Yeah, I was going to say that! So RMI is just inherently slow then? Or is
it specific to the way Cisco implemented it in the editor?
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 11:15 PM Tanner Ezell
wrote:
> No, I don't believe so. It shouldn't be reading the file contents (which
> is a shame actually, imagine
No, I don't believe so. It shouldn't be reading the file contents (which is
a shame actually, imagine how useful the input/output mappings dialog would
be if you could actually select the variables in the scripts)
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 7:44 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com>
I knew it produced a list of scripts from the repo when opening the call
subflow step, but do you know/think it's actually reading the files too?
As opposed to just grabbing a list of names?
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 7:43 PM Tanner Ezell wrote:
> I wasn't specifically responding to you Bill, just
Issue would be a corporate PC with umbrella going off-site. If you add
your internal domains, it would get the _cisco-uds record always rather
then _collab-edge.
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019, 6:34 PM Norton, Mike wrote:
> Have never used Umbrella for external clients, but I would be very
> surprised
Haha whew! I was like, I know Tanner is a lot smarter than me (I’ve seen
ContactView), but was confused about how I haven’t heard a solution to this
overall problem.
Sent from an iPhone mobile device with very tiny touchscreen input keys.
Please excude my typtos.
> On Sep 24, 2019, at 7:42
I wasn't specifically responding to you Bill, just the thread in general :)
That being said, it won't be slow if there isn't much data to transfer. The
script editor is talking in java object terms, so small data can be quite
"big" and slow over the transport medium, it is also why DB resources
I’m not disagreeing with you. Im saying there are scenarios where it’s slow
even if you’re on the local LAN. You’re saying that’s NOT the case for you in
any scenario?
Sent from an iPhone mobile device with very tiny touchscreen input keys.
Please excude my typtos.
> On Sep 24, 2019, at
It will always be an issue. It uses RMI to pull data from the UCCX which is
especially slow over VPN.
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 9:58 AM Bill Talley wrote:
> Good idea, but not always true. I have several locations with scripts
> that contain REST and DB steps. These take 7-10 second to open
Have never used Umbrella for external clients, but I would be very surprised if
it somehow magically exposed your “local” domains to external clients. Internal
clients use the internal Umbrella virtual appliance to resolve names, and if
the request is for a domain defined as “local”, the
Thanks! I’ll try that out in the morning.
-sent from mobile device-
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G
2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 |
In Expressway-C:
Click: "Status" -> "Unified Communications Status" -> "View sessions authorized
by user credential"
--
Chase Mergenthal
From: cisco-voip On Behalf Of Lelio
Fulgenzi
Sent:
OK - for the life of me, I can't remember how to find the MRA sessions from
expressway.
I'm sure it was an easy thing, but now I can't even remember if I look on C or
E.
Ack!
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037
Which deployment model have you chosen? What features are you using on the
endpoint?
I’m _pretty_ sure we’ve using Umbrella, but we’ve basically pointed our on-prem
DNS servers to them. And that’s it. No endpoint configuration yet.
I’ve asked the team to make sure they do tests accordingly
Has anyone been able to get this to work?
Umbrella always finds the _collab-edge SRV record even when internally. I
imagine if we made the voice services domain a local domain we would have
the reverse issue of always seeing _cisco-uds even when external.
Any Umbrella features that could help
Outside of the Collab VT, I’d say if you are involved in post sales you get
better and more timely info in the CCP about future stuff and planning than you
do as a partner.
The stuff Srini knows and I do to some extent is about ordering and BOMs, etc
etc. and not really useful to post sales
I was just kidding around anyway.
For what it's worth, I've been at a Partner for the majority of my career
(~10 out of ~13 years), and I can honestly say that, from a post-sales
engineering role I serve, there's very little of benefit to me on the
partner side. I derive almost all of my value
Good idea, but not always true. I have several locations with scripts that
contain REST and DB steps. These take 7-10 second to open properties on any
step regardless of whether I’m onsite or remote.
Sent from an iPhone mobile device with very tiny touchscreen input keys.
Please excude my
It’s much faster if the client is run at the same site as the uccx server (RDP
to a machine with the editor installed).
Not an option that’s possible for all, but there is a huge improvement.
Especially when using the debugger.
> On Sep 24, 2019, at 10:52, Matthew Loraditch
> wrote:
>
>
It wasn’t intended to be mean.
Just an observation.
Would be nice if CCIEs (that aren’t associated with a partner), are given more
access similar to what is available to partners.
I can’t count the number of times going through support forums something links
to a partner only link.
I’m
How in the world did that slip through the cracks? Start power maybe? No
one wanted to correct him? Wowza!
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 10:32 AM Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:
> I prefer Mt. Penguin.
>
>
>
> As does Benadark Cumberband.
>
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GHPNKUMf70=3m18s
>
>
>
> ---
I’ve seen it editing scripts locally, in the repository, versions old and new.
Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
From: cisco-voip On Behalf Of Johnson, Tim
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 11:47 AM
To:
Yeah, it’s still an issue in 12.0. Right now it’s opening properties for me in
1-2 seconds, other times it’s 10.
Would be nice if they did a full makeover of the tool, but I don’t expect it.
From: cisco-voip On Behalf Of Anthony
Holloway
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 11:11 AM
To: Matthew
I prefer Mt. Penguin.
As does Benadark Cumberband.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GHPNKUMf70=3m18s
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
Thanks for the insight!
Correction to my previous post, I meant to type Mr. Penguin, and not Mt.
Penguin.
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 10:18 AM Dave, Pavan wrote:
> It’s been a while since my TAC days but CCIE meant you went straight to
> Backbone TAC. They were considering phasing this out at
It’s been a while since my TAC days but CCIE meant you went straight to
Backbone TAC. They were considering phasing this out at some point, not sure
where that went because TAC does key word based routing.
There is/was some thinking with customers that backbone = best, but the way
keywords
I would like to know this too! Seems to be different lengths of delay
depending on a few factors, however, I have not nailed down what those
factors are. If it happened more often, I'd put some time into it, but
since it's generally quick-ish, I ignore it.
I have one system I access exclusively
Low blow Mt Penguin, low blow. I'm not saying you get developers on the
case with you. I think it's more of a backbone TAC (if available) versus
the outsourced TAC. I admittedly haven't opened a TAC case since fixing my
status, so the benefit has yet to be seen by me. I did notice I can select
Still Troubleshooting with TAC. But it looks like something is up with
Extension mobility. we have ours set to log out in 12 hours. and we are
finding some phones not logging out like they should. and some kind of
issue that logs the phones out at midnight.
Working on trying to get TAC a
Mine was associated, though I haven’t seen any noticeable TAC improvements.
> On Sep 24, 2019, at 09:27, Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:
>
> I’ve forwarded this note to a couple of my colleagues. I’m pretty sure they
> had a similar experience in thinking CCIE treatment was automatic. I’ll have
> to
You'll probably want to make that into 2 SIP trunks so it can actually
failover to the other if it gets an error message back from the
Expressway-C.
On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 8:43 AM Nick via cisco-voip <
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> wrote:
> Hi All
>
> We have a situation with a client where they
Hi All
We have a situation with a client where they have an Expressway cluster 2 x
ExpC and 2 x ExpE split across two datacentre, each datacentre has
different ISP's. If they have a internet outage at one of the datacentres,
50% of the outbound video traffic is lost.
The CUCM has one SIP trunk
31 matches
Mail list logo
