I know nothing about UCCX, but from an HTTP perspective, the problem does not
quite make sense as described.
If the HTTP server is “spitting back some HTML” then it had to have also spit
back a status code. The status code is in the HTTP response headers before the
content. Content cannot possi
A+++ Would recommend to anyone!
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 1:53 PM Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:
> I tried fooling around with it. I still think it’s in it’s infancy. Things
> like the PIN entry moves to the panel… what? You have voice recognition,
> let me say my PIN outloud!
>
>
>
> Also, I had the room
I mean an outbound flow... offnet Jabber calls PSTN... I need it to go to
primary DC... the only way I can force that is by lowering priority of the
collab-edge SRV record.
To force a failover, I put the primary in maintenance mode, then Jabber
times out and dies... log out, log back in and it con
That seems correct. It seems like you’re speaking about an outbound flow and
Lelio is speaking about an inbound flow.
The traversal client cluster (the CS) should know about all the peers in the
traversal server cluster (the Es).
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 29, 2020, at 15:21, Jonathan Charles
OK, maybe I am misunderstanding... I have th E's paired together as a
cluster and the C's paired together as a cluster... I have the C's
initiating a UCM traversal client to both E's... is this not correct?
Jonathan
On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 7:59 PM Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:
> I could be wrong here,
I tried fooling around with it. I still think it's in it's infancy. Things like
the PIN entry moves to the panel... what? You have voice recognition, let me
say my PIN outloud!
Also, I had the room open once and my manager coughed really loud and the
system started joining his personal room! WT
Is anyone successfully using the Webex Assistant for all the cool features?
I've been testing this on a Kit Plus, and haven't had that much luck. It does
offer you to say "join the meeting" for a OBTP scheduled meeting, but, then I
get asked on-screen if I'm the host and the assistant responds t
Well at least the docs bumped the WAN tolerances to 80Ms instead of the 30Ms it
used to be... so... progress? Lol
Honestly, I don’t see them changing intra-clustering communications anymore
than it is today.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 29, 2020, at 13:28, Charles Goldsmith wrote:
Yes, but w
Yes, but when installing distributed systems (across geographically diverse
DC's), this is better than having Core1 talk to Edge2 scenario all the time.
Hopefully this is resolved soon and we can go back to clustering.
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 11:59 AM ROZA, Ariel
wrote:
> But without clusterin
Correct, the edge cluster and the control cluster are very much separate
entities apart from themselves and load balance within their own respective
clusters.
As long as clustering has been implemented correctly, in that scenario, the
edge cluster would still be able to load balance and distrib
But without clustering, if Core1 fails, Edge1 will still be active and Jabber
clients will still see Edge1 running and attempt to connect through it!
De: cisco-voip En nombre de Charles
Goldsmith
Enviado el: martes, 28 de enero de 2020 23:18
Para: Lelio Fulgenzi
CC: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
1) socialminer needs to be accessible by the user. So, public DNS and
public HTTPS cert.
2) You should have deployed social miner with a public domain to start
with, in the DMZ. This will make everything easier and cleaner to deal
with.
On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 12:24 AM naresh rathore wrote:
>
Is that A record needed for some function or another of Jabber to operate?
We have two equally weighted SRV to our E and it will fail over to the other
host when it's not available, depending on the service, if it chooses to
operate. The client periodically re-looks up the SRV record anyways in
13 matches
Mail list logo
