http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/connection/8x/gui_reference/guide/8xcucgrgx/8xcucgrg060.html#pgfId-1052219
Check out table 6-9, specifically the “Callers Hear” section. This doc talks
about Call Handlers but the “Callers Hear” section is applicable to CUC users
and should
I don’t know why this failed to connected when reading the release notes. Quite
the brain fart… No OS = no SFTP = local mounting of ISO.
- Dan
From: NateCCIE [mailto:natec...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 4:42 PM
To: Daniel Pagan <dpa...@fidelus.com>
Cc: Justin Steinberg &l
I’m digging up this old thread once again.
With PCD v11 released, it’s great to see that remote SFTP sources can now be
used, but it’s also disappointing to see it restricted to upgrades only. Does
anyone know if there are plans to support migrations using a remote SFTP
server? Is the issue of
Interesting… Out of curiosity, there should first be a CANCEL to the IP phones
where the call wasn’t answered. The phones should then 200 that CANCEL request,
and then send the 487 final response to the original INVITE for the call. Do
you see the 487 final response six seconds after the
cucm <-- 487 with CSeq: 101 INVITE <-- phoneB (one response per
phone)
cucm --> ACK --> phoneB
cucm --> ACK --> phoneC
Hope this helps. I’m pretty interested in knowing what you or TAC finds.
- Dan
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf O
the
local ringer, but if the issue is a delay in *starting* the ringer, then I
agree this 487 certainly shouldn’t be applicable.
Dan
From: avhollo...@gmail.com [mailto:avhollo...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Anthony
Holloway
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 11:27 PM
To: Erick Wellnitz
Cc: Daniel Pagan
Accomplish this with the Accept and Relay option for user message actions for
VM1 and specify VM2’s SMTP address. This should keep the message available for
VM1 while forwarding a copy to VM2. You’ll need to setup CUC with a SMTP smart
host in order to relay messages, and will likely need to
I would also suggest debugging the signaling protocol being used for calls
to/from this analog port or reviewing CCM SDI/SDL traces. If these are MGCP
controlled, try to determine if CUCM transmitted a DLCX without first receiving
a NTFY for the on-hook event (O: L/hu). Seeing a NTFY with O:
My first step would be to find out the direction of the 500 final response. I
would run a ccsip messages debug on CUBE and recreate the issue for determining
where the 500 final response is being generated. The User-Agent header should
tell you what device is generating it. My second step would
Hey Ryan! Hope you’re well ☺
Just wanted to add here that not supporting early offer should result in one of
two things – either local ring back would be generated on the calling device
and/or there will be no audio in scenarios where audio cut-through is required
before the 200 final response
Comments below. Hope this helps.
- Danend attach-
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Dave
Goodwin
Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 8:41 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] advice on upgrading large CUCM cluster with CoW from 8.6
Had no idea this XML generator was available. I’ve been grabbing sample scripts
off Github and customizing them in the lab for testing purposes so this should
supplement that setup very well. I just tested it for a few minutes and it
seems like it replaces device-specific fields (via, contact
Looking at the SIP transactions in a parser that doesn't display header fields
(it doesn't even have the start-line) really limits how much information one
can gather from the output. The REFER should have either a Replaces: header
field or, most likely, a Refer-To: header field, which should
Not to mention further impact caused by a “can’t break what’s broken” approach
without having full knowledge of additional dependencies. I would add a third
to your list:
3) Do I understand all the dependencies of this service I’m restarting, trunk
I’m resetting, server I’m rebooting, or
Just a heads up, the Use Forward Settings of Line Group Member should use the
forward no coverage settings of the DN forwarding to the Hunt Pilot. No need to
have an active line member in the LG. Just ran a quick test to confirm - the
only member of a LG was logged out with the device
the Call Forward No Coverage (CFNC) settings for
the original called number that forwarded the call to this hunt pilot.”
- Dan
From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com]
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 11:38 AM
To: Daniel Pagan <dpa...@fidelus.com>; rschukne...@gmx.de;
cisc
Set the call handler to send voice messages to a specific user with mailbox.
Configure that CUC user to relay voice messages (not accept and relay) to an
SMTP address in the Message Actions config page. This assumes you have an SMTP
server configured in the SMTP Smart Host page. Also the user
Personally, I would push back to them and simply provide them with the request
URI your transmitting, which they should be using for routing purposes.
INVITE sip:1343@10.11.0.9:5060 SIP/2.0
I say push back because a 404 is a very straight forward response and sent for
one reason. If their
I’ve heard of this as well and actually have an open case that will require a
rebuild of CUC in order to add an additional vCPU. From what I recall, it can
be done but Unity won’t utilize the additional core unless it’s detected during
the install process. CUC, from what I know, is the only UC
According to the RFC, the Allow-Events header is specifically used to convey
events that a UA can support using the SUBSCRIBE method. Typically we’ll see
KPML or Presence as a supported Allow-Event value, which makes sense since both
of those events are initiated through SUBSCRIBE/NOTIFY
I have heard of this but have yet to see it from a trace perspective. For
troubleshooting, my first step would be to determine if the problem is CUCM or
the IP Phones that don't stop ringing. The call is sent to an 8851/61 using
INVITE, which means CUCM should force them to stop ringing on
ll suggest, if possible, to address the main
problem of your session expiration.
Hope this helps.
- Dan
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
Daniel Pagan
Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 4:12 PM
To: Norton, Mike <mikenor...@pwsd76.ab.ca>; cisco-voip
ly pushing for creation
of a new defect and can share that ID if you feel it would help.
Hope this helps.
Dan
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
Daniel Pagan
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 10:28 AM
To: cisco.voip <cisco.v...@verizon.net>; cisco-voip
Just adding my experience to this…
I agree and can attest to the stratum-1 server caveat below. After some time,
the NTP client can get blocked and force you (the general “you”) to update your
entries in the near future. Of course multiple NTP entries can be configured
but if you’re doing
Some of you might be interested to hear that Cisco has announced a new method
of renewing one's expert-level certification. While taking a written exam is
still an option, those needing to renew their CCIE/CCDE will be allowed to
enroll themselves in select classes, online and in-person, which
In your example, the SERVER2 certificate in phone-vpn-trust is there because
someone would have placed it there for some reason. Some additional info...
certificates uploaded to the phone-vpn-trust store can be associated with a VPN
gateway in /ccmadmin. When assigned to a VPN-enabled phone
and will also ensure that services remain up and running when
the security update becomes mandatory.”
- Daniel Pagan
From: cisco-voip On Behalf Of Daniel Pagan
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2020 2:36 PM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi ; Matthew Loraditch
Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
It does not appear Microsoft will be enforcing LDAP over TLS with this upcoming
patch. While the original plan was indeed to tighten this up, it seems this
requirement is being delayed until after Q2 of the year.
The advisory was updated February 4th and shows:
Windows Updates in March 2020 add
is a bit behind and needs to be updated. Hopefully
this buys everyone some time, especially for those supporting a number of
environments.
- Daniel Pagan
From: Daniel Pagan
Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2020 2:33 PM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi ; Matthew Loraditch
Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip
101 - 129 of 129 matches
Mail list logo
