Team,
I have a customer who has two separate UCCX HA cluster with their
respective CUCM cluster (merging two companies). They would like to merge
both CUCM and UCCX cluster to one cluster and upgrade them to 9.x. They
are running CUCM version *7.1.3.1-11* and UCCX cluster running *7.0(2)
Ashwani,
At this point, I question why you don't upgrade to 10.5. Coming off 7.1,
you're in for a major jump/upgrade path, you might as well go the last two
versions and be current.
Also, you didn't make clear if you're going to 9.0, or 9.1. They will have
different EOS dates.
Cisco has not
Ashwani,
Since you’re taking 2 separate CCX servers, and migrating to 1 there is no way
to bring over Historical data from the older version as part of the upgrade.
As this is Historical data, I would advise the supervisors to generate all the
reports they’ll need the week before the cutover
Hi Guys,
I am using CUCM 7 cluster and with multi VG MGCP at different location.
My Telecom provider has given list of unauthorized calls made from us. So
where we can investigate in cucm.
I collected CDR a nd cucm trace thert are showing some unsuccessful call
attempts. Is there any strong
Are these recent calls or historical?
Do you currently have any type of call accounting system where your CDR's are
currently sent?
If these are recent calls you can start with the Real Time Data in the RTMT.
Thanks,
Ryan Huff
ryanthomashuff.com
CCNA R/S, CCNA Wireless, CCNP Voice, UCCX
First - your target version should be the 10.6 release which is Communications
Manager 10.5.2 and CCX 10.6.1.
You merging of UCCX should also include going to Finesse and dropping CAD.
If you have a non-overlapping dial plan the merging is simple. However if you
have to do a lot of dial plan
Wow, 10.6 snuck in there… looks like they got e-mail support for finesse in
there which is a great help.
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Josh
Warcop
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 2:18 PM
To: Ashwani R; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re:
Talking about stuff sneaking out, expressway 8.5 is on CCO. Here is the
release notes:
http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/expressway/release_note/Cisco-Expressway-Release-Note-X8-5.pdf
The Expressway can now work with the Cisco DX Series endpoints, and with the
UCCX 10.6 supports CAD and Finesse as ️Co-resident and rumor has it that is the
only version that will support this configuration so plan accordingly.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 18, 2014, at 3:17 PM, Josh Warcop j...@warcop.com wrote:
First - your target version should be the 10.6 release
I'm trying to understand what you're pointing out. Expressway is an HTTPS proxy
so there wouldn't be any LDAP sent over the Internet. So UDS serves that
purpose so that off premise clients can search the directory.
From what I'm reading this is more of your security setup and nothing wrong
The future is Finesse only. Might as well start planning now.
Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Mikemailto:mik...@msn.com
Sent: 12/18/2014 6:23 PM
To: Josh Warcopmailto:j...@warcop.com
Cc: Ashwani Rmailto:ashw...@ranpise.com;
Another thing I just saw. Split DNS isn't required and generally I dislike
split DNS even though it does have its use cases.
Using different internal host domains, external domains, and different presence
domains is supported. What it comes down to is certificates and if you're going
to go
Thanks Josh.
Right now we create pseudo-userids in our LDAP directory for just about any
directory entry users want, e.g. College of Arts, so they can find the
extension easily. This extends to many, many non user based entries. This
allows us to have a many to one relationship directory
Interesting, this is the impression I got when attending a Live session this
year. I'll have to spend some more time reading.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 18, 2014, at 7:14 PM, Josh Warcop j...@warcop.com wrote:
Another thing I just saw. Split DNS isn't required and generally I dislike
CAD and Finesse can't be active at the same time unless you are on version 10.6
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 18, 2014, at 9:02 PM, Kevin Przybylowski kev...@advancedtsg.com
wrote:
Do you mean the last version? They’ve been together the last few revisions.
From: cisco-voip
They have both existed since 10 but you were stuck with one or the other, with
10.6 you will be allowed to have both in production, there is a white paper
coming with details.
Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-V, CCNA-RS, CCDA
Network Engineer
We understand and solve your
technology challengers so
That is configurable via the CUCM Ldap Directory configuration. What is
returned when searching is not related to the primary extension on the user
account. The CUCM LDAP directory configuration allows you to pick from
telephoneNumber or ipPhone.
You're not limited to connecting only to Active
That’s great, will help get people off CAD and into Finesse if you can easily
show them in their own environment.
You’d think they would put this in the release notes as it’s a pretty big deal
in the CCX world.
From: NateCCIE [mailto:natec...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 8:14
It seems UDS isn’t that great when pictures are in AD, for user info, it should
be the same?
From: Josh Warcop [mailto:j...@warcop.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 4:30 PM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi; NateCCIE
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] Expressway 8.5 is out
That's good news. That will be a good start.
I'm not sure about moving from to AD to LDAP as our source. There are other
issues there, namely LDAP version compatibility.
I'll have to see about convincing the AD team to import the vanity accounts
into the domain. Even if they import them
Wait and see, probably after the holidays
Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-V, CCNA-RS, CCDA
Network Engineer
We understand and solve your
technology challengers so
you can sell and service cars.
Facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/heliontech?ref=hl |
Twitterhttps://twitter.com/HelionTech |
Hello,
The support for concurrent use of CAD and Finesse for UCCX is expected to be
announced in January (in all likelihood). Our internal testing has completed,
but we are waiting to tie up a few loose ends.
Regards,
Abhiram Kramadhati
CCIE Voice # 40065
Contact Center TAC
Cisco Systems
Having lived thru one of these, (albeit 15 years ago), you should also look
at your voicemail system. Does your voicemail system allow you forward
calls externally, or from a menu? It's an avenue of investigation.
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Dharambir kumar varma
dharambi...@gmail.com
URI dialing uses the directory URI which is not the extension. So in my Jabber
client I see 'usern...@domain.com' to call someone via directory URI. Again
this is generated by the LDAP attribute. You can add additional URIs to the DN
but the one in the directory is the one imported via LDAP.
Ok. Thanks. I'll have to try and sort through that as I get further into my
readings.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 18, 2014, at 10:18 PM, Josh Warcop j...@warcop.com wrote:
URI dialing uses the directory URI which is not the extension. So in my
Jabber client I see 'usern...@domain.com' to
25 matches
Mail list logo
