The tftp process has supported that since 4.x days (it was used for the proxy
tftp feature). Endpoints have been preferring it since the Cius days, when
phone loads started getting so big traditional TFTP just wouldn’t work.
These days the TFTP process can take requests using tftp on UDP:69,
We got caught by that too. Can’t remember exactly when that happened.
-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.
I'm looking at a phone register and I see no tftp traffic. All http over
6970. when did this happen?
I'm on 12.5
if this is the new norm, then can I get rid of tftp option in dhcp?
Scott
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Yea, I was actually looking at some crash bugs to see if that's an easier
route haha.
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019, 4:27 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Interesting, so you want to change the client behavior, such that you can
> remotely signal the client to return the
Ok. I got feedback on this. It’s a strange scenario.
I’m going to try and replicate and test and provide feedback tomorrow.
Lelio
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E |
It’s a global change that needs to be done in conjunction with the user setting
something in their meeting as well.
I went through the slides and realized this and got feedback from a few places.
It’s basically a two step process.
It can be onestep if the admin changes the base template.
---
Interesting, so you want to change the client behavior, such that you can
remotely signal the client to return the login screen?
I have never looked into that, but it sounds like a tall order to me. I'd
be surprised if that's possible. But, I'll watch this thread for further
developments.
BRB,
Has anyone found a way to force logout all or some Jabber clients on an
IM Cluster?
Restarting XCP Router or un-assigning presence service for the user just
makes them spin and show it can't connect to IM
ForceLogoutTimerDesktop is in the parameter guide but pushing this out via
jabber-config
Yea, I'm not a huge fan of the Webex Directory Connector. It could be a
lot better. Something like Synergy Sky works much better.
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:46 PM Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:
> Just a heads up that the Hybrid calendar parse tool does _*not*_ work
> with forwarded invites last time I
This is a global change in Control Hub. You can say to not require host
pins at all from cloud-registered video endpoints. No other changes needed.
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 12:33 PM Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:
>
>
> You can. But the way to do this is long and arduous. It requires users to
> create a
Just a heads up that the Hybrid calendar parse tool does _not_ work with
forwarded invites last time I checked. This is a big drag. You can copy/paste
meeting details into a new meeting I think.
Or did I already say this?
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications
You can. But the way to do this is long and arduous. It requires users to
create a template in Web interface and then use that template in outlook.
I’m hoping they include this option soon in the options/settings available in
the outlook plug-in natively.
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior
The RoomKit mini can act as a USB device and then they can use a laptop to
join the meeting.
The other devices right now only support calling in to other meeting
services via SIP/H.323. Zoom has Cloud Room Connector licenses you can pay
for to enable dialing in via SIP/H.323. With Microsoft
If the endpoints are cloud-registered, you can disable it asking for a host
pin.
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 9:56 AM Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:
>
> I think you've hit the nail on the head Adam.
>
> The idea of these room systems are great... they really do making joining
> meetings easy (as long as you
Tanner, I ran a test and actually, anything inside the Do step will block
events.
As a test, I used this Do step:
Do {
int i = 0;
do {
i++;
} while (i <= 1);
}
And then hang up the a call during the do step, and see that nothing
happens; no interrupt. However, the
yes it would. We struggle with this too. Really it's two problems:
- By the time we went to roll out these units, everyone already knew
and loved Zoom.
- With Zoom, you can play with it in your office before the meeting.
99% of our users probably use these things 1-2 times a year, but when
I think you've hit the nail on the head Adam.
The idea of these room systems are great... they really do making joining
meetings easy (as long as you know to bring your host PIN, argh!).
But I think we are going to be relegated to providing the best fit for all,
which, in the end, might be a
I don't know if that whole mess is necessary to join a Zoom call. If the party
who sent you the Zoom invite has the connector service for interop, you can
usually call the meeting by @zoomcrc.com as SIP call. If they
don't, it prompts you to sign in on an app with your account (which is paying
Yea I saw the zoom connector too. My initial preference is to deploy the Webex
devices since most of our employees use Webex meetings, but come up with a
standard plan that allows them to join Zoom, GoToMeeting and other 3rd party
meetings in a user friendly way that is similar to joining Webex
19 matches
Mail list logo
