Hi Claiton,
Was this an upgrade or a fresh install of the UCCX 10.6? Also, did you confirm
before the Finesse activation that the licenses did show up?
Regards,
Abhiram Kramadhati
Technical Solutions Manager, CBABU
CCIE Voice # 40065
From: Claiton Campos
Hi All
Thanks for your responses, I should have been more clear, I was referring
to a virtualised install on UCS servers already. I have always followed the
compatibility matrix and recently upgraded a 8.5.1 on UCS to 10.5 using an
interim step of 9.1.2, however my colleague then claimed he had
Just a note on this.
I have just completed a direct Hardware 8.5 to VM 10.5 with network changes
using Prime collaboration deployment. No Cop files need to be installed, No
jump upgrades, No restoring from backup. Really was a simple process.
If you haven’t used PCD I would strongly suggest
PCD is a great tool for single-site installs or upgrades in a lab environment.
Biggest limitation of PCD when multisites are involved, since it pushes all
ISOs from the PCD server. Maybe an ability to leverage ISOs on VMWare
datastores instead of from the PCD server.
Dennis Heim | Emerging
Folks:
Wrapping up on this thread. BU created three new defects for this issue:
CSCut60329
Misconfigured Mobile Connect-SNR causes call leak in StationD
CSCut60376
Misconfigured Mobile Connect-SNR causes call leak in StationD part2
CSCut60641
Race condition at LBM Interface between LBM res and
I have a pair of cubes on 4000 series ISRs. I want to do cube-ha on the ccm
facing side and the itsp facing side.
1.) Am I better off just doing HSRP on both sides (which is 70% of cube-ha
anyway) or is it practical to do the connected call failover portion?
2.) If I include the connected call
Hi Abhiram,
It is a fresh install. Yes, before the Finesse activation, the demo
licenses were activated , could create all CSQ structure , applications
upload prompts etc.
Em seg, 30 de mar de 2015 às 06:16, Abhiram Kramadhati (akramadh)
akram...@cisco.com escreveu:
Hi Claiton,
Was this
That is a bug you are hitting I believe. CSCup16883. There is a workaround of
running an SQL command to grant users correct perms, but it doesn't stick:
Identify users: run sql select * from Cuic_data:cuicuser
Set user with admin perms: run sql update cuic_data:cuicuser set cuicroles
='127'
All,
Question - hopefully an easy one. We just did an upgrade from UCCX 8.5 to UCCX
10.5, HA, with Premium licensing. When I try to add a user to the Historical
Reporting Capability View I get the below pop up message. Also in CUIC I can
log in with the System User that was created during
What hardware is everyone using to upgrade there UC enviroment to?
We have UCS Blades with netapp storage, but have had some limitations on IO
(prior to the upgraded controllers) that I'm a little concerned about.
I like the idea of vmotion. But I'm thinking if it's my back side on the
line
Oooo, good question Brian. It's my understanding that in order for the
below specific call flow to work, an MTP is required for DTMF inter-working
of inband to out-of-band.
PSTN Caller Pushes DTMF --- ITSP Delivers RFC2833 --- CUBE Delivers OOB
--- CUCM Devlier OOB --- UCCX CTI Port Receives OOB
All,
I know the name itself, LTI, includes the word transcoding, but I'm just
double checking that this will or will not work for registering an MTP on
the CUBE. All roads are leading me to the answer, but it just seems like a
huge miss on Cisco's part to not allow us to register MTPs as well as
What are you trying to accomplish with the MTP that can't already be
accomplished with media flow-through and dtmf-relay?
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Anthony Holloway
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com wrote:
All,
I know the name itself, LTI, includes the word transcoding, but I'm just
dtmf-relay I believe should handle that find for you without the MTP.
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Anthony Holloway
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com wrote:
Oooo, good question Brian. It's my understanding that in order for the
below specific call flow to work, an MTP is required for DTMF
Interesting.
http://mic.com/articles/114046/you-probably-didn-t-know-calling-911-is-a-problem-but-it-is-these-guys-are-fixing-it
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
University of Guelph
519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
Ok, time to take a step back and appreciate the situation I just found
myself in.
You were absolutely correct. I lab'd this up just now and my mouth is a
gape. I've been doing and teaching the MTP method for UCCX for like 4
years now, and not once have I ever had anyone correct me. Not in the
This chart has all the interoperability that can be handled by dtmf-relay
natively on CUBE-
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/voice/cube/configuration/cube-book/dtmf-relay.html#concept_264617919921874995299551391601561
Brian
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Brian Meade
Just an FYI, there may be some NSFW content on that page . . . thankfully no
one from HR was walking by when I scrolled down and saw the breateses ☺
Rob
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio
Fulgenzi
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 3:12 PM
To:
According to the table in that document, what I just did is not supported.
Great!
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 1:52 PM Anthony Holloway
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, time to take a step back and appreciate the situation I just found
myself in.
You were absolutely correct. I lab'd
omg. my apologies.
i just noticed that the page scrolls into other stories.
---
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,
It's been a while, but last time I looked (and this is how our SRST routers are
configured) you have to use COR lists.
It was confusing at first when I started reading them, but I just looked at
them as search spaces and partitions. The whole subset matching diagram
confused me too. :)
Lisa,
SIP or TDM/PRI?
Have you gandered into RTMT and taken a look at any active / recent alerts?
Thanks,
Ryan
Original Message
From: Lisa Notarianni lisa.notaria...@scranton.edu
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 04:48 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Temp
Interesting. Could you grab the MCVD logs from the time of the demo license
activation and the finesse activation when it got invalidated?
Regards,
Abhiram Kramadhati
Technical Solutions Manager, CBABU
CCIE Voice # 40065
From: Claiton Campos claitoncam...@gmail.commailto:claitoncam...@gmail.com
A few weeks ago we upgraded Call Manager and Unity Connection from 8.6.2 to
10.5.1.
We have experienced 2 intermittent outbound calling issues:
1. “Temp Fail” shows on phone display and only option on phone button is
“End Call”
2. Outbound callers dial a number and hear nothing
2 PRIs one each Communication Media Module– MGCP gateways. 2 Call Managers set
up as redundant.
Cisco TAC looked at RTMT with me today. They want us to set up packet
captures and try to duplicate the problem tomorrow. I am just wondering if
this is an upgrade issue that anyone else may be
Do you have any SDL Links going out of services? Are you clustering over a WAN?
Temp Fail could be the result of two devices registered to different nodes on
an active call when the SDL Link (tcp 8002) between those nodes goes down.
file view activelog syslog/CiscoSyslog
HTH,
—
Adam
From:
Are the mgcp gateways on a supported IOS for 10.5?
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lisa
Notarianni
Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 5:02 PM
To: Ryan Huff; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Temp Fail since upgrade
2 PRIs one each
Indeed.
You can assign incoming COR lists to ranges of DNs (priviledge
assignment) and outgoing COR lists to dial-peers (priviledge checking).
call-manager-fallback
cor incoming emergencyOnly 1 1000 - 1100
or something like that.
-Carlos
Lelio Fulgenzi @ 30/03/2015 17:29 -0300 dixit:
I'm not aware of any known caveats of that nature regarding that upgrade path.
Any recent network changes between ccm and the gateways since the upgrade?
I have seen situations with MGCP where the ccm side of the gateway config had
to be rebuilt after a CCM upgrade.
Are you running an ED code
In CUBE HA the sccp subsystem is in a standby mode on the backup router. I
had the same thought as you at first trying to use the extra DSPs in the
standby. The sccp system needs to be bound to the inside interface and the
DSP profiles need to use the same names on both routers.
On Mar 26, 2015
I can tell you it is a lot easier to get through A2Q when you aren’t dealing
with network attached storage. The costs will be higher for a ucs C series
chassis because it is an all in one server unlike the blades. I prefer UCS-C
series typically because I don’t have to depend on a network
We are about to deploy Cisco IP phones for one of our remote offices and they
are asking that we provide some type of caption or any other type of service
for a staff member that is hearing impair/hard of hearing.
It seems like there are few companies that can provide these services, NexTalk,
I'm going to be suggesting rack mount C series to my manager at this time, for
a number of reasons.
We have two data centres, so I have to split the equipment over two locations.
Putting a full fledged B series solution would be cost prohibitive.
Plus, I like that the C series has local
C series with local storage is definitely the most popular for UC. If you
still want enterprise storage features, Nutanix has a nice solution for
utilizing your local storage-
http://urns.com/blog/2014/12/nutanix-and-uc-part-1-introduction-and-overview/
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 11:42 AM,
34 matches
Mail list logo
