Sure, you could fence them off if creating an isolated or appropriately gapped
network is in your wheelhouse. Since the devices are usually used with pass
through, they’re potentially exposed to some issues regardless of how well you
try and secure the address space of the phones.
In my case I
I’m pretty sure I’ve seen a few Cisco published cleaning documents. They were
posted in forums. Couldn’t really find a live link.
People were really worried about the touch tens for example. Cisco wanted them
to use specific cleaning materials.
From: cisco-voip On Behalf Of James
Buchanan
I’m guessing, based on conversations that I had with a few Cisco folk, that,
yes, TAC support will likely change along with this. Expect Basic level support
for free.
And, to my surprise, expect that Basic level support to match Webex basic level
support.
It will be painful is my prediction.
Thankfully I don't have to deal with that, but if it were me, I'd ask my
management/HR to get involved, get the CDC suggested methods (assuming you
are in the US), and let them draft a policy and implement it.
This is all primarily to CYA, because you don't want to be blamed for
anything that
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
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
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
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
Oops! "tierd TAC support" was intended.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 9:30 AM Charles Goldsmith wrote:
> "come with *tired* TAC support?"
>
> I bet they are!
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 9:23 AM Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> That's great info, thank you for
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:
"come with *tired* TAC support?"
I bet they are!
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 9:23 AM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's great info, thank you for sharing.
>
> Does this mean that "traditional" tac support is also changing? Because,
> doesn't Flex come with tired
Flex has and will include the same TAC access you’ve had for software with SWSS
(24x7) for no additional cost. There are enhanced levels that cost more and
come with additional features. I don’t honestly know the details on those, they
are designed for large/hi touch accounts, I think dedicated
That's great info, thank you for sharing.
Does this mean that "traditional" tac support is also changing? Because,
doesn't Flex come with tired TAC support? Any info you can share there?
Thanks!
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 8:48 AM Matthew Loraditch <
mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:
>
>
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/unified-communications/unified-communications-licensing/eos-eol-notice-c51-744285.html
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/unified-communications/unified-communications-licensing/eos-eol-notice-c51-744286.html
Everything CUCM/UCXN is
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,
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
16 matches
Mail list logo
