Re: [cisco-voip] um, where'd the scheduled backups go in PLM

2017-06-29 Thread Ryan Huff
t providing licensing. Since we don't often issue new licenses > out into our system the "restore" would just be missing that usage data but > would be fine to restore licensing should we have to rebuild this machine. > (Standalone PLM). > > Supposedly it is gone after 11.5 any

Re: [cisco-voip] Migrating IP space

2017-04-30 Thread Ryan Huff
Ben, The "Prepare Cluster for Rollback to Pre 8.0" parameter in part, is used to empty out the ITL and CTL files on each phone (the process to do that involves more than just setting that parameter though). As I recall, you enable the parameter, bounce TVS on each server to clear out all

Re: [cisco-voip] what triggers license change in UCCx?

2017-08-08 Thread Ryan Huff
Biggest issue with the UCCX rehost most folks have is not expecting it and then winding up with a degraded call center until the rehost is complete. The Answer File Generator (https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/applicat/content/cuc-afg/index.html) is a good way to help predict the LMAC, so you can

Re: [cisco-voip] 11.5.1SU2 Can't Add Node

2017-08-09 Thread Ryan Huff
I just hit this issue tonight myself (11.5(SU1)); my case doesn't seem to fit CSCvb00248 as I am using 9 character passwords; I'm not using any special characters either. I've tried all the normal reboots, delete / re-added from the processNode table ... etc, NTP and DNS are solid. I opened a

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco Licensing - UCL / CUWL

2017-08-06 Thread Ryan Huff
Once loaded into the PLM/ELM, legitimately purchased licenses will be marked permanent (shown in the licensing inventory section). If Cisco licensing (GLO) has issued you "demo" or "temp" licenses; they will generally expire 60 days after being loaded into the PLM/ELM. -Ryan > On Aug 6, 2017,

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco Licensing - UCL / CUWL

2017-08-06 Thread Ryan Huff
, Ryan > On Aug 6, 2017, at 4:44 PM, Jon Fox <jonfox...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks Ryan, > That is what i suspected. Once purchased and uploaded they will not expire? > They don’t have a life span? > > Jon >> On 6 Aug 2017, at 21:35, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@ou

Re: [cisco-voip] Outbound Video Calls to Webex fail with 481

2017-08-20 Thread Ryan Huff
. Thanks, Ryan On Aug 20, 2017, at 6:36 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: This might have to do with DNS. I would review all your internal/external SRV/A records for EXP/CUCM and your DNS zone in EXP. It sounds like the call is traversing expressw

Re: [cisco-voip] Outbound Video Calls to Webex fail with 481

2017-08-20 Thread Ryan Huff
Do you have EXP clusters or is this a single C/E pair? Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 20, 2017, at 6:26 PM, Jonathan Charles wrote: > > We have an SX80 connected to CUCM 11.5 and VCSC 8.10 to a VCSE 8.10... > > Outbound calls route to Webex, you see them enter the meeting

Re: [cisco-voip] Outbound Video Calls to Webex fail with 481

2017-08-20 Thread Ryan Huff
Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: Do you have EXP clusters or is this a single C/E pair? Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 20, 2017, at 6:26 PM, Jonathan Charles > <jonv...@gmail.com<mailto:jonv...@gmail.com>

Re: [cisco-voip] 11.5.1SU2 Can't Add Node

2017-08-20 Thread Ryan Huff
trying to herd a litter of feral cats. -Ryan From: Matthew Loraditch <mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2017 7:52 AM To: Anthony Holloway; Dana Tong; Ryan Huff; Dave Goodwin; Brian Meade Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subje

Re: [cisco-voip] can make conference call when i use IP communicator (same settings as 7942), but the conference call is not working when i use 7942 phone

2017-05-03 Thread Ryan Huff
Couple of questions ... Do both devices have access to the same MRGL/MRG in CUCM? Does the 7942's audio codec region match the region of where the disconnected party comes from (ex. PSTN gateway) or does it need transcoded? -Ryan On May 3, 2017, at 8:04 PM, naresh rathore

Re: [cisco-voip] CISCO PHONES BAT Template.

2017-05-12 Thread Ryan Huff
Since you are coming from a dissimilar system, my advice is to create a phone template in CUCM (located in the phone subsection of the BAT menu of the publisher), per model, and put as much standardized data as you can in the phone template (device pool, CSS, sip profile, number of lines,

Re: [cisco-voip] Migrating a Cisco 2901 to a Cisco 4321

2017-05-12 Thread Ryan Huff
T1 PRI commands are substantially different if that is in play. Sent from my iPhone On May 12, 2017, at 7:35 AM, Matthew Loraditch > wrote: The vast majority of commands are the same. Netflow stuff is changed

[cisco-voip] Jabber Screen share over MRA

2017-05-12 Thread Ryan Huff
The native screen capture in the Jabber client does not work and is not supported over MRA (internal or WebEx Messenger IM Jabber works fine). I believe it is actually covered by the same Expressway caveat that states native P2P file sharing won't work over MRA. By using MFT (Managed File

Re: [cisco-voip] License File

2017-05-11 Thread Ryan Huff
I would agree, re-hosting is invaluable. When we were making the transition to CUWL back in the 9.x days ... GLO was painfully swamped. Would have been great then ... I have had much better GLO reaction lately, but still, a self-service portal for re-host is boss. Now only to make a Spark bot

Re: [cisco-voip] SME or Leaf Subscriber Offline Timer

2017-05-15 Thread Ryan Huff
In what way are you classifying a "fail"? Once a subscriber node goes offline, replication to that node will stop/fail at the next replication attempt with that node (and be marked down even sooner than that). If database replication for the ENTIRE cluster has failed, it isn't because of a

Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber Screen share over MRA

2017-05-12 Thread Ryan Huff
ically be the same kind of data since it’s an in-stream picture with text. Ben Amick Telecom Analyst From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ryan Huff Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 9:56 AM To: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com<mailto:

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco 7942 phone Echoing.

2017-05-15 Thread Ryan Huff
Let me ask you this; when a user talks, are they hearing their own voice echoed back, OR is the far end (called party) hearing the talker's (calling party) voice twice in a way that sounds like an echo? Thanks, Ryan On May 15, 2017, at 9:00 PM, Hamu Ebiso

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco 7942 phone Echoing.

2017-05-15 Thread Ryan Huff
ort paired with the interface for the voice card (Ex. voice-port 0/0/1:23) and reduce the input gain (Ex. input gain -3). Thanks, Ryan On May 15, 2017, at 9:05 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: Let me ask you this; when a user talks, are they h

Re: [cisco-voip] Migrating a Cisco 2901 to a Cisco 4321

2017-05-12 Thread Ryan Huff
@gmail.com>> wrote: If you will be using DSP's you will need to decided if you will need them on the motherboard or on the T1 NIM. On the motherboard I believe it can only be used for conferencing. You will need them on the NIM for transcoding. On May 12, 2017 6:42 AM, "Ryan Huff"

Re: [cisco-voip] Migrating a Cisco 2901 to a Cisco 4321

2017-05-12 Thread Ryan Huff
tion. On May 12, 2017 2:28 PM, "Ryan Huff" <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: So this is interesting; I was under the impression the backplane DSP could not extend to the NIM (and is the fundamental reason, among others, that the NIM has its

Re: [cisco-voip] Migrating a Cisco 2901 to a Cisco 4321

2017-05-12 Thread Ryan Huff
tec...@gmail.com<mailto:natec...@gmail.com>> wrote: What do mean by shareable to the backplane? It is my understanding that unused DSPs on a NIM can be used for conferencing/transcoding/MTP. Sent from my iPhone On May 12, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ry

Re: [cisco-voip] Migrating a Cisco 2901 to a Cisco 4321

2017-05-12 Thread Ryan Huff
:jcolon...@gmail.com>> wrote: If you will be using DSP's you will need to decided if you will need them on the motherboard or on the T1 NIM. On the motherboard I believe it can only be used for conferencing. You will need them on the NIM for transcoding. On May 12, 2017 6:42 AM, "

Re: [cisco-voip] re-genarate certifications

2017-06-23 Thread Ryan Huff
I suspect that would just obliterate CTL every time certbot runs the renewal ... every 3 months all phones reject registration... fun stuff. I suspect there would have to be a fundamental change with TVS and the SBD architecture. -Ryan On Jun 23, 2017, at 12:44 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)

Re: [cisco-voip] re-genarate certifications

2017-06-23 Thread Ryan Huff
Jun 23, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: I suspect that would just obliterate CTL every time certbot runs the renewal ... every 3 months all phones reject registration... fun stuff. I suspect there would have to be a fundamental cha

Re: [cisco-voip] expressway c/e

2017-06-23 Thread Ryan Huff
Pick the guides relevant to your version from here: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/unified-communications/expressway-series/products-installation-and-configuration-guides-list.html Sent from my iPhone On Jun 23, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Arun Kumar

Re: [cisco-voip] Hide Number Translation on Screen

2017-06-21 Thread Ryan Huff
The phone display is always going to show whatever digits are being sent to the called party/device (whether those are natively dialed or transformed digits). Thanks, Ryan Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 21, 2017, at 12:23 PM, David Zhars wrote: > > Is there a way to not show

Re: [cisco-voip] GLC-TE modules

2017-06-01 Thread Ryan Huff
Mike, Do you have a link for the GLC-T eos, can't find it for some reason .. #GoogleFuFail Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 1, 2017, at 9:01 AM, Mike King wrote: > > Just wanted to throw an FYI out there for people. I just ran into this, and > it's a mess. > > Short Answer. >

Re: [cisco-voip] GLC-TE modules

2017-06-01 Thread Ryan Huff
Never mind Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 1, 2017, at 9:01 AM, Mike King wrote: > > Just wanted to throw an FYI out there for people. I just ran into this, and > it's a mess. > > Short Answer. > Cisco has EOS'd the GLC-T modules (today), and replaced it with the GLC-TE

Re: [cisco-voip] Field Notice: Cisco Unified Communications Manager Release 12.0(x) does not support some deprecated phone models - Cisco

2017-05-01 Thread Ryan Huff
My guess is because of SLED and GOV. The 40s and 60s were nearly indestructible tanks with many still running. Cisco maybe giving them a longer shelf life to make the CapEx burden for new handsets easier to spread by slowly transitioning those models. I wouldn't count on them being around

Re: [cisco-voip] Field Notice: Cisco Unified Communications Manager Release 12.0(x) does not support some deprecated phone models - Cisco

2017-05-01 Thread Ryan Huff
519-824-4120 Ext 56354 le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs> Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 From: Stephen Welsh [mailto:stephen.we...@unifiedfx.com] Sent: Monday, May 01, 2017 12:36 PM To

Re: [cisco-voip] Field Notice: Cisco Unified Communications Manager Release 12.0(x) does not support some deprecated phone models - Cisco

2017-05-01 Thread Ryan Huff
. Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure Computing and Communications Services (CCS) University of Guelph 519-824-4120 Ext 56354 le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs> Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building Guelph, Ontario, N1G

Re: [cisco-voip] CCX and NTP

2017-05-08 Thread Ryan Huff
Hey Ben, This has less to do with UCCX and more to do with the lack of time precision in Windows SNTP / NTP compared to the needs of UCOS. Yes, I know, die hard Redmond boys and girls will say that ever since Win2003 that isn't the case but sorry, it is. (read:

Re: [cisco-voip] CCX and NTP

2017-05-08 Thread Ryan Huff
o many NTP servers go offline when using the pool addresses. Because of that, I've been sticking with .gov based NTP on the voice gateway. Ryan Huff, one thing about pointing to strata 1 servers, most of them have restrictions from what I've seen, while they work, they could block you for n

Re: [cisco-voip] Register MX300 G2 to CMR Cloud

2017-05-31 Thread Ryan Huff
Are you speaking about registering the endpoint to the Collaboration Cloud (Spark), or being able to use the endpoint with CMR Cloud? CMR Cloud is really nothing more than a specialize URI string (meeting.compa...@webex.com) in a b2b call through expressway (which by the way,

Re: [cisco-voip] Register MX300 G2 to CMR Cloud

2017-05-31 Thread Ryan Huff
Either way, you will need some sort of SIP registrar/proxy whether that is CUCM, Expressway or Collaboration Cloud (Spark) as the Codec's firmware alone does not provide that functionality. Sent from my iPhone On May 31, 2017, at 9:38 AM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto

Re: [cisco-voip] Register MX300 G2 to CMR Cloud

2017-05-31 Thread Ryan Huff
Also, to correct an earlier typo (my iPhone keyboard is for real this morning); a CMR URI would look like "webexmeetingnum...@company.webex.com<mailto:webexmeetingnum...@company.webex.com>". Sent from my iPhone On May 31, 2017, at 9:44 AM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlo

Re: [cisco-voip] expressway cluster restart order - E's first, then C's?

2017-09-21 Thread Ryan Huff
It really doesn’t matter other than the order in which it will impact your environment. The “cluster” isn’t a mesh replication like CUCM, it’s more of like a master slave relationship. In theory, you have the same license options on both cluster peers, so one peer can function in the same

Re: [cisco-voip] doing more with CUC notification devices?

2017-09-20 Thread Ryan Huff
I'm thinking a polling script against the CUMI API to get new / old message counts: https://docwiki.cisco.com/wiki/Cisco_Unity_Connection_Messaging_Interface_(CUMI)_API I think the useful sections might be be the MessageCount property in the "Mailbox Folder Operations/Inbox Folder

Re: [cisco-voip] 7940 Extension Mobility w/ 11.5

2017-10-06 Thread Ryan Huff
Since you mentioned 7940 specifically, I imagine you have EM working on this cluster for other phones? - Is the EM service activated on all nodes? - Have you bounced tomcat on all the cluster nodes? On Oct 6, 2017, at 11:39 AM, Jason Faraone

Re: [cisco-voip] New install 11.5 phones won't register or the subscriber

2017-10-12 Thread Ryan Huff
no need for the non-standard MTU, it was just a legacy config that no one changed “cause it never caused a problem before”. -Ryan On Oct 12, 2017, at 1:48 PM, Mike King <m...@mpking.com<mailto:m...@mpking.com>> wrote: On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 4:10 AM, Ryan Huff <ryanh

Re: [cisco-voip] New install 11.5 phones won't register or the subscriber

2017-10-11 Thread Ryan Huff
So, from the publisher; you’ve added the subscriber under the System -> Server menu section ( likely by IP address or hostname since you’re saying DNS is not used ), correct? You state all infrastructure services are active on the publisher and DNS is not used. When you go to install the

Re: [cisco-voip] firmware COP files - TFTP server only? or all nodes?

2017-09-11 Thread Ryan Huff
The only reason I add to all nodes for firmware (versus just tftp) is because and in case, you decide to change how the nodes are used or function in the cluster at some point; then you don't have to worry about what is or is not on the node; just activate the service and go :). Thanks, Ryan

Re: [cisco-voip] let's encrypt for local admin gui pages

2017-09-26 Thread Ryan Huff
Its theoretically possible to take the CUCM tomcat CSR and use it to get LE to sign a cert, then take the resulting cert and attempt to upload it to CUCM however; if it worked, LE only signs certificates for 90 days. So if you did get it to work, you'd have to do it every 90 days (the built in

Re: [cisco-voip] Call length on paging ports

2017-09-25 Thread Ryan Huff
You might find that editing the softkey template and relocating the hold softkey away from the end call softkey for the connected state might be a solution (that way you don’t have to alter the behavior of the pots line). Thanks, Ryan On Sep 25, 2017, at 3:31 PM, Loren Hillukka

Re: [cisco-voip] UCM Upgrade Poll

2017-08-23 Thread Ryan Huff
I would tend to agree that the overall installation process could improve (not that I want to give up my ANSI art or anything). Most of the installation process today is merely an extension of the underlying Linux kernel. I would settle for more verbose feedback when errors are encountered,

Re: [cisco-voip] Inbound CLI displaying on CUAC console.

2017-08-24 Thread Ryan Huff
Does this inbound caller ID behavior also happen on a normal inbound call to an IP phone, that then forwards the call to another destination internally? Since you rebuilt CCM with BAT, did you change the PSTN ingress protocol (Ex. It WAS an MGCP gateway and now it IS an h.323 gateway)? If the

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco IM & Presence 11 5.1 SU2 corrupt install with 2nd server

2017-08-26 Thread Ryan Huff
years ago Cisco starting posting bootable ISO's and then turned around and pulled them due to issues with another department. Here is the relevant thread: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/2010-August/015533.html Have to read some of the quoted messages that were not posted to the list. On

Re: [cisco-voip] SIP option ping prioritization

2017-08-28 Thread Ryan Huff
The OPTIONS Ping will come across in the regular SIP stack (TCP:5060/TCP:5061 or UDP:5060 typically). Prioritization is a Quality of Service technique and not an Access Control technique. I don't think a standard ACL would look at the application layer header to differentiate SIP messages and

Re: [cisco-voip] UCM Upgrade Poll

2017-08-23 Thread Ryan Huff
1.) Bug Poll Legitimate bugs (which I define as unexpected behavior in consistent with published Cisco documentation): 2% Customer Issue: 98% 2.) I usually devote 16-20 hours of planning and prepping the upgrade (Documentation, Visio, building the bridge if it's that kind of

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco IM & Presence 11 5.1 SU2 corrupt install with 2nd server

2017-08-25 Thread Ryan Huff
The Unified Communications IM and Presence ISO is bootable I believe (maybe that changed?); although it's sister ISO, Unified Communications Manager is not. From: cisco-voip on behalf of Anthony Holloway

Re: [cisco-voip] Outbound Video Calls to Webex fail with 481

2017-08-25 Thread Ryan Huff
verify/port 5061 required. That's my guess anyway, -RH From: bmead...@gmail.com <bmead...@gmail.com> on behalf of Brian Meade <bmead...@vt.edu> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2017 4:37 PM To: Anthony Holloway Cc: Jonathan Charles; Ryan Huff

Re: [cisco-voip] Naming conventions for Expressway-C / E

2017-09-04 Thread Ryan Huff
pe" or "expc" as well when the > longer name isn't allowed, depending on customers naming standards. > > Sent from a mobile device with very tiny touchscreen input keys. Please > excude my typtos. > > On Sep 4, 2017, at 7:05 AM, Ryan Huff > <ryanh...@outlo

Re: [cisco-voip] Naming conventions for Expressway-C / E

2017-09-04 Thread Ryan Huff
I usually keep the names, "edge" and "control" incorporated in them somehow. If I'm trying to save on typing and it's a single pair I might do, "expcontrol" and "expedge". With clusters, I'll add more to the name that denote its purpose or location. Thanks, Ryan On Sep 4, 2017, at 6:17 AM,

Re: [cisco-voip] using resource pools to organize VMs - supported?

2017-08-29 Thread Ryan Huff
As I understand the TRC, as long as the compute/storage needs are available 100% of the time (no oversubscription) and the storage wasn't dynamically created (thin provision); then I believe you are okay to organize as you see fit. I think you can thin provision, as long as the total storage

Re: [cisco-voip] Office 365 CUC 11.5.1 and Speechview

2017-08-31 Thread Ryan Huff
Unity Connection v11.5.1 should work with O365 for Unified Messaging. What type of error are you encountering? -RH On Aug 31, 2017, at 1:14 PM, Sean E. Knight via cisco-voip > wrote: We had Unified Messaging and Exchange 2010 and

[cisco-voip] Looking for advice on sRTP using tokenless CTL

2017-10-18 Thread Ryan Huff
Looking at enabling sRTP on a 10.x cluster (CUCM, EXPRESSWAY, CXN, UCCX). As I have been researching this topic; I’ve found the “riskiest” task to be enabling CTL / Mixed Mode in CUCM. Specifically, if you have devices that do not support Security By Default. It’s my understanding that once

Re: [cisco-voip] UC server performance and UCCX agent in reserve

2017-12-16 Thread Ryan Huff
d all the time to respond to all of us but I am very thankful that you do.  From: Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 5:26:53 PM To: Terry Oakley Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:c

Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber IM service Issue

2017-12-18 Thread Ryan Huff
Is your domain provisioned with the WebEx connect service? On Dec 18, 2017, at 3:43 PM, Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman > wrote: Hi Brian, Will try what you suggested, but other than this issue I have another symptom, the user must use Jabber

Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber IM service Issue

2017-12-18 Thread Ryan Huff
bd EL-Rahman Senior Network Engineer From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com] Sent: Monday, December 18, 2017 11:48 PM To: Ahmed Abd EL-Rahman <ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com<mailto:ahmed.rah...@bmbgroup.com>> Cc: Brian Meade <bmead...@vt.edu<mailto:bmead...@vt.edu>>; cisco-vo

Re: [cisco-voip] UC server performance and UCCX agent in reserve

2017-12-14 Thread Ryan Huff
Just based on that description alone, I’d say it might be possible you have some LAN congestion? Everything you’re talking about here is riding http/https. - Any recent QoS policy changes? - Is other non-UC web traffic slower than normal from those PCs? - Run utils diagnose test on the CLI of

Re: [cisco-voip] AnyConnect Wireless and Jabber Voice

2017-12-13 Thread Ryan Huff
Sounds like jitter usually QoS related. Spitballing here cause I don’t know your topology but it sounds like the traffic is getting marked best effort when traversing the VPN connection. If you can illustrate the Jabber client’s connection path (and type of Jabber client), I might be able

Re: [cisco-voip] AnyConnect Wireless and Jabber Voice

2017-12-13 Thread Ryan Huff
802.1x/ ISE. Not using for VPN at all. This is happening internally on site connected to our Cisco wireless environment that uses 3602/3702 APs and 5508 WLCs. I know it is crazy but it seems directly related to us installing AnyConnect. Steve From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com] Sent: Wednesd

Re: [cisco-voip] untraceable connection attempt?

2017-12-19 Thread Ryan Huff
Sounds like you should schedule a bounce of the CM service for this node. Have a read here for more detail: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/err_msgs/8_x/ccmalarms851.html Thanks, Ryan On Dec 19, 2017, at 11:11 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi

Re: [cisco-voip] untraceable connection attempt?

2017-12-19 Thread Ryan Huff
connectivity / verify they are all registered. Could also be a bad device that is no longer working but still attempting a registration ... sort of. -Ryan On Dec 19, 2017, at 11:22 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: Sounds like you should sched

Re: [cisco-voip] untraceable connection attempt?

2017-12-19 Thread Ryan Huff
S. I'd hate for it to be the beginning of something larger. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 19, 2017, at 11:35 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: Could also be network connectivity among a lot of things but more often than not, bouncing

Re: [cisco-voip] IP Phones + MGCP FXS + Shared Lines

2017-12-18 Thread Ryan Huff
It is interesting that this is not specifically documented anywhere, as an unsupported feature. My suspicion is that because, it does work, some to most of the time. The typical symptom I've seen from shared mgcp fxs is a, "ghost ring". Pretty sure it has to do with the notify event in the

Re: [cisco-voip] UCS C210 Replace 146 GB Disk in RAID5 with 300 GB Disk

2017-11-14 Thread Ryan Huff
Reto, Seek/rpm speeds and media type (flash, sata ... etc) are usually what matter the most for RAID disks. If your only difference is total storage capacity, the bigger disk will usually work just fine, your just gonna waste the additional 154GB of space (because the RAID will only provision

Re: [cisco-voip] UCS C210 Replace 146 GB Disk in RAID5 with 300 GB Disk

2017-11-14 Thread Ryan Huff
imes in case of a failure. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/storage/why-raid-6-stops-working-in-2019/805 On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: Reto, Seek/rpm speeds and media type (flash, sata ... etc) are usually what matter the most

Re: [cisco-voip] ISDN T1 voice calls hardware validation

2018-05-04 Thread Ryan Huff
I think Pat - Original Message - From: Ryan Huff<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com> To: PF<mailto:pucknet...@foril.com> Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 9:56 AM Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] ISDN T1 voice calls hardware validati

Re: [cisco-voip] ISDN T1 voice calls hardware validation

2018-05-04 Thread Ryan Huff
el 3 timers trying 1000 timers register 100 sip-server ipv4:172.16.x.y ! ! Pat - Original Message - From: Ryan Huff<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com> To: Patrick Fortin<mailto:pfor...@royaume.com> Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> Sent:

Re: [cisco-voip] ISDN T1 voice calls hardware validation

2018-05-04 Thread Ryan Huff
o don't have the "port" command that should go in the dial-peer voice section any ideas ? Thanks Pat - Original Message - From: Ryan Huff<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com> To: PF<mailto:pucknet...@foril.com> Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net

Re: [cisco-voip] UCS memory sizing best practices

2018-05-05 Thread Ryan Huff
Here is Cisco’s virtualization software guide which is sorta like the bible of all the do’s and dont’s for Cisco virtual servers with VMWare: https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/uc_system/virtualization/virtualization-software-requirements.html I’m not sure if the specific

Re: [cisco-voip] refining dial peers for Fax

2018-05-08 Thread Ryan Huff
for the rest of its days. -Ryan- From: Brian Meade<mailto:bmead...@vt.edu> Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 2:24 PM To: Anthony Holloway<mailto:avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> Cc: Ryan Huff<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>; F

Re: [cisco-voip] refining dial peers for Fax

2018-05-09 Thread Ryan Huff
ing, the way the fax machine used the facsimile standard out of the box is the way it’ll work for the rest of its days. -Ryan- From: Brian Meade<mailto:bmead...@vt.edu> Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 2:24 PM To: Anthony Holloway<mailto:avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> Cc: Ryan

Re: [cisco-voip] refining dial peers for Fax

2018-05-09 Thread Ryan Huff
iPhone > On May 9, 2018, at 13:02, Norton, Mike <mikenor...@pwsd76.ab.ca> wrote: > > Ryan Huff wrote: >> Yes, the handshake “noise” samples, so to speak (RTP payload) in a fax over >> SIP will always be UDP; the signaling (SIP) could be TCP or UDP. If you do >>

Re: [cisco-voip] refining dial peers for Fax

2018-05-08 Thread Ryan Huff
Set the TX/RX rate at 14400 kbps and turn ECM. I would do that at the machine level first, and/or the dial-peer level second. Sent from my iPhone On May 8, 2018, at 12:17, Jonatan Quezada > wrote: we are finding that after

Re: [cisco-voip] refining dial peers for Fax

2018-05-08 Thread Ryan Huff
MGCP - CUCM - SIP - ATA187 - Fax/Modem<https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/voice-unified-communications/unified-border-element/115742-fax-modem-call-flows-00.html#anc7> except our ATA s are 190 and 191s On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mai

Re: [cisco-voip] ISDN T1 voice calls hardware validation

2018-05-04 Thread Ryan Huff
For isdn voice you’ll need a NIM-8MFT-T1/E1 Sent from my iPhone On May 4, 2018, at 09:31, PF > wrote: Hi Can someone help us validate if we can use this hardware to receive voice calls from a isdn T1 (23B+D) and send them in SIP to a

Re: [cisco-voip] multiple domain support for jabber (both internal and MRA)

2018-05-20 Thread Ryan Huff
Hi Naresh! There is a lot that could be unpacked here, in terms of a reply, because this area of Cisco UC can be a bit of a big "if then, do else" decision matrix if you're not familiar with all the underlying players. From a 10,000 foot view, multi domain support will work pretty much like

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 11.5 RIS DB shows None

2018-05-20 Thread Ryan Huff
Bounce the RIS DB Collector (Realtime Information Database Collector Service). This usually brings it backup, then logout / login of the admin GUI. If the issue keeps happening after restarting, dig a little deeper; DNS, NTP ... all the usual suspects. Outside of a bug, this can be the result

Re: [cisco-voip] what are the cool kids using to read CUCM logs nowadays?

2018-05-17 Thread Ryan Huff
For the money (free) and usability; yeah, I’d go with Paul’s TranslatorX. Especially if your troubleshooting call behaviors because of its ability to organize by session ID and parse out OPTIONS messages. - Geany text editor does a good job because of its ability to highlight similar entities

Re: [cisco-voip] ATA190

2018-05-22 Thread Ryan Huff
Yes, that is correct. The ports are differentiated by the device name. However, the ports themselves are registered to CCM and communicate on the network through a single network interface on the ATA. The second port in the ATA will have the first two characters striped from the beginning of

Re: [cisco-voip] Moving LDAP Integrated Users across domains

2018-05-23 Thread Ryan Huff
I believe it is a result of the query Expressway-C makes into CCM. Expressway-C queries CCM with the username the user attempted to authenticate with, and CCM is looking for that username in the UserID field of the End User account, as apposed to looking for the user@host alternate attribute

Re: [cisco-voip] Moving LDAP Integrated Users across domains

2018-05-23 Thread Ryan Huff
Hello Mr. Loraditch! If you have on-prem IM and Presence, send a note about folks’ contact/buddy lists needing updated (or take care of it on the backend with CSV files). My experience here though; its best, easiest and simpler if that remain a user action/item post move. Alternatively, you

Re: [cisco-voip] ATA190

2018-05-22 Thread Ryan Huff
flip the I3E on their heads … all the sudden, Belkin OUIs start showing up in ARP tables coming from Cisco ATAs, lol. Thanks, Ryan From: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 2:45:59 PM To: Ryan Huff Cc: Jon Fox;

Re: [cisco-voip] ATA190

2018-05-22 Thread Ryan Huff
<mailto:avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 12:54 PM To: Ryan Huff<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com> Cc: Jon Fox<mailto:jonfox...@gmail.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] ATA190 Aren't the first

Re: [cisco-voip] 11.5.1SU2 Average .tar DRS backup side

2018-06-08 Thread Ryan Huff
Depends. Are CDRs being backed up? I could see that easily causing a large backup or clusters of decent size. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 8, 2018, at 09:34, Jason Aarons (Americas) mailto:jason.aar...@dimensiondata.com>> wrote: I’ve got a customer with about 3,000 users but lots of Spark

Re: [cisco-voip] are we still using custom jabber xml files in CUCM v11.5 and JAbber v12?

2018-06-15 Thread Ryan Huff
[University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline] On Jun 14, 2018, at 6:59 PM, Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: It just a silly draconian style application behavior that just doesn’t need to be there. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 14, 2018, at 18:51, Lelio Fulgenzi mail

Re: [cisco-voip] are we still using custom jabber xml files in CUCM v11.5 and JAbber v12?

2018-06-14 Thread Ryan Huff
sks you to enter the CTI Server IP Address. What server is that? CUCM obviously, right? Nope, it's the QM server. So yeah, language can be tricky. On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 5:22 PM Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: The spirit of Jabber login‘s as I understand it, is for the clien

Re: [cisco-voip] are we still using custom jabber xml files in CUCM v11.5 and JAbber v12?

2018-06-14 Thread Ryan Huff
+cisco-v...@gmail.com>> wrote: Are you arguing that the Jabber client shouldn't check for cloud services (webex messaenger) at all? What is your distinction between a technique which solves a problem, and a solution? On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 5:04 PM Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com&g

Re: [cisco-voip] are we still using custom jabber xml files in CUCM v11.5 and JAbber v12?

2018-06-14 Thread Ryan Huff
you're not trying to run both services on the same domain. I have not verified the validity of this statement however. Now, I agree that it presents a challenge, and so I'm not denying that. On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 3:52 PM Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: Sor

Re: [cisco-voip] are we still using custom jabber xml files in CUCM v11.5 and JAbber v12?

2018-06-14 Thread Ryan Huff
. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 14, 2018, at 17:18, Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: Not at all. I’m saying the control needs to be more simple and friendly to use. Why can’t there be a control right on the front of the login screen underneath the advanced settings link, “Cloud Log

Re: [cisco-voip] are we still using custom jabber xml files in CUCM v11.5 and JAbber v12?

2018-06-14 Thread Ryan Huff
@UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline] On Jun 14, 2018, at 3:51 PM, Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: Sorry to Hijack this but .. I’d settle for not having a forced Webexconnect authorization attempt without a

Re: [cisco-voip] are we still using custom jabber xml files in CUCM v11.5 and JAbber v12?

2018-06-14 Thread Ryan Huff
..@uoguelph.ca> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs> | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook [University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline] On Jun 14, 2018, at 3:51 PM, Ryan Huff mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: Sorry to Hijack this but .. I’d s

Re: [cisco-voip] 8832s

2018-05-01 Thread Ryan Huff
e might think. On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 12:27 PM Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: [image1.jpeg] On May 1, 2018, at 13:17, Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com<mailto:avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com>> wrote: Thanks, now I want

Re: [cisco-voip] 8832s

2018-05-01 Thread Ryan Huff
will cause it to boot from it? On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 7:06 PM Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: Sounds like the ole’ ‘step upgrade’ issue that plagued the 79xx series back in the 8.x days My guess is they don’t actually need RMA’ed, just

[cisco-voip] CMR and the SD-WAN

2018-04-30 Thread Ryan Huff
So here is a neat little situation I ran into recently, and is worth sharing and reading; if this saves a life it was worth the crap I had to go through ….. == The Scenario == * Expressway C/E 8.10.3 cluster over wan (2 Control Peers, 2 Edge Peers) * Customer deployed and managed

Re: [cisco-voip] CMR and the SD-WAN

2018-04-30 Thread Ryan Huff
ats off to you for writing this up and sharing. Much appreciated! On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanh...@outlook.com<mailto:ryanh...@outlook.com>> wrote: So here is a neat little situation I ran into recently, and is worth sharing and reading; if this saves a

Re: [cisco-voip] 8832s

2018-04-29 Thread Ryan Huff
Sounds like the ole’ ‘step upgrade’ issue that plagued the 79xx series back in the 8.x days My guess is they don’t actually need RMA’ed, just the easiest way to deal with it I’d flash the phones and advertise an isolated tftp server to them with the firmware load and XML bootstrap

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >