Re: [cisco-voip] PCI DSS compliance for Cisco IPT/UCCX

2019-01-22 Thread Lamont, Joshua 
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 mailing list
> > cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> >
> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpuck.nether.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcisco-voipdata=02%7C01%7C%7Cb9218ac35b024bba75db08d680321fbe%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636837350098382558sdata=%2Fb%2BfDpOqy2BHdBZ%2F%2F%2B%2BYB7FyBrE4lznDiRI1dlwChC4%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] Bye Bye Cisco Spark, Hello Webex Teams

2018-04-18 Thread Lamont, Joshua 
Announcement today at noon to be livestreamed on Cisco.com

Some pre announcement details here:
https://www.nojitter.com/post/240173438/bye-bye-cisco-spark-hello-webex-teams

Joshua Lamont
Senior Telecommunications Engineer
Brown University
office (401) 863-1003
cell(401) 749-6913
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Cube configuration for CenturyLink Sip Trunk

2018-01-11 Thread Lamont, Joshua 
We are also using the same line as Ben without issues on CenturyLink SIP
trunks.


fax protocol t38 version 0 ls-redundancy 0 hs-redundancy 0 fallback
pass-through g711ulaw


We use VG204 and VG310 gateways.

Joshua Lamont
Senior Telecommunications Engineer
Brown University
office (401) 863-1003
cell(401) 749-6913

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Ben Amick  wrote:

> We’re not using any ATAs. We have one hardware fax machine on an FXS port
> on a 2951 and most of our faxes go through a SIP trunk on CUCM through to
> our RightFax server.
>
>
>
> Ben Amick
>
> Unified Communications Analyst
>
>
>
> *From:* 'Jonatan Quezada' [mailto:jonatan.quez...@chemeketa.edu]
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 11, 2018 5:10 PM
> *To:* Ben Amick 
> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Cube configuration for CenturyLink Sip Trunk
>
>
>
> Are you guys using ATA's if so which ones? we have a ton of the 186's and
> have been testing with 187 and I brought in a 190, but not excited about
> replaceing all of them. since that will be upwards of 13K, Id rather get
> another T1 and shot it all that way.
>
>
>
> I wonder if the above configured globally still need the same line in the
> dial peers, that is what i will try next tonight since I cant configure
> dial peers while calls are active
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Ben Amick  wrote:
>
> We have a CenturyLink IQ SIP trunk as well, and an efax system set up to
> our CUCM over SIP trunk, and then CUCM handles the signaling to the
> gateway.
>
>
>
> I didn’t set it up originally so I don’t know what pains we had with it,
> but we do have a slightly altered version of the below line in our gateway
> config under both voip service voip and the some of the inbound and
> outbound dial peers:
>
> “fax protocol t38 version 0 ls-redundancy 0 hs-redundancy 0 fallback
> pass-through g711ulaw”
>
>
>
> It works well enough, but we do have some periodic but common fax issues
> still. But I think that’s more of a carrier issue than our side, and we
> pump out way more faxes in a day than most companies.
>
>
>
> Ben Amick
>
> Unified Communications Analyst
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
> Of *'Jonatan Quezada'
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 11, 2018 2:50 PM
> *To:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Cube configuration for CenturyLink Sip Trunk
>
>
>
> Hola Cisco Ninjas,
>
>
>
> We cut over to a CenturyLink IQ private SIP trunk, and we are seeing that
> FAXing is not functional like before. Part of the reason we feel is that
> the ATA and the fax devices location are the older ones, they are ATA186, I
> have tried
>
>
>
> The provider says they do passthrough, but we can only receive. We
> developed a workaround with a seperate routeList, and Group to use the T1's
> we migrated from.
>
>
>
> Has anyone successfully configured Fax with centuryLinkSip Trunk?
>
>
>
> The TAC team mentioned that I should use this command  in the dial peers
>
>
>
> fax protocol t38 nse ls-redundancy 0 hs-redundancy 0 fallback
> pass-through g711u’.
>
>
>
>
>
> before I mess with my dial peers I want to see if there are field tested
> methods that have been successful.
>
>
>
> What is the difference between configuring FAX globally on the voice
> service VoIP area of the configuration vs the dial peer side. I already
> have the above command configured globally. and fax is still receive only.
> I cant send out over the trunk.  thoughts concerns? ideas greatly
> appreciated
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Johnny Q
>
> Voice Technology Analyst - TelNet
>
> Chemeketa Community College
>
> johnn...@chemeketa.edu
>
> Building 22 Room 131
>
> Work 5033995294 <(503)%20399-5294>
>
> Mobile 9712182110 <(971)%20218-2110>
>
> SIP 5035406686 <(503)%20540-6686>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> For immediate assistance please reach out to Chemeketa IT Help Desk at
> 5033997899 <(503)%20399-7899>
>
> -or-
>
> Visit the help center from your employee dashboard found here:
>
> *https://dashboard.chemeketa.edu/helpcenter/default.aspx
>

Re: [cisco-voip] 7841 Volume Rocker Not Working

2017-03-20 Thread Lamont, Joshua 
We've got about 1500 of these deployed running the same load and have seen
all kinds of weird bugs but never this one specifically.

A factory reset is now included in our basic troubleshooting process
because it tends to fix a lot of issues.

Thanks,

Joshua Lamont
Senior Telecommunications Engineer
Brown University
office (401) 863-1003
cell(401) 749-6913

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I just had three phones in an area report that the ringer stopped
> working.  When I went to play with the volume rocker, not on headset mode,
> the screen showed the volume bars, but the light failed to flash on the
> handset (MWI light) and no audio was produced from the phone.  I factory
> reset the phone, and it fixed the issue.
>
> Load: 11-5-1-18
>
> I did try searching bugsearch but found nothing, as I'm sure there are
> other ways this issue might manifest and be documented.
>
> Anyone seen this issue before, or something similar?
>
> I know I've heard stories of these 7841's being unreliable and having
> higher than usual failure rates...I'm hoping we don't have that issue here.
>
> Thanks.
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber Multiple Line Support

2017-01-17 Thread Lamont, Joshua 
>From our Cisco rep last week-

"No timelines uttered yet.  For 11.9 the priority and focus will be on Push
for Voice along with Fast Login (aka Offline Login) and O-Auth support for
an improved SSO and login experience.  Note 11.8.1 scheduled for the end of
this month (I’m confirming what is in 11.8.1)."

Joshua Lamont
Senior Telecommunications Engineer
Brown University
office (401) 863-1003
cell(401) 749-6913

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Brian Meade  wrote:

> It's still on the roadmap for Windows/MAC I believe for 12.0.  I haven't
> heard anything about iPhone/Android but I'm assuming it will be on there
> too.  I've been hearing late spring on this release.
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Frank Arrasmith <
> frank.arrasm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Anybody figure out a way for Jabber Mobile (android/iPhone) users to
>> support multiple lines.  I still dont see support on 11.8 and can find
>> nothing Cisco website that shows it on a roadmap for support.  I have tried
>> using Remote destination profile and hunt group configs as a workaround but
>> no joy.  Does anyone have any other workaround that they have tried to get
>> multiple line support?
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Captioning service

2017-01-11 Thread Lamont, Joshua 
We have an employee that is hearing impaired and is requesting a 2 line
phone with captioning  service.

Is anyone using a captioning service now? Does it support multiline? SIP?
8800 series phones?

Thanks,

Joshua Lamont
Senior Telecommunications Engineer
Brown University
office (401) 863-1003
cell(401) 749-6913
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Future of Jabber .......

2016-11-03 Thread Lamont, Joshua 
We have been told these updates will only be available for CUCM 11.5+ and
Expressway 8.8+. We're working on upgrading as soon as possible.

Joshua Lamont
Senior Telecommunications Engineer
Brown University
office (401) 863-1003
cell(401) 749-6913

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> Let's hope the service update that will support these changes will be
> released early enough to test and plan for the updates. :)
>
> I'm guessing August 15, 2017.
>
> iOS 11 likely released on Sept 15, 2017.
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Nov 2, 2016, at 4:36 AM, Matthew Collins 
> wrote:
> >
> > Received this in one of the Cisco Customer Connection: Briefing
> Registration invites last week
> >
> > "November 17, 2016 - Revised Jabber Roadmap Update
> > Cisco Collab Technology Group listened to and has acted upon your
> feedback on the Cisco Jabber roadmap that was delivered on September 15,
> 2016! Please join us to hear about the revised Jabber roadmap for post
> R11.8 capabilities that will include iOS Voice/Video Push notifications (in
> addition to IM/P notifications in R11.8), Multi-Line call support, Contact
> Center Feature enhancements, and more features and capabilities!"
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Matthew Collins
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf
> Of James Andrewartha
> > Sent: 02 November 2016 06:45
> > To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Future of Jabber ...
> >
> >> On 03/10/16 02:11, Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:
> >> I've seen only one update in the forums, and while it's a good start,
> >> there's still some outstanding issues people have concerns with.
> >
> > Reading the forum now, it looks like they've listened and are going to
> add support IM/phone push notifications by the time iOS 11 comes out.
> >
> > --
> > 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
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] 8851 and Transfers

2016-10-13 Thread Lamont, Joshua 
What are the versions of the firmware you have tried?

Thanks,

Joshua Lamont
Senior Telecommunications Engineer
Brown University
office (401) 863-1003
cell(401) 749-6913

On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Haas, Neal  wrote:

> No side Car, and this is a shared line across multiple phones.
>
>
>
> Thank You,
>
>
>
> Neal Haas
>
>
>
> *From:* Carlo Calabrese [mailto:carlo_calabrese2...@yahoo.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:17 PM
> *To:* Haas, Neal ; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] 8851 and Transfers
>
>
>
> Does this have a Side Car? we had a problem with this awhile back, not
> sure if same model but we had to roll back.
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, October 4, 2016 7:16 PM, "Haas, Neal" 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> We have 8851 phones, just upgraded to the new firmware, now we have issues.
>
>
> When a phone call is in the process of being transferred and a new call
> comes in the phone will not let you finish the transfer. How can we stop
> this issue?
>
> Anyone have a solution - besides rolling back the firmware?
>
>
>
>
> Neal Haas
> ?
> ___
> 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] Cisco DX650 question and concern

2016-02-22 Thread Lamont, Joshua 
Hi Everyone,

We are deploying a limited number of DX650 devices and have been getting
push-back to unlock the underlying Android OS to allow access to the
internet and Play Store. Since the devices are connected to the voice VLAN,
we have concerns about the potential security risks.

Has anyone else deployed these devices "unlocked" and what was the result?
What did your network security engineers have to say?

Thanks in advance!

Joshua Lamont
Senior Telecommunications Engineer
Brown University
office (401) 863-1003
cell(401) 749-6913
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM/Unity and chrome

2016-02-03 Thread Lamont, Joshua 
Confirmed!

Working on 48.0.2564.97 for OSX

Joshua Lamont
Senior Telecommunications Engineer
Brown University
office (401) 863-1003
cell(401) 749-6913

On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)  wrote:

> The bug notes say Chrome fixed it in 48.0.2564.82 and later.
>
> I haven’t updated to test it myself but if someone can confirm I’ll update
> the external text.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Feb 1, 2016, at 8:39 AM, Matthew Loraditch <
> mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:
>
> So I was just checking on this bug and it shows terminated… Is Chrome to
> never be supported again??? Or is another related bug setup? I’d hope that
> perhaps the menus are being redone since UDM4 hasn’t updated their code
> since 2013…
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R, CCDA
> Network Engineer
> Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
>
> Facebook  | Twitter
>  | LinkedIn
>  |
> G+ 
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net
> ] *On Behalf Of *Ryan Ratliff
> (rratliff)
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 9, 2015 1:25 PM
> *To:* Ryan Huff 
> *Cc:* cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM/Unity and chrome
>
> CSCux42427 has been filed against UCM to track this.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Dec 7, 2015, at 6:10 PM, Ryan Huff  wrote:
>
> My suspicion is that Google has deprecated a method that the UDM4 menu
> system is using. I'd hazard a guess that CCM's GUI isn't the only
> application impacted, specifically any applications using UDM4. Here are a
> couple of thoughts;
>
>
>- ​Use Mozilla FireFox; I know  may not be ideal for some;
>although Mozilla doesn't seem to make as many cavalier changes to there
>browser as Google does
>
>
>- For Windows based installs of Google Chrome, you might try
>
> https://support.google.com/chrome/a/answer/3019558?hl=en_topic=3062034=1
>  which
>will guide you through installing legacy browser support inside chromium. I
>have not personally tried this because I am not a native Windows user.
>
> In previous times when this has happen, you were able to go to
> settings->Show Advanced Settings and disable "use hardware acceleration" to
> resolve the issue but that is not the case this time; I believe there is an
> absence of required syntax in the renderer.
>
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> = Ryan =
>
>
> Email: ryanthomash...@outlook.com
> Spark: ryanthomash...@outlook.com
> Twitter: @ryanthomashuff 
> LinkedIn: ryanthomashuff 
> Web ryanthomashuff.com
>
>
> --
> *From:* cisco-voip  on behalf of
> Terry Oakley 
> *Sent:* Monday, December 7, 2015 5:30 PM
> *To:* 'NateCCIE .'; cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM/Unity and chrome
>
> Started for me yesterday.   I am running Chrome 47.0.2526.73 m
> Quite irritating actually.   Just get everything that I manage finally
> working under one browser and then not.
>
> Back to Firefox for somethings, IE for others.
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net
> ] *On Behalf Of *NateCCIE .
> *Sent:* December 7, 2015 3:28 PM
> *To:* cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] CUCM/Unity and chrome
>
> I have been using chrome for all of my version 10+ CUCM and Unity admin
> for a while now.  It has been great
>
> Today on both of my computers, the drop downs are not appearing in chrome.
>
> Anyone else having problems with chrome today?
>
> -Nate
> ___
> 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] BE7K or not?

2015-12-03 Thread Lamont, Joshua 
We're in the process of converting to Cisco UC and recently during our
design phase swapped out the BE7Ks in favor of the new UCS C series severs.
C240 M4s are used for the majority of our cluster.

Joshua Lamont
Senior Telecommunications Engineer
Brown University
office (401) 863-1003
cell(401) 749-6913

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Matthew Loraditch <
mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:

> http://tools.cisco.com/ucs
>
> is your friend, pick your server model and the ovas you will use.
>
>
>
> In general though BE7K should be fine. No limitations besides overall
> resources. Just gotta figure out how many you need or want
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R, CCDA
> Network Engineer
> Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
>
> Facebook  | Twitter
>  | LinkedIn
>  |
> G+ 
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
> Of *Lelio Fulgenzi
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 3, 2015 9:38 AM
> *To:* cisco-voip voyp list 
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] BE7K or not?
>
>
>
>
>
> We're spec'ing out some new UCS servers for our next upgrades.
>
>
>
> Still trying to figure out what, if any, limitations going with a BE7K
> might have. Does anyone care to share a reason why we shouldn't go with
> BE7K, or why we shouldn't go with a la cart using the BOM?
>
>
>
> There was once an issue with a limitation of users/devices, but I think
> that's gone now. My biggest concern is trying to do something on the BE7K
> and finding out only after that it's not allowed or supported.
>
>
>
> Any ideas would be great.
>
>
>
> Lelio
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> 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] BE7K or not?

2015-12-03 Thread Lamont, Joshua 
Sorry for the confusion... We had originally planned to install C240 M3s
but swapped them out for the C240 M4s instead.

Joshua Lamont
Senior Telecommunications Engineer
Brown University
office (401) 863-1003
cell(401) 749-6913

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> There are BE7Ks built on the new UCS C240 M4s.
>
> Or by "new" do you mean something else other than the 240M4s?
>
>
> ---
> 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
>
> --
> *From: *"Joshua Lamont" 
> *To: *"Matthew Loraditch" 
> *Cc: *"Lelio Fulgenzi" , "cisco-voip voyp list" <
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
> *Sent: *Thursday, December 3, 2015 10:02:47 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [cisco-voip] BE7K or not?
>
> We're in the process of converting to Cisco UC and recently during our
> design phase swapped out the BE7Ks in favor of the new UCS C series severs.
> C240 M4s are used for the majority of our cluster.
>
> Joshua Lamont
> Senior Telecommunications Engineer
> Brown University
> office (401) 863-1003
> cell(401) 749-6913
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Matthew Loraditch <
> mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:
>
>> http://tools.cisco.com/ucs
>>
>> is your friend, pick your server model and the ovas you will use.
>>
>>
>>
>> In general though BE7K should be fine. No limitations besides overall
>> resources. Just gotta figure out how many you need or want
>>
>>
>>
>> Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R, CCDA
>> Network Engineer
>> Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
>>
>> Facebook  | Twitter
>>  | LinkedIn
>> 
>> | G+ 
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On
>> Behalf Of *Lelio Fulgenzi
>> *Sent:* Thursday, December 3, 2015 9:38 AM
>> *To:* cisco-voip voyp list 
>> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] BE7K or not?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> We're spec'ing out some new UCS servers for our next upgrades.
>>
>>
>>
>> Still trying to figure out what, if any, limitations going with a BE7K
>> might have. Does anyone care to share a reason why we shouldn't go with
>> BE7K, or why we shouldn't go with a la cart using the BOM?
>>
>>
>>
>> There was once an issue with a limitation of users/devices, but I think
>> that's gone now. My biggest concern is trying to do something on the BE7K
>> and finding out only after that it's not allowed or supported.
>>
>>
>>
>> Any ideas would be great.
>>
>>
>>
>> Lelio
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> 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