead...@vt.edu> wrote:

> Yep, all of the stock reports should be there as well.
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:58 AM, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the info. Can you run the UCCX stock reports from the
>> standalone CUIC also? That'd be great. Then, you could run SocialMiner and
>> all UCCX reports from the same interface.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Brian Meade <bmead...@vt.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> CUIC always pulls from UCCX.  Having a standalone CUIC allows you to
>>> make custom reports and run them directly on the same server.  Right now,
>>> you have to use a standalone CUIC to build custom reports and then import
>>> those to UCCX co-res CUIC to run them.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:42 AM, James Buchanan <
>>> james.buchan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> What purpose does the standalone CUIC configuration serve in UCCX 11.0?
>>>> Does it send data to CUIC? Does it pull data from CUIC? Does it allow you
>>>> to use the standalone CUIC to run the same UCCX reports you run from the
>>>> on-prem CUIC? I have looked and looked to see why you would even configure
>>>> this integration, and have found nothing.
>>>>
>>>> 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] Standalone CUIC in UCCX 11

[James Buchanan]

Thanks for the info. Can you run the UCCX stock reports from the standalone
CUIC also? That'd be great. Then, you could run SocialMiner and all UCCX
reports from the same interface.

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Brian Meade <bmead...@vt.edu> wrote:

> CUIC always pulls from UCCX.  Having a standalone CUIC allows you to make
> custom reports and run them directly on the same server.  Right now, you
> have to use a standalone CUIC to build custom reports and then import those
> to UCCX co-res CUIC to run them.
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:42 AM, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> What purpose does the standalone CUIC configuration serve in UCCX 11.0?
>> Does it send data to CUIC? Does it pull data from CUIC? Does it allow you
>> to use the standalone CUIC to run the same UCCX reports you run from the
>> on-prem CUIC? I have looked and looked to see why you would even configure
>> this integration, and have found nothing.
>>
>> 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

[cisco-voip] Standalone CUIC in UCCX 11

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

What purpose does the standalone CUIC configuration serve in UCCX 11.0?
Does it send data to CUIC? Does it pull data from CUIC? Does it allow you
to use the standalone CUIC to run the same UCCX reports you run from the
on-prem CUIC? I have looked and looked to see why you would even configure
this integration, and have found nothing.

Thanks,

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

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 9 prompts gibberish

[James Buchanan]

LOL--we like the convoluted solutions. You had to come out with something
workable! Thanks!

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm surprised no one has mentioned just using UCCX itself to record the
> audio.
>
> See this link for the bare minimum steps required to record a prompt in
> UCCX, no matter the audio codec.
>
> https://supportforums.cisco.com/comment/7224091#comment-7224091
>
> Also, and may I just state for the record that UCCX in G729 is more hassel
> than it's worth.  Just account for G711 in your BW or use transcoders.
>
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Brian Meade  wrote:
>
>> According to the admin guide, Cisco has a white paper on recording
>> prompts as G.729:
>>
>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/crs/express_10_5/config/guides/UCCX_BK_U9F91527_00_unified-ccx-administration-guide-release-10-5/UCCX_BK_U9F91527_00_unified-ccx-administration-guide-release_chapter_01001.html#UCCX_TK_R3A08A4D_00
>>
>> You just need to email to apps-supp...@cisco.com to obtain a copy.  It
>> might have some other ideas not mentioned here.
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:51 AM, abbas Wali  wrote:
>>
>>> have got that in window xp sound recorder. but again all this is giving
>>> back G711.
>>>
>>> I think the last resort is upload the file as MoH file and then dloading
>>> again to get G729 :((
>>> pain..
>>>
>>> On 16 February 2016 at 16:42, Andreas Sikkema  wrote:
>>>
 James,

 > No, just for G711. I don't have a solution for G729. Hopefully
 someone else
 > does.

 G.729 is patent encumbered, so no "free" (beer or otherwise) solutions
 there.

 Also, CCIT U-Law is G.711 u-law is PCM u-law is PCMU. There must be
 one of these in Audacity.

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

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Abbas Wali*
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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 9 prompts gibberish

[James Buchanan]

No, just for G711. I don't have a solution for G729. Hopefully someone else
does.

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:12 AM, abbas Wali <abba...@gmail.com> wrote:

> are we talking about converting them to G729?
> i took all the steps few times now and everytime its the same.
> even the file show it is been saved in 64kbps instead of 8.
>
> [image: Inline images 1]
>
> On 16 February 2016 at 16:03, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> You can do it in Audacity under Other Formats when you export the file.
>> However, I've never seen an option for G729.
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:17 AM, abbas Wali <abba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> ​yes seen them but again they save it in g711's. also in the new
>>> audacity there is no​ CCIT U-Law !!
>>>
>>> On 16 February 2016 at 15:12, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Even to g729?
>>>>
>>>> On 16 Feb 2016, at 10:11 AM, Haas, Neal <nh...@co.fresno.ca.us> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I use audacity all of the time to convert to a “Cisco” format.. here
>>>> are two links for you
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.netcraftsmen.com/uc-toolkit-using-audacity-to-create-and-edit-cisco-uccx-prompts/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://xyfon.com/tech-tips/saving-wav-files-for-cisco-unified-call-centre-express-prompts-uccx-using-audacity/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net
>>>> <cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>] *On Behalf Of *abbas Wali
>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:09 AM
>>>> *To:* James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com>
>>>> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 9 prompts gibberish
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> indeed that is the case.
>>>>
>>>> thanks alot.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> any free tool to record g729. Have tried Audacity but cant bring it as
>>>> low as 8kbps.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 16 February 2016 at 14:29, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> In the System settings, are you set to use G729 for your prompts or
>>>> G711? UCCX will not play one or the other. If you record G711 and upload to
>>>> a system set to play G729, that'll be the result.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> James
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 9:26 AM, abbas wali <abba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just need a quick help here.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Every prompt I record ( via UnityC or Audacity etc ) upload and can
>>>> only hear gibberish.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But when I load an already saved file in G729 – it plays okay.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have checked an my regions for  phone dpool and application trigger
>>>> are in the same region set to g711.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The only other thing is that I am calling from a softphone vpn’ed. (
>>>> but that shouldn’t make any difference )
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please help.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ___
>>>> cisco-voip mailing list
>>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> *Abbas Wali*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Abbas Wali*
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Abbas Wali*
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 9 prompts gibberish

[James Buchanan]

You can do it in Audacity under Other Formats when you export the file.
However, I've never seen an option for G729.

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:17 AM, abbas Wali <abba...@gmail.com> wrote:

> ​yes seen them but again they save it in g711's. also in the new audacity
> there is no​ CCIT U-Law !!
>
> On 16 February 2016 at 15:12, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Even to g729?
>>
>> On 16 Feb 2016, at 10:11 AM, Haas, Neal <nh...@co.fresno.ca.us> wrote:
>>
>> I use audacity all of the time to convert to a “Cisco” format.. here are
>> two links for you
>>
>>
>> http://www.netcraftsmen.com/uc-toolkit-using-audacity-to-create-and-edit-cisco-uccx-prompts/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://xyfon.com/tech-tips/saving-wav-files-for-cisco-unified-call-centre-express-prompts-uccx-using-audacity/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net
>> <cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>] *On Behalf Of *abbas Wali
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:09 AM
>> *To:* James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com>
>> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 9 prompts gibberish
>>
>>
>>
>> indeed that is the case.
>>
>> thanks alot.
>>
>>
>>
>> any free tool to record g729. Have tried Audacity but cant bring it as
>> low as 8kbps.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 16 February 2016 at 14:29, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> In the System settings, are you set to use G729 for your prompts or G711?
>> UCCX will not play one or the other. If you record G711 and upload to a
>> system set to play G729, that'll be the result.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> James
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 9:26 AM, abbas wali <abba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>>
>>
>> Just need a quick help here.
>>
>>
>>
>> Every prompt I record ( via UnityC or Audacity etc ) upload and can only
>> hear gibberish.
>>
>>
>>
>> But when I load an already saved file in G729 – it plays okay.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have checked an my regions for  phone dpool and application trigger are
>> in the same region set to g711.
>>
>>
>>
>> The only other thing is that I am calling from a softphone vpn’ed. ( but
>> that shouldn’t make any difference )
>>
>>
>>
>> Please help.
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *Abbas Wali*
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Abbas Wali*
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 9 prompts gibberish

[James Buchanan]

Even to g729?

> On 16 Feb 2016, at 10:11 AM, Haas, Neal <nh...@co.fresno.ca.us> wrote:
> 
> I use audacity all of the time to convert to a “Cisco” format.. here are two 
> links for you
> http://www.netcraftsmen.com/uc-toolkit-using-audacity-to-create-and-edit-cisco-uccx-prompts/
>  
> http://xyfon.com/tech-tips/saving-wav-files-for-cisco-unified-call-centre-express-prompts-uccx-using-audacity/
>  
>  
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
> abbas Wali
> Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 7:09 AM
> To: James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 9 prompts gibberish
>  
> indeed that is the case. 
> thanks alot.
>  
> any free tool to record g729. Have tried Audacity but cant bring it as low as 
> 8kbps. 
>  
> On 16 February 2016 at 14:29, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> In the System settings, are you set to use G729 for your prompts or G711? 
> UCCX will not play one or the other. If you record G711 and upload to a 
> system set to play G729, that'll be the result.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> James
>  
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 9:26 AM, abbas wali <abba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>  
> Just need a quick help here.
>  
> Every prompt I record ( via UnityC or Audacity etc ) upload and can only hear 
> gibberish.
>  
> But when I load an already saved file in G729 – it plays okay.
>  
> I have checked an my regions for  phone dpool and application trigger are in 
> the same region set to g711.
>  
> The only other thing is that I am calling from a softphone vpn’ed. ( but that 
> shouldn’t make any difference )
>  
> Please help.
> Thanks in advance.
>  
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> 
>  
> 
> 
>  
> --
> Abbas Wali
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 9 prompts gibberish

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

In the System settings, are you set to use G729 for your prompts or G711?
UCCX will not play one or the other. If you record G711 and upload to a
system set to play G729, that'll be the result.

Thanks,

James

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 9:26 AM, abbas wali  wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
>
>
> Just need a quick help here.
>
>
>
> Every prompt I record ( via UnityC or Audacity etc ) upload and can only
> hear gibberish.
>
>
>
> But when I load an already saved file in G729 – it plays okay.
>
>
>
> I have checked an my regions for  phone dpool and application trigger are
> in the same region set to g711.
>
>
>
> The only other thing is that I am calling from a softphone vpn’ed. ( but
> that shouldn’t make any difference )
>
>
>
> Please help.
>
> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] Issue IP Phone 8831 not register to CUCM 10.5

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

I have had an issue in which the 8831 had an old firmware and would not
register. I had to do a two-step upgrade to get it to work. You might check
the firmware the 8831 is running, see what CUCM is serving, and serve a
version in between by manually uploading it and setting the Phone Load
value.

Thanks,

James

On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 11:57 PM, Foryanto J. Wiguna <
foryanto.wig...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> I have an issue about ip phone 8831, that ip phone can not register to
> CUCM 10.5, but if i use my CIPC version 8, it registered to CUCM 10.5
>
> please advice...
>
> --
> Salam,
> -Foryanto J. Wiguna-
>
> ___
> 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] Recommendations Admin Phone

[James Buchanan]

Going real old school, but the 7931 was great for this.

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:33 AM, David Zhars  wrote:

> UCM 8.0 and Unity 8.0
>
> New Admin Asst, wants a phone that isn't too big, but would let her
> monitor ten extensions.  Just easily see who is on the phone and who isn't.
>
> Ideas?  Don't really like the sidecar options, they look clunky!
>
> Dave
>
> ___
> 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] ip communicator

[James Buchanan]

Close it, right-click on the icon to start it and run it as administrator.

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Mensah, Leonard <
leonard.men...@sourcemedia.com> wrote:

> All,
>
>
>
> I install IP Communicator on my desktop, and I am having some issues
> configuring.
>
> I click on preferences and select use specific  URL,  https://
>
> I click on the network tap but everything is gray out… I can make any
> change…I can’t select specific TFTP.
>
>
>
> Any thoughts?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
> Of *Ryan Huff
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 29, 2015 1:51 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Telepresence Training
>
>
>
> I've never made videos for the SX series and YT doesn't seem to have any
> great offerings either. The Cisco guides for the SX20 (
> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/collaboration-endpoints/telepresence-quick-set-series/products-user-guide-list.html)
> seem nice though, lots of pictures.
>
>
>
> Regarding TMS, I have a couple that I am editing/cleaning up that I did a
> few weeks ago (Scheduling and basic operations), I'll send them over to you
> once I am done (should be this weekend).
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> = Ryan =
>
>
>
> Email: ryanthomash...@outlook.com
>
> Spark: ryanthomash...@outlook.com
>
> Twitter: @ryanthomashuff 
>
> LinkedIn: ryanthomashuff 
>
> Web ryanthomashuff.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From:* Matthew Loraditch 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 29, 2015 1:25 PM
> *To:* Ryan Huff; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* RE: Telepresence Training
>
>
>
> SX Series with Touch 10. SX20s specifically. TMS also.
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R, CCDA
> Network Engineer
> Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
>
> Facebook  | Twitter
>  | LinkedIn
>  |
> G+ 
>
>
>
> *From:* Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 29, 2015 1:23 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch ;
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: Telepresence Training
>
>
>
> I see!
>
>
>
> What sort of training technology topics are you looking for (TMS
> Scheduling, SX/MX/EX .. etc)? I have a small cache of recent end-user
> videos I've done (DRM Free, not customer specific) for some video
> applications, might have something that will help you out.
>
>
>
>
>
> = Ryan =
>
>
>
>
>
> Email: ryanthomash...@outlook.com
>
> Spark: ryanthomash...@outlook.com
>
> Twitter: @ryanthomashuff 
>
> LinkedIn: ryanthomashuff 
>
> Web ryanthomashuff.com
>
>
> --
>
> *From:* Matthew Loraditch 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 29, 2015 1:13 PM
> *To:* Ryan Huff; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* RE: Telepresence Training
>
>
>
> Thanks I should have specified! end-user training is what we are looking
> for. But this would be useful for some of my team members so thanks for
> that!
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R, CCDA
> Network Engineer
> Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
>
> Facebook  | Twitter
>  | LinkedIn
>  |
> G+ 
>
>
>
> *From:* Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com ]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 29, 2015 1:07 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch ;
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: Telepresence Training
>
>
>
> Hi Matthew! I hope you are doing well!
>
>
>
> Here are some of my thoughts below. If you're talking about Cisco
> TelePresence in context of a generalized technology, you're really talking
> about quite a few different applications. My suggestion would be to start
> with the fundamentals book referenced below, if you're completely new to
> video. If you have a solid grasp on video, I would start with Cisco
> TelePresence Management (TMS) and work to understand that first, the
> next thing I would learn is TelePresenece Content Server (TCS) and then
> TelePresence Conductor, CMR (the A2Q process alone can be a mind-bending
> experience) ... etc. I would save VCS/Expressway until the end of
> the education journey.
>
>- Cisco dCloud's (http://dcloud.cisco.com) "Cisco Preferred
>Architecture for Video 10.6 v1" is a great content session to get some the
>products spun-up in 15 or so minutes. Admittedly, this works best if you
>have a couple of video endpoints (9971 .. etc) and a spare router so you
>can connect 

Re: [cisco-voip] Click to Call

[James Buchanan]

Are you using Jabber for click-to-call, or are you using either the TSP or
the Click-to-Call Widget?

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 1:06 PM, David Zhars  wrote:

> I am trying to get Click to Call working with OUtlook 2013 and it's not
> going so well.  UCM 8.
>
> Anyone use any of the other 3rd party ones instead?  Or is there some
> little tweak I need to use in OUtlook 2013 to make the Cisco one go?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Dave
>
> ___
> 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] External Federation with Microsoft

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

Has anyone successfully implemented external federation between Cisco IM
10.5 and microsoft.com (like, Microsoft itself)?

Thanks,

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

Re: [cisco-voip] ILBC

[James Buchanan]

I never said anything about your psychological condition since anyone in
Cisco voice must be a little off-kilter, but you are most welcome.

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com> wrote:

> Thanks for confirming that I wasn't going nuts.
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Oct 4, 2015, at 2:17 PM, James Buchanan <james.buchan...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> One of the new features of the 7942/62 was the addition of iLBC support.
> See
> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/collaboration-endpoints/unified-ip-phone-7962g/prod_qas0900aecd80699c20.html
> .
>
> On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com> wrote:
>
>> Having some issues with a 7941 refusing ILBC and preferring G711ULAW
>> (despite proper region/device pool config) and I think I know why, just
>> looking for a confirmation here really
>>
>> As I read it from;
>>
>>
>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/collaboration-endpoints/unified-ip-phone-7941g/product_data_sheet0900aecd802ff012.html
>>
>> the 7941 does not support the ILBC codec.
>>
>> The troubleshooting guide for the 7941,7942,7961,7962 at
>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cuipph/7962g_7961g_7961g-ge_7942g_7941g_7941g-ge/8_0/english/administration/guide/62adm80/62614241trb.html
>> has troubleshooting steps in the case that a phone is not negotiating ILBC.
>> I assume those troubleshooting steps are referring to the 7942 and 7962 and
>> not the 41/61.
>>
>> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] ILBC

[James Buchanan]

One of the new features of the 7942/62 was the addition of iLBC support.
See
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/collaboration-endpoints/unified-ip-phone-7962g/prod_qas0900aecd80699c20.html
.

On Sun, Oct 4, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Ryan Huff  wrote:

> Having some issues with a 7941 refusing ILBC and preferring G711ULAW
> (despite proper region/device pool config) and I think I know why, just
> looking for a confirmation here really
>
> As I read it from;
>
>
> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/collaboration-endpoints/unified-ip-phone-7941g/product_data_sheet0900aecd802ff012.html
>
> the 7941 does not support the ILBC codec.
>
> The troubleshooting guide for the 7941,7942,7961,7962 at
> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cuipph/7962g_7961g_7961g-ge_7942g_7941g_7941g-ge/8_0/english/administration/guide/62adm80/62614241trb.html
> has troubleshooting steps in the case that a phone is not negotiating ILBC.
> I assume those troubleshooting steps are referring to the 7942 and 7962 and
> not the 41/61.
>
> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] Unity Won't Take Message

[James Buchanan]

Look at the Standard (or Alternate if enabled) greeting and look at the
after greeting setting.

Thanks,

James

On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 9:57 AM, David Zhars dzh...@gmail.com wrote:

 Unity 8.0

 Call the extension, get the user's greeting, there is a short pause, maybe
 one second.  User greeting plays again, get short pause, continue ad
 nauseum.

 Only extension doing this.  Any ideas?

 Dave

 ___
 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 is better than MediaSense for recording calls?

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

Starting with your last statement, are you saying you cannot use a
SPAN-less recording product that requires the audio stream to go to the
recording server while being recorded?

ZOOM CallRec can provide the security you need. However, to keep the audio
from having to go to that subnet, you could put smaller recording servers
in each network segment then have the recorded files synchronized to a
central repository.

Other products may provide similar functionality. This is just to get the
ball rolling.

Thanks,

James

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Derek Andrew derek.and...@usask.ca wrote:

 We are running CUCM 10.5 and have MediaSense to record calls in one call
 centre. We would like to record more groups but have a small problem.
 Anyone that can view/hear the recordings, can see all of them. There is no
 way to isolate one group from another.

 Rather than purchase separate MediaSense servers for each group, we were
 wondering if there were any competitive products which would solve our
 problem.

 We cannot use a server that requires us to route all our traffic through
 the subnet of the recording server. MediaSense does not require this but
 some products I had seen do.

 derek.and...@usask.ca

 --
 Copyright 2015 Derek Andrew (excluding quotations)

 +1 306 966 4808
 University of Saskatchewan
 Peterson 120; 54 Innovation Boulevard
 Saskatoon,Saskatchewan,Canada. S7N 2V3
 Timezone GMT-6

 Typed but not read.



 ___
 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 question

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

The certificate issue with the mobile app is not yet in the release notes.
If they will reference TAC case 635173083 when you open your TAC case, they
can see if you need the hotfix or not.

Thanks,

James

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Tim Smith tim.sm...@enject.com.au wrote:

  Just make sure to check release notes before as well!


 http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/collaboration/CWMS/2_5/Release_Notes/Release_Notes.html#reference_23E4C721B42E4B909ABE8ECA786F88BE



 Cheers,



 Tim.



 *From:* James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Friday, 12 June 2015 12:08 AM
 *To:* Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 *Cc:* Tim Smith; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question



 Open a TAC case. It is post MR5.


 On 11 Jun 2015, at 7:46 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com
 wrote:

  Hi James,



 So I can go directly to MR5 with the hotfix you mentioned, but how I can
 get this hotfix if it is not published on Cisco.com ?







 Best Regards



 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman

 Senior Network Engineer - KSA



 *From:* James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com
 james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:16 PM
 *To:* Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 *Cc:* Tim Smith; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question



 Hello,

 It would be cumulative. However, I went from MR2 to MR5, so I'm not sure
 about MR4. I would just get TAC to publish the hotfix for you with special
 file access.

 Thanks,

 James



 On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman 
 ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:

  Hi James,



 One question here, I assume that everything mentioned to be fixed in MR4
 and earlier should be included in MR5, am I right ? isn’t it a cumulative
 updates each one has all previous fixes plus new fixes ?.



 Also based on your feedback is it better to install the MR4 instead of the
 MR5 ?







 Best Regards



 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman

 Senior Network Engineer - KSA



 *From:* James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Thursday, June 11, 2015 3:53 PM
 *To:* Tim Smith
 *Cc:* Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question



 Hello,



 MR5 will not fix the URL question. However, applied without the hot fix I
 mentioned it will break the mobile app because of a bug regarding
 certificates and how they are issued.



 Thanks,

 James


 On 11 Jun 2015, at 4:29 AM, Tim Smith tim.sm...@enject.com.au wrote:

  Hi Ahmed,



 I think the difference is the PT tools invites use plain text only

 I guess it’s because you can’t embed the hyperlink in there..



 I have not tried the short URL feature yet, but I believe it will replace
 that long URL yes.

 I don’t think it will replace it with “Join the meeting” I think it will
 just replace it with a shortened URL

 So it should be shorter and neater but not exactly like the web invites.



 Looks like we need to be careful of the issue James raised though.



 Cheers,



 Tim



 *From:* Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman [mailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com
 ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com]
 *Sent:* Thursday, 11 June 2015 7:01 PM
 *To:* James Buchanan; Tim Smith
 *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 *Subject:* RE: [cisco-voip] WebEx question



 Hi James/Tim,



 Just to make sure we are on the same page, I have the major release of the
 CWMS 2.5 without any MR releases installed.

 Here is what I meant by my question,

 *This is a snapshot of the invitation received for a meeting initiated
 from web (with short hyperlink):*



 image001.jpg

 *And here a snapshot of the invitation received for a meeting initiated
 from outlook client (with long URL):*



 image002.jpg



 So coming to your suggestions, will the MR5 fix this issue ? and will make
 the outlook invitation looks neat like the web invitation ? also, James did
 the MR5 caused issues with mobile client access with you ?



 Many thanks for your kind support.









 Best Regards



 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman

 Senior Network Engineer - KSA

 -Original Message-
 From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com
 james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 6:10 AM
 To: Tim Smith
 Cc: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question



 If you go to MR5 you will break the mobile app. Just found out from the BU
 the other day. There is a hot fix they can publish for you.







  On 10 Jun 2015, at 8:55 PM, Tim Smith tim.sm...@enject.com.au wrote:

 

  Hi Ahmed,

 

  Check out 2.5 MR4 if you are not on it..

 

  Short URL feature is there, you can get rid of all the long URL's

 

  Also if you are security conscious, MR5 has split certificates too.

 

  You should upgrade to MR5 anyway if you aren't already, there are a
 couple of doozies fixed along the way :)

 

  Cheers,

 

  Tim

 

  -Original Message-

  From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net
 cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net

Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

TAC actually headed me off at the pass. I had updated to MR5 but had some
issues with the MDC deployment. While fixing those issues, they told me
about this mobile app issue and told me to go to the hotfix.

Thanks,

James

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman 
ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:

 So as a conclusion I can go with MR5 and if I faced an issue with the
 mobile client I can open a TAC case to get the hot fix which is what
 happened with you James ? And after that hot fix was everything running
 smoothly with you James?

 Hi Tim, did you installed the MR4 in your environment ? And is it working
 fine ?





 Best Regards

 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - BMB KSA

 On Jun 11, 2015, at 5:32 PM, James Buchanan james.buchan...@gmail.com
 mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello,

 The certificate issue with the mobile app is not yet in the release notes.
 If they will reference TAC case 635173083 when you open your TAC case, they
 can see if you need the hotfix or not.

 Thanks,

 James

 On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Tim Smith tim.sm...@enject.com.au
 mailto:tim.sm...@enject.com.au wrote:
 Just make sure to check release notes before as well!

 http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/collaboration/CWMS/2_5/Release_Notes/Release_Notes.html#reference_23E4C721B42E4B909ABE8ECA786F88BE

 Cheers,

 Tim.

 From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:
 james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Friday, 12 June 2015 12:08 AM
 To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Cc: Tim Smith; cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:
 cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question

 Open a TAC case. It is post MR5.


 On 11 Jun 2015, at 7:46 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com
 mailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:
 Hi James,

 So I can go directly to MR5 with the hotfix you mentioned, but how I can
 get this hotfix if it is not published on Cisco.comhttp://Cisco.com ?



 Best Regards

 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - KSA

 From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:16 PM
 To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Cc: Tim Smith; cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:
 cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question

 Hello,
 It would be cumulative. However, I went from MR2 to MR5, so I'm not sure
 about MR4. I would just get TAC to publish the hotfix for you with special
 file access.
 Thanks,
 James

 On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman 
 ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:
 Hi James,

 One question here, I assume that everything mentioned to be fixed in MR4
 and earlier should be included in MR5, am I right ? isn’t it a cumulative
 updates each one has all previous fixes plus new fixes ?.

 Also based on your feedback is it better to install the MR4 instead of the
 MR5 ?



 Best Regards

 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - KSA

 From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:
 james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 3:53 PM
 To: Tim Smith
 Cc: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman; cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:
 cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question

 Hello,

 MR5 will not fix the URL question. However, applied without the hot fix I
 mentioned it will break the mobile app because of a bug regarding
 certificates and how they are issued.

 Thanks,
 James

 On 11 Jun 2015, at 4:29 AM, Tim Smith tim.sm...@enject.com.aumailto:
 tim.sm...@enject.com.au wrote:
 Hi Ahmed,

 I think the difference is the PT tools invites use plain text only
 I guess it’s because you can’t embed the hyperlink in there..

 I have not tried the short URL feature yet, but I believe it will replace
 that long URL yes.
 I don’t think it will replace it with “Join the meeting” I think it will
 just replace it with a shortened URL
 So it should be shorter and neater but not exactly like the web invites.

 Looks like we need to be careful of the issue James raised though.

 Cheers,

 Tim

 From: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman [mailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com]
 Sent: Thursday, 11 June 2015 7:01 PM
 To: James Buchanan; Tim Smith
 Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] WebEx question


 Hi James/Tim,



 Just to make sure we are on the same page, I have the major release of the
 CWMS 2.5 without any MR releases installed.

 Here is what I meant by my question,

 This is a snapshot of the invitation received for a meeting initiated from
 web (with short hyperlink):



 image001.jpg

 And here a snapshot of the invitation received for a meeting initiated
 from outlook client (with long URL):



 image002.jpg



 So coming to your suggestions, will the MR5 fix this issue ? and will make
 the outlook invitation looks neat like the web invitation ? also, James did
 the MR5 caused issues with mobile client access with you ?



 Many thanks for your kind support.






 Best Regards

Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

MR5 with the hotfix is stable. I don't know if you'll hit the issue with
SDC or not, but I'd open a TAC case.

Thanks,

James

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman 
ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:

 But I have SDC, do you think I will hit the same issue with the mobile app?
 Also is the situation currently stable with the MR5? As in some cases the
 newest version suffers a lot of opened bugs that's why I was thinking to go
 with the MR4 instead of the MR5.





 Best Regards

 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - BMB KSA

 On Jun 11, 2015, at 5:48 PM, James Buchanan james.buchan...@gmail.com
 mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello,

 TAC actually headed me off at the pass. I had updated to MR5 but had some
 issues with the MDC deployment. While fixing those issues, they told me
 about this mobile app issue and told me to go to the hotfix.

 Thanks,

 James

 On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman 
 ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:
 So as a conclusion I can go with MR5 and if I faced an issue with the
 mobile client I can open a TAC case to get the hot fix which is what
 happened with you James ? And after that hot fix was everything running
 smoothly with you James?

 Hi Tim, did you installed the MR4 in your environment ? And is it working
 fine ?





 Best Regards

 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - BMB KSA

 On Jun 11, 2015, at 5:32 PM, James Buchanan james.buchan...@gmail.com
 mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com
 mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello,

 The certificate issue with the mobile app is not yet in the release notes.
 If they will reference TAC case 635173083 when you open your TAC case, they
 can see if you need the hotfix or not.

 Thanks,

 James

 On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Tim Smith tim.sm...@enject.com.au
 mailto:tim.sm...@enject.com.aumailto:tim.sm...@enject.com.aumailto:
 tim.sm...@enject.com.au wrote:
 Just make sure to check release notes before as well!

 http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/collaboration/CWMS/2_5/Release_Notes/Release_Notes.html#reference_23E4C721B42E4B909ABE8ECA786F88BE

 Cheers,

 Tim.

 From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:
 james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:
 james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Friday, 12 June 2015 12:08 AM
 To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Cc: Tim Smith; cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:
 cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:
 cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question

 Open a TAC case. It is post MR5.


 On 11 Jun 2015, at 7:46 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com
 mailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com
 mailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:
 Hi James,

 So I can go directly to MR5 with the hotfix you mentioned, but how I can
 get this hotfix if it is not published on Cisco.comhttp://Cisco.com
 http://Cisco.com ?



 Best Regards

 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - KSA

 From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:
 james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 4:16 PM
 To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Cc: Tim Smith; cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:
 cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:
 cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question

 Hello,
 It would be cumulative. However, I went from MR2 to MR5, so I'm not sure
 about MR4. I would just get TAC to publish the hotfix for you with special
 file access.
 Thanks,
 James

 On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman 
 ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:
 ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:
 Hi James,

 One question here, I assume that everything mentioned to be fixed in MR4
 and earlier should be included in MR5, am I right ? isn’t it a cumulative
 updates each one has all previous fixes plus new fixes ?.

 Also based on your feedback is it better to install the MR4 instead of the
 MR5 ?



 Best Regards

 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - KSA

 From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:
 james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:
 james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2015 3:53 PM
 To: Tim Smith
 Cc: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman; cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:
 cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:
 cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question

 Hello,

 MR5 will not fix the URL question. However, applied without the hot fix I
 mentioned it will break the mobile app because of a bug regarding
 certificates and how they are issued.

 Thanks,
 James

 On 11 Jun 2015, at 4:29 AM, Tim Smith tim.sm...@enject.com.aumailto:
 tim.sm...@enject.com.aumailto:tim.sm...@enject.com.aumailto:
 tim.sm...@enject.com.au wrote:
 Hi Ahmed,

 I think

Re: [cisco-voip] WebEx question

[James Buchanan]

If you go to MR5 you will break the mobile app. Just found out from the BU the 
other day. There is a hot fix they can publish for you.



 On 10 Jun 2015, at 8:55 PM, Tim Smith tim.sm...@enject.com.au wrote:
 
 Hi Ahmed,
 
 Check out 2.5 MR4 if you are not on it..
 
 Short URL feature is there, you can get rid of all the long URL's
 
 Also if you are security conscious, MR5 has split certificates too.
 
 You should upgrade to MR5 anyway if you aren't already, there are a couple of 
 doozies fixed along the way :)
 
 Cheers,
 
 Tim
 
 -Original Message-
 From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Sent: Wednesday, 10 June 2015 9:41 AM
 To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 Subject: [cisco-voip] WebEx question
 
 Hi Gents,
 
 I have WebEx (CWMS) 2.5 and it is working fine, I have just one strange note, 
 when a user created a meeting from outlook directly the invitation email sent 
 with the complete long url for the meeting while when create a meeting from 
 the webpage the meeting invitation email is sent with join the meeting 
 hyperlink without the long meeting url being revealed which should be the 
 case regardless from which way the meeting has been created.
 So any ideas what could be the reason for that
 
 
 
 
 
 Best Regards
 
 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - BMB KSA
 ___
 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 - WebEx integration query

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

That is correct about the profile.

I'm not sure if SSO solves this or not.

When I have CWMS questions, I sometimes post on the supportforums.cisco.com
site for WebEx. I have found this to be very useful in getting accurate
answers quickly.

Thanks,

James

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman 
ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:

 Hi James,
 So the role of the UC conferencing service will be just providing the
 WebEx site URL, then the user must enter his email and password manually,
 right?

 The client is not also preferring the manual way of each user entering his
 WebEx credentials manually, so what if we configured the WebEx with SSO,
 will that help in avoiding that process?

 Many thanks James.





 Best Regards

 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - BMB KSA

 On Jun 1, 2015, at 6:48 AM, James Buchanan james.buchan...@gmail.com
 mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hello,

 You still must configure the web conferencing in the UC Service Profile.
 Just do not set the credentials setting to anything.

 Thanks,

 James

 On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman 
 ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.commailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:
 In this case no need to configure the conference UC service at all in the
 service profile ? we just should enter the access credentials manually ?



 Best Regards

 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - KSA

 image001.png
 ­­
 Shahd Center for Investment. Office#6
 Emam Saud bin Abdulaziz Road, Olaya, Hay al-Murooj
 P.O Box 17384
 T +966 11 200 5778-5013
 F +966 11 200 5811tel:%2B966%2011%20200%205811
 M +966 50 792 0925
 bmbgroup.comhttp://www.bmbgroup.com/

 LEBANON • EGYPT • KSA • JORDAN • IRAQ

 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission (and/or the attachments
 accompanying it) may contain confidential information belonging to the
 sender. The information is intended only for the use of the intended
 recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
 that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in
 reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Any
 unauthorized interception of this transmission is illegal under the law. If
 you have received this transmission in error, please promptly notify the
 sender by reply e-mail, and then destroy all copies of the transmission.

 From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.commailto:
 james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2015 11:27 PM
 To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber - WebEx integration query

 Did you enter your whole email address?

 There is no other way to send Webex Meetings Server credentials at present.


 On 31 May 2015, at 3:23 PM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com
 mailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:
 Hi James,

 When I try to do that it gives me a message “cannot verify your account.
 Check your password and then try again”

 Any ideas for possible reasons ?

 Also is it the only way to do that is that manual method or there are
 alternatives, also please if possible let me know any dependencies in terms
 of CUCM UC service and service profile configurations, specially the
 authentication source.

 Many thanks



 Best Regards

 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - KSA


 From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2015 10:47 PM
 To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber - WebEx integration query

 Hello,

 They must go under File, options and manually configure their webex login
 information .

 Thanks,
 James



 On 31 May 2015, at 2:44 PM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com
 mailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:
 Hi Gents,

 I have a setup including CUCM 10.5, IMPresence 10.5, CUC 10.5, WebEx 2.5
 (on premises CWMS), Expressway 8.5, Jabber clients version 10.6

 The system is fine and jabber clients works fine and integrated well with
 CUCM, CUC, IMP, but not with WebEx.

 The webex is working completely fine but from the Jabber client I can’t
 initiate a webex meeting or access meetings information and all the webex
 related options are not active as per the following snapshot:
 image001.png

 I already added the webex site URL to a conference UC service which is a
 assigned to the service profile in use, but still no success.

 So any ideas on how to complete the WebEx integration with Jabber client ?





 Best Regards

 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - KSA
 ___
 cisco-voip mailing list
 cisco-voip@puck.nether.netmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip


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

Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber - WebEx integration query

[James Buchanan]

Did you enter your whole email address?

There is no other way to send Webex Meetings Server credentials at present.



 On 31 May 2015, at 3:23 PM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com 
 wrote:
 
 Hi James,
  
 When I try to do that it gives me a message “cannot verify your account. 
 Check your password and then try again”
  
 Any ideas for possible reasons ?
  
 Also is it the only way to do that is that manual method or there are 
 alternatives, also please if possible let me know any dependencies in terms 
 of CUCM UC service and service profile configurations, specially the 
 authentication source.
  
 Many thanks
  
  
  
 Best Regards
  
 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - KSA
  
  
 From: James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com] 
 Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2015 10:47 PM
 To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber - WebEx integration query
  
 Hello,
  
 They must go under File, options and manually configure their webex login 
 information .
  
 Thanks,
 James
 
 
 
 On 31 May 2015, at 2:44 PM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com 
 wrote:
 
 Hi Gents,
  
 I have a setup including CUCM 10.5, IMPresence 10.5, CUC 10.5, WebEx 2.5 (on 
 premises CWMS), Expressway 8.5, Jabber clients version 10.6
  
 The system is fine and jabber clients works fine and integrated well with 
 CUCM, CUC, IMP, but not with WebEx.
  
 The webex is working completely fine but from the Jabber client I can’t 
 initiate a webex meeting or access meetings information and all the webex 
 related options are not active as per the following snapshot:
 image001.png
  
 I already added the webex site URL to a conference UC service which is a 
 assigned to the service profile in use, but still no success.
  
 So any ideas on how to complete the WebEx integration with Jabber client ?
  
  
  
  
  
 Best Regards
  
 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - KSA
 ___
 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 - WebEx integration query

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

You still must configure the web conferencing in the UC Service Profile.
Just do not set the credentials setting to anything.

Thanks,

James

On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman 
ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com wrote:

  In this case no need to configure the conference UC service at all in
 the service profile ? we just should enter the access credentials manually ?







 Best Regards



 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman

 Senior Network Engineer - KSA



 [image: cid:image001.png@01CEB2D0.5AD73CC0]

 ­­

 Shahd Center for Investment. Office#6

 Emam Saud bin Abdulaziz Road, Olaya, Hay al-Murooj

 P.O Box 17384

 *T* +966 11 200 5778-5013

 *F* +966 11 200 5811

 *M *+966 50 792 0925

 *bmbgroup.com* http://www.bmbgroup.com/



 LEBANON · EGYPT · KSA · JORDAN · IRAQ



 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission (and/or the attachments
 accompanying it) may contain confidential information belonging to the
 sender. The information is intended only for the use of the intended
 recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
 that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in
 reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Any
 unauthorized interception of this transmission is illegal under the law.
 If you have received this transmission in error, please promptly notify the
 sender by reply e-mail, and then destroy all copies of the transmission.



 *From:* James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Sunday, May 31, 2015 11:27 PM
 *To:* Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber - WebEx integration query



 Did you enter your whole email address?



 There is no other way to send Webex Meetings Server credentials at present.


 On 31 May 2015, at 3:23 PM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com
 wrote:

  Hi James,



 When I try to do that it gives me a message “cannot verify your account.
 Check your password and then try again”



 Any ideas for possible reasons ?



 Also is it the only way to do that is that manual method or there are
 alternatives, also please if possible let me know any dependencies in terms
 of CUCM UC service and service profile configurations, specially the
 authentication source.



 Many thanks







 Best Regards



 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman

 Senior Network Engineer - KSA





 *From:* James Buchanan [mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com
 james.buchan...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Sunday, May 31, 2015 10:47 PM
 *To:* Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber - WebEx integration query



 Hello,



 They must go under File, options and manually configure their webex login
 information .



 Thanks,

 James



 On 31 May 2015, at 2:44 PM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com
 wrote:

  Hi Gents,



 I have a setup including CUCM 10.5, IMPresence 10.5, CUC 10.5, WebEx 2.5
 (on premises CWMS), Expressway 8.5, Jabber clients version 10.6



 The system is fine and jabber clients works fine and integrated well with
 CUCM, CUC, IMP, but not with WebEx.



 The webex is working completely fine but from the Jabber client I can’t
 initiate a webex meeting or access meetings information and all the webex
 related options are not active as per the following snapshot:

 image001.png



 I already added the webex site URL to a conference UC service which is a
 assigned to the service profile in use, but still no success.



 So any ideas on how to complete the WebEx integration with Jabber client ?











 Best Regards



 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman

 Senior Network Engineer - KSA

  ___
 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 - WebEx integration query

[James Buchanan]

Hello,

They must go under File, options and manually configure their webex login 
information .

Thanks,
James



 On 31 May 2015, at 2:44 PM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com 
 wrote:
 
 Hi Gents,
  
 I have a setup including CUCM 10.5, IMPresence 10.5, CUC 10.5, WebEx 2.5 (on 
 premises CWMS), Expressway 8.5, Jabber clients version 10.6
  
 The system is fine and jabber clients works fine and integrated well with 
 CUCM, CUC, IMP, but not with WebEx.
  
 The webex is working completely fine but from the Jabber client I can’t 
 initiate a webex meeting or access meetings information and all the webex 
 related options are not active as per the following snapshot:
  
  
 I already added the webex site URL to a conference UC service which is a 
 assigned to the service profile in use, but still no success.
  
 So any ideas on how to complete the WebEx integration with Jabber client ?
  
  
  
  
  
 Best Regards
  
 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 Senior Network Engineer - KSA
 ___
 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] CSR Information

[James Buchanan]

Check the parent domain field and see if a space has made it's way into it.

On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Leslie Meade leslie.me...@lvs1.com wrote:

  I am exporting the Tomcast certs and i have checked it against a CSR
 checker to make sure that everything is good before i submit the CSR.

 But I am getting a , in my Subject Alternative Name.


  For example


  Subject Alternative Name: , ca.forces.net


  There is a comma in the subject feild and I do not know where to fix it.
 I have checked the web-security and there seems to be nothing funny there.


  https://www.sslshopper.com/csr-decoder.html,



  Leslie






 ___
 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] 10.5.2 No Call Park Numbers Available

[James Buchanan]

Do you have a call park range enabled on each server or have cluster wide call 
park enabled?



 On 11 Apr 2015, at 2:03 PM, Jason Aarons (AM) 
 jason.aar...@dimensiondata.com wrote:
 
 Inbound call I’m seeing No Call Park Number available on phone.
  
 Doesn’t the Gateway CSS need to include the Call Park Number partition?I 
 see the phone’s CSS includes the Call Park Number partition.
  
 http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/voice-unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-version-70/112043-ucm-callpark-00.html
 This guide discusses the Phone CSS but not a gateway CSS.
  
 -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

Re: [cisco-voip] UC Cluster Upgrade Implementation Query

[James Buchanan]

I would agree with Dennis. Engage with a Cisco partner who can deliver on
this. Several of us represent reputable Cisco partners and I'm sure would
be happy for your business.

Thanks,

James

On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Heim, Dennis dennis.h...@wwt.com wrote:

  That is incredible complex. We are here to provide some assistance and
 guidance, but for something that complex there are too many variables to
 give a real estimate/process. My recommendation is to have some
 conversations with a UC Master Certificated Cisco Partner in your area and
 provide you actual deliverable documents.



 *Dennis Heim | Emerging Technology Architect (Collaboration)*

 World Wide Technology, Inc. | +1 314-212-1814

 [image: twitter] https://twitter.com/CollabSensei

 [image: chat][image: Phone] +13142121814[image: video]

 Innovation happens on project squared -- http://www.projectsquared.com



 *Click here to join me in my Collaboration Meeting Room
 https://wwt.webex.com/meet/dennis.heim*







 *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
 Of *Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman
 *Sent:* Friday, March 20, 2015 8:43 AM
 *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
 *Subject:* [cisco-voip] UC Cluster Upgrade Implementation Query



 Hi All,

   I’m seeking your professional advice regarding the following
 request, I need an implementation plan (or in simple words ordered sequence
 for the implementation steps with a focus on the downtime needed), here is
 what I have in terms of UC cluster components:

 · CUCM V 8.6.2 which will be upgraded to V10.5 and will be
 virtualized on UCS Blade servers (2 blades), they have a Pub and a Sub on
 the HQ which will have the 2 Blades and 2 other Subs in a remote site, I’m
 planning to use the prime collaboration deployment for this upgrade.

 · UCCX V9.0.2 on a physical 7825I4 MCS server which to be also
 upgraded to V10.X and virtualized on the Blade server.

 · A new installation for cisco unified Communications Manager IM
 and Presence V10.X on the Blades, which will replace an old Cisco Unified
 Personal Communicator V 8.5.

 · A new installation of WebEx Meeting Server on the Blades which
 will replace an old Cisco Meeting Place Express V2.1.

 · A new installation of Cisco Paging Server on the Blades.

 · A new installation of Cisco Expressway System.

 · An upgrade and virtualization for Unity Connection V8.5
 currently on MCS servers to V 10.X on the Blades.

 · An Upgrade for Unity Connection V8.6 currently virtualized on
 UCS server in remote site to V10.X on the same UCS servers on the remote
 site.

 · Upgrading Unity Express V 8.0.3 in different remote sites
 routers to latest 8.6.X version to be compatible with the new CUCM version
 10.5 without any other modification to the CUE which handle both AA and VM
 features for these remote sites.

 So kindly I need any suggestions and advices regarding the ordered steps
 of the above and what needs a downtime and what’s doesn’t need ? also if
 there is any other suggestions regarding compatibility of the above
 components.



 Also what’s the best practice to minimize the downtime and I would be also
 highly appreciated if tests checklist can be provided



 Many thanks.









 Best Regards



 Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman

 Senior Network 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