[cisco-voip] Video Conferencing ? CM 4.1(3)

Wed Jan 30 20:18:39 EST 2008

Actually CDP was more or less made into a standard

>
> It is LLDP-MED
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LLDP-MED
>
> If I remember correctly the new version of cisco phones support this.  SO
> in other words you could use HP switches at the edge and Cisco in the middle
> and still have separate Voice and Data VLANS and no one is non the wiser
> (except the accountants paying the bills)
>
> Craig
> On Jan 30, 2008 6:34 PM, Philip Walenta <pwalenta at wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > Well it's not that we want to get around CDP.  We've done a good job of
> > staying "industry standard" where possible, and if there's a standard
> > for
> > this we'd prefer to use it.
> >
> > Personally speaking I'd prefer to license CDP now, and deal with a
> > standard
> > later simply because CDP also helps set QoS parameters nicely.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lelio Fulgenzi [mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 6:27 PM
> > To: Philip Walenta; 'Robert Kulagowski'; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Video Conferencing ? CM 4.1(3)
> >
> > 802.3af is the inline power standard...that might be one way, but not
> > sure
> > how.
> >
> > 802.1x is more likely the solution, which authenticates a user and
> > allows
> > them on a particular VLAN.
> >
> > That would be a novel way around CDP.
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----
> > Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> > Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> > (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > "Life expectancy would grow by leaps and bounds if green vegetables
> > smelled
> > as good as bacon."
> > Doug Larson
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Philip Walenta" <pwalenta at wi.rr.com>
> > To: "'Lelio Fulgenzi'" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>; "'Robert Kulagowski'"
> > <rkulagow at gmail.com>; <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 7:18 PM
> > Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] Video Conferencing ? CM 4.1(3)
> >
> >
> > > I'm not sure if CDP is going to be licensed, but I know we're working
> > on a
> > > way to do it via 802.x standards (the appropriate standard escapes me
> > at
> > > the
> > > moment - it might be 802.3af).
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Lelio Fulgenzi [mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 5:50 PM
> > > To: Philip Walenta; 'Robert Kulagowski'; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Video Conferencing ? CM 4.1(3)
> > >
> > > Phil...any chance on Polycom licencing CDP from Cisco so I can slap
> > the
> > > phone onto a port and have it configure voice VLANs appropriately?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ----
> > > Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> > > Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> > > (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
> > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > "Life expectancy would grow by leaps and bounds if green vegetables
> > > smelled
> > > as good as bacon."
> > > Doug Larson
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Philip Walenta" <pwalenta at wi.rr.com>
> > > To: "'Robert Kulagowski'" <rkulagow at gmail.com>;
> > > <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 5:32 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Video Conferencing ? CM 4.1(3)
> > >
> > >
> > >> I'll start by saying that I work for Polycom...that being said..
> > >>
> > >> We do have a product that does allow control of the video unit from a
> > >> Cisco
> > >> IP phone (it can control our SCCP based devices or H.323/SIP
> > devices).
> > >>
> > >> Link here (sorry for the product advertisment):
> > >>
> > >
> >
> > http://www.polycom.com/usa/en/products/video/video_conferencing_systems/desk
> > >> top/video_control_app.html
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Now, as for what folks usually do for overflow:
> > >>
> > >> I've built several scenarios for customers:
> > >>
> > >> 1.  MCU, IP and ISDN attached, with GK control.  The GK knows that
> > the
> > >> MCU
> > >> can "dial out" as a backup path.
> > >> 2.  H.323/GK control, with Cisco IOS gateways (28XX or 38XX) and
> > attached
> > >> PRI's using the new IOS ability to do H.323 to H.320 conversion.
> > >>
> > >> Both work pretty well, the MCU variant allows content, the Cisco one
> > does
> > >> not (support is coming from what I understand).
> > >>
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > >> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Robert
> > >> Kulagowski
> > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 2:38 PM
> > >> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > >> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Video Conferencing ? CM 4.1(3)
> > >>
> > >> Matthew Saskin wrote:
> > >>> VT Advantage is basically your only option if you want to provide
> > >>> video from the desktop IP phone.  If you want room-based solutions
> > >>> they can integrate with CallManager in multiple ways (as mentioned
> > in
> > >>> previous
> > >>> emails) but they are going to be dedicated units in a room (or on a
> > >>> crash cart, etc.)
> > >>>
> > >>> As far as providing overflow from IP to ISDN, I can't even think how
> > >>> to do that.  The biggest thing standing in the way is that you would
> > >>> need to change the destination being dialed from an IP address to a
> > >>> phone number :-\
> > >>
> > >> Right; as I'm thinking about it now, the gatekeeper knows that
> > there's
> > >> "x"
> > >> amount of bandwidth between the two locations; if the bandwidth
> > request
> > >> is
> > >> rejected then there should be _some_ way to do this though, isn't
> > there?
> > >> Or
> > >> do people just not place the call at that point?
> > >> That's how AAR in the voice world works...
> > >>
> > >> As far as the one-touch capability, I think I should be able to
> > create a
> > >> service URL on the phone that does an AXL call to determine who I'm
> > >> currently talking to.  I can then have a widget that uses the video
> > >> conferencing equipment API to dial the call.  I've already gotten it
> > to
> > >> work
> > >> manually using the Polycom telnet interface, so at this point it's
> > just a
> > >> Small Matter of Programming. :)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> cisco-voip mailing list
> > >> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> cisco-voip mailing list
> > >> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Craig Staffin
> Craig at staffin.org
> (H) 262-437-7313
> (C) 262-613-6003


-- 
Craig Staffin
Craig at staffin.org
(H) 262-437-7313
(C) 262-613-6003
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20080130/e961eb8e/attachment-0001.html