[OSL | CCIE_Voice] show DHCP in UCM

[Karen Johnson]

does anyone know how to check DHCP binding in UCM ?
 
- what is similar command for "sh ip dhcp bind" in UCM



___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] need help

[Leslie Meade]

My gues would be the pstn pri does not have 12 channels configured.
The degustation is showing that the t1 is taking  channel 12 and it is being 
rejected by the router.

To test this theory change the bchannel order around and I bet it works...

Sent from my iPad

On Jun 11, 2013, at 9:38 PM, "Amit Sharma"  wrote:

> when i try to call from hq phone to 911 or locla number...showing busy...!
> please see the attached log and running config...!
> 
> 
> i also try to call with hq mgcp fail then it should go with br1 h.323 
> gateway...
> that also not moving...
> no logs coming on any router...!
> 
> can anyone help me?
> 
> 
> -- 
> Thanks & Regard's
> Amit Sharma
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
> visit www.ipexpert.com
> 
> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] 3750 IOS version in lab

[Brian Valentine]

Bump

On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Brian Valentine wrote:

> Unless it breaks NDA, can someone please tell me what version of IOS is
> running on the 3750 switch in the lab exam?  The blueprint is generic in
> that it just says 12.2 Mainline.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brian Valentine
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] voiceview express with CUE integrated with CME

[Smith, Adam]

Hey y'all

I'm having issues getting voiceview express working with CUE integrated with 
CME.  Once I get CUE integrated with CME, the authentication and services urls 
are auto-added to telephony service, but when I press the services button on 
the phone I get "No services configured".  I've checked the authentication 
credentials under telephony service and CUE and everything looks good.  CUE 
works fine, but no services.  Any suggestions are much appreciated!

PS - next take is Thursday ... !

Thanks,
Adam Smith
adam_sm...@eloyalty.com


-Original Message-
From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com 
[mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of 
ccie_voice-requ...@onlinestudylist.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 11:00 AM
To: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
Subject: CCIE_Voice Digest, Vol 88, Issue 66

Send CCIE_Voice mailing list submissions to
ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_voice
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
ccie_voice-requ...@onlinestudylist.com

You can reach the person managing the list at
ccie_voice-ow...@onlinestudylist.com

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: 
Contents of CCIE_Voice digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: switch- spanning tree portfast (Martin Sloan)


--

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 11:29:41 -0400
From: Martin Sloan 
To: singh 
Cc: "ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com" ,
ccie_voice-requ...@onlinestudylist.com
Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] switch- spanning tree portfast
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Singh,

It does add the 'spanning tree portfast' command on the HQ switch, but not on 
the switch modules at the branch routers.  You have to add that command 
manually for the switch modules.

Marty


On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:33 AM, singh  wrote:

>
> hi Guys,
>
> Is the command " spanning tree portfast" required under the switch 
> ports on a switch connected to the phone? Doesn't the "switchport mode 
> voice vlan" <> take care of this ?
>
>
> Regards,
> singh
>
>
> Get Yourself a cool, short *@in.com* Email ID 
> now! e&utm_medium=outgoing>
>
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, 
> please visit www.ipexpert.com
>
> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

--

___
CCIE_Voice mailing list
CCIE_Voice@onlinestudylist.com
http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_voice


End of CCIE_Voice Digest, Vol 88, Issue 66
**
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] UCCX prompt recording.

[Karen Johnson]

i think Default prompt doesn't matter





 From: Drake J 
To: Gurpreet Singh Kukreja  
Cc: "ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com"  
Sent: Friday, June 7, 2013 6:21:29 PM
Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] UCCX prompt recording.
 


hi Gurpreet,

It is version 7.x .

Also C:\Program Files\wfavvid\temp is for recording prompts correct?

What about my 2nd question?


-Drake




On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 2:22 AM, Gurpreet Singh Kukreja 
 wrote:

Hi Drake, 
>
>What is the version of CCX?
>
>It's "C:\Program Files\wfavvid\temp" in 7.x by default and usually "en_US" 
>using an upload prompt step in 8.x.
>
>- Gurpreet
>
>
>
>
>On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Drake J  wrote:
>
>Hello Guys,
>>
>>I have a  few questions on UCCX script for recording a prompt
>>
>>1) How do I find out where my recorded  prompt is being stored for  a 
>>recording script I create?
>>
>>
>>2) If I am using spoken name upload  and then using the Upload prompt ( step) 
>> just before the terminate step in the script then how do find where my 
>>recording has been stored?
>>
>>
>>Many times  in question ( 2) I can hear my recorded prompt . But when I 
>>search for it I don't find it.
>>
>>I checked the wfavvid folder as well and prompts section.
>>
>>
>>Can someone help me out with the above  2 questions?
>>
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Drake
>>
>>___
>>For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please 
>>visit www.ipexpert.com
>>
>>Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
>>www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>>
>

___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] switch- spanning tree portfast

[Martin Sloan]

Thanks Bill, et al.  It looks like trunk ports are the way to go on lab day.


On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Tony Zunt  wrote:

> I think Mr. Sears provided the best response we may see.  Our emails
> passed in midair.  If I'd seen his first, I wouldn't have sent mine.  :^)
> Thanks
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Martin Sloan wrote:
>
>> Hi Tony,
>>
>> I would like to know the 'correct' way too (at least in the context of
>> the lab grading) because I want to make sure I get the points on this!
>> When technology evolves, you can usually find conflicting information as
>> noticed here:
>>
>>
>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/modules/ps2797/products_configuration_example09186a00808066b8.shtml#step4
>>
>> This guide recommends making the ports access ports, which is what I've
>> been practicing.  The link you gave says the 802.1Q tagging is vital for
>> 'Cisco AVVID networks', so I'm not sure this is the current best practice
>> but I guess that doesn't say much about getting the points in the lab.
>> Logically for me it makes more sense to use the more current access-port
>> style config, which creates a little conundrum for me if you guys are
>> saying the trunk-style is what they're looking for in the lab.  You
>> probably caught the very nice explanation provided by Michael Sears as
>> well, who supports your thoughts on it.
>>
>> Am I off base that the access-style config would be considered the
>> current proper configuration?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Marty
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Tony Zunt  wrote:
>>
>>> Marty is correct and we know that config works just fine most of the
>>> time.  I am curious whether or not CISCO may be looking for something a
>>> little different for this element?  A wise sage on this forum (certainly
>>> not me) pointed out earlier that CISCO recommends use of the 'switchport
>>> mode  trunk' configuration when supporting ip phones on ESW (which is
>>> what we do on site B, site C usually):
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios-xml/ios/lanswitch/configuration/12-4t/lsw-hwic-ethsw-ic.html#GUID-379450C0-5434-4AC3-9BED-396CB7D162C1
>>>
>>> That's the method I practice, however in this case it is no longer
>>> possible to apply the required ' 'spanning-tree portfast' command on the
>>> interface in trunk mode.  Therefore the wise engineer also suggested using
>>> 'no spanning-tree vlan ' command in global configuration
>>> mode in order to allow the phones to boot rapidly.  I thought that was
>>> brilliant and find it works well too on my lab, but I always wonder what
>>> the "correct" way is.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Martin Sloan 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Singh,

 It does add the 'spanning tree portfast' command on the HQ switch, but
 not on the switch modules at the branch routers.  You have to add that
 command manually for the switch modules.

 Marty


 On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:33 AM, singh  wrote:

>
> hi Guys,
>
> Is the command " spanning tree portfast" required under the switch
> ports on a switch connected to the phone? Doesn't the "switchport mode
> voice vlan" <> take care of this ?
>
>
> Regards,
> singh
>
>
> Get Yourself a cool, short *@in.com* Email ID 
> now!
>
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
> please visit www.ipexpert.com
>
> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>


 ___
 For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
 please visit www.ipexpert.com

 Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
 www.PlatinumPlacement.com

>>>
>>>
>>
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] switch- spanning tree portfast

[Tony Zunt]

I think Mr. Sears provided the best response we may see.  Our emails passed
in midair.  If I'd seen his first, I wouldn't have sent mine.  :^)  Thanks


On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Martin Sloan wrote:

> Hi Tony,
>
> I would like to know the 'correct' way too (at least in the context of the
> lab grading) because I want to make sure I get the points on this!  When
> technology evolves, you can usually find conflicting information as noticed
> here:
>
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/modules/ps2797/products_configuration_example09186a00808066b8.shtml#step4
>
> This guide recommends making the ports access ports, which is what I've
> been practicing.  The link you gave says the 802.1Q tagging is vital for
> 'Cisco AVVID networks', so I'm not sure this is the current best practice
> but I guess that doesn't say much about getting the points in the lab.
> Logically for me it makes more sense to use the more current access-port
> style config, which creates a little conundrum for me if you guys are
> saying the trunk-style is what they're looking for in the lab.  You
> probably caught the very nice explanation provided by Michael Sears as
> well, who supports your thoughts on it.
>
> Am I off base that the access-style config would be considered the current
> proper configuration?
>
> Thanks,
> Marty
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Tony Zunt  wrote:
>
>> Marty is correct and we know that config works just fine most of the
>> time.  I am curious whether or not CISCO may be looking for something a
>> little different for this element?  A wise sage on this forum (certainly
>> not me) pointed out earlier that CISCO recommends use of the 'switchport
>> mode  trunk' configuration when supporting ip phones on ESW (which is
>> what we do on site B, site C usually):
>>
>>
>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios-xml/ios/lanswitch/configuration/12-4t/lsw-hwic-ethsw-ic.html#GUID-379450C0-5434-4AC3-9BED-396CB7D162C1
>>
>> That's the method I practice, however in this case it is no longer
>> possible to apply the required ' 'spanning-tree portfast' command on the
>> interface in trunk mode.  Therefore the wise engineer also suggested using
>> 'no spanning-tree vlan ' command in global configuration
>> mode in order to allow the phones to boot rapidly.  I thought that was
>> brilliant and find it works well too on my lab, but I always wonder what
>> the "correct" way is.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Martin Sloan 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Singh,
>>>
>>> It does add the 'spanning tree portfast' command on the HQ switch, but
>>> not on the switch modules at the branch routers.  You have to add that
>>> command manually for the switch modules.
>>>
>>> Marty
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:33 AM, singh  wrote:
>>>

 hi Guys,

 Is the command " spanning tree portfast" required under the switch
 ports on a switch connected to the phone? Doesn't the "switchport mode
 voice vlan" <> take care of this ?


 Regards,
 singh


 Get Yourself a cool, short *@in.com* Email ID 
 now!

 ___
 For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
 please visit www.ipexpert.com

 Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
 www.PlatinumPlacement.com

>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
>>> please visit www.ipexpert.com
>>>
>>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
>>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>>>
>>
>>
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] switch- spanning tree portfast

[Bill Lake]

My experience using the access port method with ESW and the version of IOS
on the lab is that it is possible to get three results.  One, it works
perfectly.  Two, it works at first but then fails sometime later (most
likely when the proctor grades your lab).  Finally, it will not work at
all, the issue I see is that the voice vlan never activates or fails at a
later time.

I recommend using the trunk method and learning to turn off spanning tree
at a higher level such as no spanning-tree vlan xxx




On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Martin Sloan wrote:

> Hi Tony,
>
> I would like to know the 'correct' way too (at least in the context of the
> lab grading) because I want to make sure I get the points on this!  When
> technology evolves, you can usually find conflicting information as noticed
> here:
>
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/modules/ps2797/products_configuration_example09186a00808066b8.shtml#step4
>
> This guide recommends making the ports access ports, which is what I've
> been practicing.  The link you gave says the 802.1Q tagging is vital for
> 'Cisco AVVID networks', so I'm not sure this is the current best practice
> but I guess that doesn't say much about getting the points in the lab.
> Logically for me it makes more sense to use the more current access-port
> style config, which creates a little conundrum for me if you guys are
> saying the trunk-style is what they're looking for in the lab.  You
> probably caught the very nice explanation provided by Michael Sears as
> well, who supports your thoughts on it.
>
> Am I off base that the access-style config would be considered the current
> proper configuration?
>
> Thanks,
> Marty
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Tony Zunt  wrote:
>
>> Marty is correct and we know that config works just fine most of the
>> time.  I am curious whether or not CISCO may be looking for something a
>> little different for this element?  A wise sage on this forum (certainly
>> not me) pointed out earlier that CISCO recommends use of the 'switchport
>> mode  trunk' configuration when supporting ip phones on ESW (which is
>> what we do on site B, site C usually):
>>
>>
>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios-xml/ios/lanswitch/configuration/12-4t/lsw-hwic-ethsw-ic.html#GUID-379450C0-5434-4AC3-9BED-396CB7D162C1
>>
>> That's the method I practice, however in this case it is no longer
>> possible to apply the required ' 'spanning-tree portfast' command on the
>> interface in trunk mode.  Therefore the wise engineer also suggested using
>> 'no spanning-tree vlan ' command in global configuration
>> mode in order to allow the phones to boot rapidly.  I thought that was
>> brilliant and find it works well too on my lab, but I always wonder what
>> the "correct" way is.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Martin Sloan 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Singh,
>>>
>>> It does add the 'spanning tree portfast' command on the HQ switch, but
>>> not on the switch modules at the branch routers.  You have to add that
>>> command manually for the switch modules.
>>>
>>> Marty
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:33 AM, singh  wrote:
>>>

 hi Guys,

 Is the command " spanning tree portfast" required under the switch
 ports on a switch connected to the phone? Doesn't the "switchport mode
 voice vlan" <> take care of this ?


 Regards,
 singh


 Get Yourself a cool, short *@in.com* Email ID 
 now!

 ___
 For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
 please visit www.ipexpert.com

 Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
 www.PlatinumPlacement.com

>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
>>> please visit www.ipexpert.com
>>>
>>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
>>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>>>
>>
>>
>
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
> visit www.ipexpert.com
>
> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] switch- spanning tree portfast

[Martin Sloan]

Hi Tony,

I would like to know the 'correct' way too (at least in the context of the
lab grading) because I want to make sure I get the points on this!  When
technology evolves, you can usually find conflicting information as noticed
here:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/modules/ps2797/products_configuration_example09186a00808066b8.shtml#step4

This guide recommends making the ports access ports, which is what I've
been practicing.  The link you gave says the 802.1Q tagging is vital for
'Cisco AVVID networks', so I'm not sure this is the current best practice
but I guess that doesn't say much about getting the points in the lab.
Logically for me it makes more sense to use the more current access-port
style config, which creates a little conundrum for me if you guys are
saying the trunk-style is what they're looking for in the lab.  You
probably caught the very nice explanation provided by Michael Sears as
well, who supports your thoughts on it.

Am I off base that the access-style config would be considered the current
proper configuration?

Thanks,
Marty



On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Tony Zunt  wrote:

> Marty is correct and we know that config works just fine most of the
> time.  I am curious whether or not CISCO may be looking for something a
> little different for this element?  A wise sage on this forum (certainly
> not me) pointed out earlier that CISCO recommends use of the 'switchport
> mode  trunk' configuration when supporting ip phones on ESW (which is
> what we do on site B, site C usually):
>
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios-xml/ios/lanswitch/configuration/12-4t/lsw-hwic-ethsw-ic.html#GUID-379450C0-5434-4AC3-9BED-396CB7D162C1
>
> That's the method I practice, however in this case it is no longer
> possible to apply the required ' 'spanning-tree portfast' command on the
> interface in trunk mode.  Therefore the wise engineer also suggested using
> 'no spanning-tree vlan ' command in global configuration
> mode in order to allow the phones to boot rapidly.  I thought that was
> brilliant and find it works well too on my lab, but I always wonder what
> the "correct" way is.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Martin Sloan wrote:
>
>> Singh,
>>
>> It does add the 'spanning tree portfast' command on the HQ switch, but
>> not on the switch modules at the branch routers.  You have to add that
>> command manually for the switch modules.
>>
>> Marty
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:33 AM, singh  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> hi Guys,
>>>
>>> Is the command " spanning tree portfast" required under the switch ports
>>> on a switch connected to the phone? Doesn't the "switchport mode voice
>>> vlan" <> take care of this ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> singh
>>>
>>>
>>> Get Yourself a cool, short *@in.com* Email ID 
>>> now!
>>>
>>> ___
>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
>>> please visit www.ipexpert.com
>>>
>>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
>>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
>> visit www.ipexpert.com
>>
>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>>
>
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] switch- spanning tree portfast

[Tony Zunt]

Marty is correct and we know that config works just fine most of the time.
I am curious whether or not CISCO may be looking for something a little
different for this element?  A wise sage on this forum (certainly not me)
pointed out earlier that CISCO recommends use of the 'switchport mode  trunk'
configuration when supporting ip phones on ESW (which is what we do on site
B, site C usually):

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios-xml/ios/lanswitch/configuration/12-4t/lsw-hwic-ethsw-ic.html#GUID-379450C0-5434-4AC3-9BED-396CB7D162C1

That's the method I practice, however in this case it is no longer possible
to apply the required ' 'spanning-tree portfast' command on the interface
in trunk mode.  Therefore the wise engineer also suggested using 'no
spanning-tree vlan ' command in global configuration mode
in order to allow the phones to boot rapidly.  I thought that was brilliant
and find it works well too on my lab, but I always wonder what the
"correct" way is.

Thanks



On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Martin Sloan wrote:

> Singh,
>
> It does add the 'spanning tree portfast' command on the HQ switch, but not
> on the switch modules at the branch routers.  You have to add that command
> manually for the switch modules.
>
> Marty
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:33 AM, singh  wrote:
>
>>
>> hi Guys,
>>
>> Is the command " spanning tree portfast" required under the switch ports
>> on a switch connected to the phone? Doesn't the "switchport mode voice
>> vlan" <> take care of this ?
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> singh
>>
>>
>> Get Yourself a cool, short *@in.com* Email ID 
>> now!
>>
>> ___
>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
>> visit www.ipexpert.com
>>
>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>>
>
>
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
> visit www.ipexpert.com
>
> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Spanning Tree Portfast

[Michael.Sears]

Recommended for HQ Switch Access Ports:

interface GigabitEthernet1/0/20
 description ==HQ Phone 1
 switchport access vlan xxx
 switchport mode access
 switchport voice vlan xxx
 switchport priority extend cos 0
 spanning-tree portfast

Recommended for use with HWIC-4ESW:

interface FastEthernet0/3/0
 description ==R2 Phone 1
 switchport trunk native vlan xxx
 switchport mode trunk
 switchport voice vlan sxx
 switchport priority extend cos 0
 switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q

Portfast Command:
Typical STP convergence time is around 50 seconds by default, so basically 
every port takes around 50 seconds to initialize and be in say forwarding 
state, this is a lot of time and is not needed to be spent to check for loops 
in your network especially if you know there won't be any network loops through 
that port.  The port bypasses the listening, learning, filtering steps when 
using "portfast" increasing convergence times.  It is advisable to utilize this 
command on access ports in the older versions of code.  The newer versions of 
code have the command "spanning-tree portfast trunk" for use on trunk ports.

I would recommend that you use "spanning-tree portfast" on server ports and 
phone ports, but it has no effect on trunked ports.

Michael Sears, CCIE(V)#38404
Cisco Certified Unfied Communications Computing Systems Specialist
E911 Insrastructure Specialist
 "Designing and Implementing Cisco Unified Communications on Unified Computing 
Systems"



___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] RSVP Problem

[Vasanth]

Thanks Martin,

Hi Somphol,

I'll share the traces once I get an opportunity to set the same up again. I
had it in another VM which I had delete as a result of space contraint.

I remember very well and how I spent hours troubleshooting it.

Thanks,
Vasanth


Regards,
Vasanth


On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Martin Sloan wrote:

> Thanks, Vasanth.  I appreciate your input!
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:01 AM, Vasanth  wrote:
>
>> Yes. In that case you can go with the approach you have taken.
>>
>> I had tough time when doing it in a different lab scenario and then
>> finally removing the QoS policy fixed my problem and then did reverse
>> engineering of the QoS policy(with help of CCM Traces) to find out that
>> fragmentation is causing the problem. If the ask is to configure LFI and
>> RSVP on the same link then you might be using a different version of
>> IOS/CCM.
>>
>> As WAN QoS question I would alway start with auto qos and work through
>> the class-map,map-class,policy-map to meet the requirement.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Vasanth
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Vasanth
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Martin Sloan wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Vasanth,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the reply.  I was able to get this working by
>>> removing/re-adding the RSVP MTP association to the MRG in CUCM.  Calls are
>>> working fine with RSVP now.  About the fragmentation, it's required as part
>>> of the next task for WAN QoS with LFI between HQ->BR1 so I don't think I
>>> can avoid that part.  Do you agree?
>>>
>>> I posted a similar question to the group in regard to setting up the LFI
>>> for these tasks.  I've been using auto qos because it creates all of the
>>> class-maps and calculates the fragment size for me, so there's no digging
>>> for the information within Cisco docs.  If you're interested, check out my
>>> email from 6/1 titled 'Advice or opinions on Vol 2 Lab 4 Task 5.1' and let
>>> me know what you think.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Marty
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Vasanth  wrote:
>>>

 On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:30 PM, <
 ccie_voice-requ...@onlinestudylist.com> wrote:

> command under the dspfarm profile as well, it didn't copy over in my
> email:
>

 Hi Martin,

 You have auto qos enabled for 384 bandwidth frame-relay link.

 This would bring in frame-relay fragmentation of packets.

 auto qos would configure frame-relay fragment size of 480 bytes.

 This causes the ccm not able to parse the rsvp response from the Router
 (MTP) to call manager.

 If you can remove the frame-relay fragment command and check RSVP it
 should work.

 Regards,
 Vasanth

 ___
 For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
 please visit www.ipexpert.com

 Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
 www.PlatinumPlacement.com

>>>
>>>
>>
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] switch- spanning tree portfast

[Martin Sloan]

Singh,

It does add the 'spanning tree portfast' command on the HQ switch, but not
on the switch modules at the branch routers.  You have to add that command
manually for the switch modules.

Marty


On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:33 AM, singh  wrote:

>
> hi Guys,
>
> Is the command " spanning tree portfast" required under the switch ports
> on a switch connected to the phone? Doesn't the "switchport mode voice
> vlan" <> take care of this ?
>
>
> Regards,
> singh
>
>
> Get Yourself a cool, short *@in.com* Email ID 
> now!
>
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
> visit www.ipexpert.com
>
> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] switch- spanning tree portfast

[Shabeeb Mohammed]

If you don't give spanning tree portfast, then on reboot etc the device
(phone or desktop) will take 30 seconds to boot up..
On 11 Jun 2013 20:00, "singh"  wrote:

>
> hi Guys,
>
> Is the command " spanning tree portfast" required under the switch ports
> on a switch connected to the phone? Doesn't the "switchport mode voice
> vlan" <> take care of this ?
>
>
> Regards,
> singh
>
>
> Get Yourself a cool, short *@in.com* Email ID 
> now!
>
> ___
> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
> visit www.ipexpert.com
>
> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] switch- spanning tree portfast

[singh]

hi Guys,Is the command " spanning tree portfast"required under the switch 
portson aswitch connected to the phone?Doesn't the"switchport mode voice 
vlan"takecare of this ?Regards,singhGet Yourself a cool, short @in.com Email ID 
now!
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] RSVP Problem

[Martin Sloan]

Thanks, Vasanth.  I appreciate your input!


On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:01 AM, Vasanth  wrote:

> Yes. In that case you can go with the approach you have taken.
>
> I had tough time when doing it in a different lab scenario and then
> finally removing the QoS policy fixed my problem and then did reverse
> engineering of the QoS policy(with help of CCM Traces) to find out that
> fragmentation is causing the problem. If the ask is to configure LFI and
> RSVP on the same link then you might be using a different version of
> IOS/CCM.
>
> As WAN QoS question I would alway start with auto qos and work through the
> class-map,map-class,policy-map to meet the requirement.
>
> Cheers,
> Vasanth
>
>
> Regards,
> Vasanth
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Martin Sloan wrote:
>
>> Hi Vasanth,
>>
>> Thanks for the reply.  I was able to get this working by
>> removing/re-adding the RSVP MTP association to the MRG in CUCM.  Calls are
>> working fine with RSVP now.  About the fragmentation, it's required as part
>> of the next task for WAN QoS with LFI between HQ->BR1 so I don't think I
>> can avoid that part.  Do you agree?
>>
>> I posted a similar question to the group in regard to setting up the LFI
>> for these tasks.  I've been using auto qos because it creates all of the
>> class-maps and calculates the fragment size for me, so there's no digging
>> for the information within Cisco docs.  If you're interested, check out my
>> email from 6/1 titled 'Advice or opinions on Vol 2 Lab 4 Task 5.1' and let
>> me know what you think.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Marty
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Vasanth  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:30 PM, >> > wrote:
>>>
 command under the dspfarm profile as well, it didn't copy over in my
 email:

>>>
>>> Hi Martin,
>>>
>>> You have auto qos enabled for 384 bandwidth frame-relay link.
>>>
>>> This would bring in frame-relay fragmentation of packets.
>>>
>>> auto qos would configure frame-relay fragment size of 480 bytes.
>>>
>>> This causes the ccm not able to parse the rsvp response from the Router
>>> (MTP) to call manager.
>>>
>>> If you can remove the frame-relay fragment command and check RSVP it
>>> should work.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Vasanth
>>>
>>> ___
>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
>>> please visit www.ipexpert.com
>>>
>>> Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
>>> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
>>>
>>
>>
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] L2TP on Lab

[Rafael Chavantes]

Hello All,
Does anyone know how Cisco configures the local switch in way that the
remote devices sees the phones as local?

I have 2 racks here and would like to do the same, since my racks are on a
Datacenter.

If anyone point me the direction i would appreciate.

Thanks

-- 
Rafael Chavantes
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com