[cisco-voip] Install CUCM 8.0(2c) in ESXi
Anthony Fairhurst
Anthony.Fairhurst at phoenix.co.uk
Wed Aug 18 14:10:50 EDT 2010
I have managed to install on ESXi 4 on a Dell Optiplex 760 PC without
any problems using the DVD.
Used red hat enterprise 4 32 bit
Disc 72Gb
Memory 3Gb
-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
cisco-voip-request at puck.nether.net
Sent: 18 August 2010 17:00
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: cisco-voip Digest, Vol 82, Issue 17
Send cisco-voip mailing list submissions to
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
cisco-voip-request at puck.nether.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
cisco-voip-owner at puck.nether.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cisco-voip digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. ISDN Signaling (Bill)
2. Re: ISDN Signaling (Eric Butcher)
3. Re: ISDN Signaling (Ted Nugent)
4. Re: ISDN Signaling (Haas, Neal)
5. 3750 Sw - Queuing Threshold2 < Threshold1. What would happen
? (Pavan K)
6. Install CUCM 8.0(2c) in ESXi (Brian Schultz)
7. Polycom VVX 1500 & Callmanager (ROZA, Ariel)
8. updation? a new word? (Lelio Fulgenzi)
9. What controls bearer-cap? (Robert Kulagowski)
10. Re: updation? a new word? (Scott Voll)
11. Re: updation? a new word? (Go0se)
12. OT: Installation cost (Kim Casserly)
13. Re: updation? a new word? (Ted Nugent)
14. Re: What controls bearer-cap? (Wes Sisk)
15. Re: OT: Installation cost (Haas, Neal)
16. Re: OT: Installation cost (Lelio Fulgenzi)
17. Re: OT: Installation cost (Scott Voll)
18. Softkey Settings (Loren.Gray)
19. Re: OT: Installation cost (Mike Olivere)
20. Re: CUE v7.1.2 + CUCM v7.1.5b.SU2 (Lelio Fulgenzi)
21. Re: Softkey Settings (Daniel)
22. Re: OT: Installation cost (Matthew Saskin)
23. Re: OT: Installation cost (Dennis Heim)
24. Re: Install CUCM 8.0(2c) in ESXi (Nick Matthews)
25. Re: Softkey Settings (cips)
26. Cisco Unified Department Attendant Console - Problems with
Queue and Directory (Peer Kohlstetter)
27. Re: Softkey Settings (James Buchanan)
28. Re: Install CUCM 8.0(2c) in ESXi (Chris Ward (chrward))
29. Re: Polycom VVX 1500 & Callmanager (Ryan Ratliff)
30. Custom phone directory (Peter Pauly)
31. Re: What controls bearer-cap? (Robert Kulagowski)
32. Options for upgrading 4.2(3) ? (Rhodes, Geoff)
33. Re: Custom phone directory (Ryan Ratliff)
34. Re: Options for upgrading 4.2(3) ? (Ed Leatherman)
35. UCCX script problem (Sandy Lee)
36. Re: Options for upgrading 4.2(3) ? (Scott Voll)
37. Re: updation? a new word? (Tim Reimers)
38. Re: updation? a new word? (Lelio Fulgenzi)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 12:47:39 -0500
From: "Bill" <bill at hitechconnection.net>
To: <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] ISDN Signaling
Message-ID: <AC934D34493540508A6FB725AB3AB512 at centric.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I am ordering new circuits from the Telco and we are getting our
terminology
crossed. They are asking / telling me they will install the circuits as
ISDN
signaling NI2. I am telling them that we already have 20 circuits from
them.
All of the existing circuits have ISDN switch-type DMS-100. So is the
DMS-100 that is in the Cisco H.323 gateway configuration compatible with
NI2? They are using the term ISDN signaling and I am using the term ISDN
Switch-type.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/5ccec
cc8/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:52:17 +0000
From: Eric Butcher <Eric.Butcher at cdw.com>
To: Bill <bill at hitechconnection.net>, "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net"
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] ISDN Signaling
Message-ID:
<752D9137441C0449A658D6062408D9A903F6C1 at EXMBSW2VH.corp.cdw.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sometimes they use a different switch type and tell you they're using
NI-2 when they're really just emulating it, and setting it to NI-2 in
the gateway causes quirkiness. You should set the switch type to
whatever the circuit is provisioned to use. If they're really using
DMS-100, use that. If they say they're provisioning it NI-2, then use
that. (primary-ni is what will show up in IOS for NI-2)
Eric Butcher
Cisco Unified Communications Engineer
CDW Professional Services
11711 N Meridian, Ste 225
Carmel, IN 46032
* 317.569.4282 - IP Phone
* 765.744.1458 - Mobile
* eric.butcher at cdw.com<mailto:eric.butcher at cdw.com>
http://www.cdw.com/
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Bill
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 1:48 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] ISDN Signaling
I am ordering new circuits from the Telco and we are getting our
terminology crossed. They are asking / telling me they will install the
circuits as ISDN signaling NI2. I am telling them that we already have
20 circuits from them. All of the existing circuits have ISDN
switch-type DMS-100. So is the DMS-100 that is in the Cisco H.323
gateway configuration compatible with NI2? They are using the term ISDN
signaling and I am using the term ISDN Switch-type.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/77b27
3ea/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 14:10:38 -0400
From: Ted Nugent <tednugent73 at gmail.com>
To: Bill <bill at hitechconnection.net>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] ISDN Signaling
Message-ID:
<AANLkTinV9B5+c9Z_08r0gQv3mMJWqC_+gTd+choOG_H3 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
If it is a nortel switch and they are telling you they are using
National,
ni or ni1 then you need to set it to dms100. Some Nortel switches can
speak
ni2 in which case use primary-ni but triple check that its actually ni2.
I
have had this discussion with Bellsouth specifically until i was blue in
the
face and eventually determined that what they were calling national was
actually nortel proprietary version of ni1 (not even a pri standard) and
Cisco calls that dms 100. just don't make assumptions.
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Bill <bill at hitechconnection.net> wrote:
> I am ordering new circuits from the Telco and we are getting our
> terminology crossed. They are asking / telling me they will install
the
> circuits as ISDN signaling NI2. I am telling them that we already have
20
> circuits from them. All of the existing circuits have ISDN switch-type
> DMS-100. So is the DMS-100 that is in the Cisco H.323 gateway
configuration
> compatible with NI2? They are using the term ISDN signaling and I am
using
> the term ISDN Switch-type.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/018ef
ebf/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:19:22 -0700
From: "Haas, Neal" <nhaas at co.fresno.ca.us>
To: "'Eric Butcher'" <Eric.Butcher at cdw.com>, "'Bill'"
<bill at hitechconnection.net>, "'cisco-voip at puck.nether.net'"
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] ISDN Signaling
Message-ID:
<A607839BE5327F4DB0719710592119C9B2E956EF49 at COFMAIL2.intra.co.fresno.ca.
us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Personally, I would tell them to setup the Switch type exactly the same
as the current setup. Keeps it simple for documentation.
Neal Haas
1020 S 10th St
Fresno, CA 93702
Desk 559.600.5890
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Eric Butcher
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 10:52 AM
To: Bill; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] ISDN Signaling
Sometimes they use a different switch type and tell you they're using
NI-2 when they're really just emulating it, and setting it to NI-2 in
the gateway causes quirkiness. You should set the switch type to
whatever the circuit is provisioned to use. If they're really using
DMS-100, use that. If they say they're provisioning it NI-2, then use
that. (primary-ni is what will show up in IOS for NI-2)
Eric Butcher
Cisco Unified Communications Engineer
CDW Professional Services
11711 N Meridian, Ste 225
Carmel, IN 46032
* 317.569.4282 - IP Phone
* 765.744.1458 - Mobile
* eric.butcher at cdw.com<mailto:eric.butcher at cdw.com>
http://www.cdw.com/
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Bill
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 1:48 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] ISDN Signaling
I am ordering new circuits from the Telco and we are getting our
terminology crossed. They are asking / telling me they will install the
circuits as ISDN signaling NI2. I am telling them that we already have
20 circuits from them. All of the existing circuits have ISDN
switch-type DMS-100. So is the DMS-100 that is in the Cisco H.323
gateway configuration compatible with NI2? They are using the term ISDN
signaling and I am using the term ISDN Switch-type.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/f0ad1
bca/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 14:15:39 -0500
From: Pavan K <pav.ccie at gmail.com>
To: osl osl <ccie_voice at onlinestudylist.com>,
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] 3750 Sw - Queuing Threshold2 < Threshold1. What
would happen ?
Message-ID:
<AANLkTikQvk-o3=YGm=nXCS5FteHh+2OpAK2-BzGu4gVs at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Folks,
When Configuring QOS Thresholds on the 3750 Switch,
I noticed that the switch allows us to configure Threshold 2 to be a
lower
number than Threshold 1
What would happen in this scenario ?
Would COS/DSCP levels assigned to Threshold 2 be dropped at 10% while
those
assigned to Threshold 1 be dropped at 20%
or
Something else ?
HQ-SW(config)#mls qos srr-queue input thres
HQ-SW(config)#mls qos srr-queue input threshold 1 20 10
HQ-SW(config)#do sh mls qos input-q
Queue : 1 2
----------------------------------------------
buffers : 90 10
bandwidth : 90 10
priority : 10 0
threshold1: *20* 100
threshold2: *10* 100
--
- Pavan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/4b7a7
4ae/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 14:44:09 -0500
From: Brian Schultz <bms314 at gmail.com>
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Install CUCM 8.0(2c) in ESXi
Message-ID:
<AANLkTi=s4kqvo2jj+iqywGCQ-fa+Km9Ppygfd=P0M+Dh at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Has anyone been able to install CUCM 8.0(2c) in ESXi for lab purposes?
I am
having a heck of a time trying to get this installed with the Cisco
media.
I've tried on both ESXi 4.0 and 3.5. Tried several variations of 72GB,
73GB
and 80GB hard drives. Tried with 1 and 2 processors. Also tried with
RHEL
3, 4 and 5 (32 bit). It typically makes it through the initial OS and
application install, and then goes to a blue screen with a blinking
cursor
at the bottom and just sits there. If I restart the VM at this point,
it
goes through it's bootup, detects VMWare, installs VMWare Tools, then
gives
an Installation Failed error stating 'The installation has failed and
must
be restarted to recover from the failure'.
I've also tried deploying with the OVF template using the ova file from
CCO,
same problem. Last night, I let it sit at the blue screen overnight
thinking it just needed more time, same blue screen in the morning.
Just to clarify, it's not the typical Windows "blue screen", just a
screen
of blue color with a blinking cursor at the bottom.
Thanks,
Brian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/4f63c
32e/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:15:00 -0300
From: "ROZA, Ariel" <Ariel.ROZA at LA.LOGICALIS.COM>
To: <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Polycom VVX 1500 & Callmanager
Message-ID:
<C76DE0649058DE498401B3D9CFEC57BF0193E412 at SNLAR-EXCH01.LA.LOGICALIS.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Guys & gals,
Has anyone successfully configured a Polycom VVX video phone under
Callmanager 6.1?
I am following Polycom guides, but all I get is a rejection from the
CUCM server.
A network dump shows callmanager responding with - 401 Unauthorized
and following attempts with 404 Not found.
I have security profiles, User Id & Password.
Regards,
Ariel.
ARIEL ROZA
Advanced Engineering
LOGICALIS
Peru 327 1? Piso - C.A.B.A. - Argentina - C1063ACH
Tel/Fax: +54 (11) 4344-0300
ariel.roza at la.logicalis.com
www.la.logicalis.com
www.logicalisnow.com
Por favor, piense en el medioambiente antes de imprimir este email.
La presente informaci?n se env?a ?nicamente para el destinatario, y
contiene informaci?n de car?cter CONFIDENCIAL o PRIVLEGIADA.
La modificaci?n, retransmisi?n, difus?n, copia u otro uso de esta
informaci?n por cualquier medio, por personas distintas al destinatario,
est?n estrictamente prohibidas.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/c659e
4b8/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:17:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
To: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] updation? a new word?
Message-ID:
<153163410.342209.1282076222634.JavaMail.root at simcoe.cs.uoguelph.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
on the CUCM v7.1(5b)SU2 CDR management Billing Application Server
Parameters update screen:
Updation of IPAddress/Hostname and Directory Path is not allowed, CDR
Repository Service will not upload files to the new destination. To
Upload files to the new Destination, delete the existing server and add
a new billing server.
updation? omg.
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
- LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/d554d
f30/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:36:45 -0500
From: Robert Kulagowski <rkulagow at gmail.com>
To: Cisco VOIP <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] What controls bearer-cap?
Message-ID:
<AANLkTikhq_dpb+8BxsPOZn=Dc9ioETqBjEMGj8xHqyO- at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I'm generating a PRI for internal use (it's connected to the PRI
modules of a Polycom HDX 4002). I also have a PRI to the telco; I'm
trying to get the router to act as a tandem switch.
Here's the q931 on the router:
000298: Aug 17 15:28:02.987: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: RX <- SETUP pd = 8
callref = 0x0001
Sending Complete
Bearer Capability i = 0x8890
Standard = CCITT
Transfer Capability = Unrestricted Digital
Transfer Mode = Circuit
Transfer Rate = 64 kbit/s
Channel ID i = 0xA98381
Exclusive, Channel 1
Called Party Number i = 0x80, '13122455128'
Plan:Unknown, Type:Unknown
000299: Aug 17 15:28:02.991: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: Received SETUP
callref = 0x8001 callID = 0x0003 switch = primary-net5 interface =
Network
000300: Aug 17 15:28:03.003: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: TX -> CALL_PROC pd
= 8 callref = 0x8001
Channel ID i = 0xA98381
Exclusive, Channel 1
000301: Aug 17 15:28:03.011: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: Applying typeplan
for sw-type 0xD is 0x0 0x0, Calling num
000302: Aug 17 15:28:03.011: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: Sending SETUP
callref = 0x0082 callID = 0x8003 switch = primary-ni interface = User
000303: Aug 17 15:28:03.011: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: TX -> SETUP pd = 8
callref = 0x0082
Bearer Capability i = 0x8090A2
Standard = CCITT
Transfer Capability = Speech
Transfer Mode = Circuit
Transfer Rate = 64 kbit/s
Channel ID i = 0xA98397
Exclusive, Channel 23
Calling Party Number i = 0x0080, N/A
Plan:Unknown, Type:Unknown
Called Party Number i = 0x80, '13122455128'
Plan:Unknown, Type:Unknown
000304: Aug 17 15:28:03.123: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PROC pd
= 8 callref = 0x8082
Channel ID i = 0xA98397
Exclusive, Channel 23
000305: Aug 17 15:28:03.475: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: RX <- ALERTING pd =
8 callref = 0x8082
Progress Ind i = 0x8088 - In-band info or appropriate now
available
000306: Aug 17 15:28:03.487: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: TX -> ALERTING pd =
8 callref = 0x8001
Progress Ind i = 0x8188 - In-band info or appropriate now
available
000307: Aug 17 15:28:03.675: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: RX <- CONNECT pd =
8 callref = 0x8082
000308: Aug 17 15:28:03.675: %ISDN-6-CONNECT: Interface Serial0/1/0:22
is now connected to 13122455128 N/A
000309: Aug 17 15:28:03.679: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: TX -> CONNECT_ACK
pd = 8 callref = 0x0082
000310: Aug 17 15:28:03.683: %ISDN-6-CONNECT: Interface Serial0/3/0:0
is now connected to N/A N/A
000311: Aug 17 15:28:03.683: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: TX -> CONNECT pd =
8 callref = 0x8001
000312: Aug 17 15:28:03.707: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: RX <- CONNECT_ACK
pd = 8 callref = 0x0001
000313: Aug 17 15:28:17.403: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: RX <- DISCONNECT pd
= 8 callref = 0x0001
Cause i = 0x8090 - Normal call clearing
000314: Aug 17 15:28:17.403: %ISDN-6-DISCONNECT: Interface
Serial0/3/0:0 disconnected from unknown , call lasted 13 seconds
000315: Aug 17 15:28:17.403: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: TX -> RELEASE pd =
8 callref = 0x8001
000316: Aug 17 15:28:17.427: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: RX <- RELEASE_COMP
pd = 8 callref = 0x0001
000317: Aug 17 15:28:17.439: %ISDN-6-DISCONNECT: Interface
Serial0/1/0:22 disconnected from 13122455128 , call lasted 13 seconds
000318: Aug 17 15:28:17.439: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: TX -> DISCONNECT pd
= 8 callref = 0x0082
Cause i = 0x8090 - Normal call clearing
000319: Aug 17 15:28:17.475: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: RX <- RELEASE pd =
8 callref = 0x8082
000320: Aug 17 15:28:17.475: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: TX -> RELEASE_COMP
pd = 8 callref = 0x0082
Note that the incoming PRI call from the Polycom is 0x8890, which is
fine. However, on the outbound call leg from the router to the telco,
the 2851 has made the bearer cap speech, (0x8090A2), and that's
causing the issue. The Codian 3241 on the receiving end of the call
(which is directly connected to the PSTN) sees the incoming call from
the 2851 as bearer cap speech and tries to process it as a 64K audio
call rather than starting the bonding process.
Polycom HDX #1 -> PRI module -> crossover PRI -> 2851 router (0/3/0)
-> 0/1/0 -> PSTN
PSTN -> Codian 3241 H.320 gateway -> H.323 -> Polycom HDX #2
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 13:47:38 -0700
From: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
Cc: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] updation? a new word?
Message-ID:
<AANLkTikrNpA8iwLm04OLqbjWP9W_Sad1YoUn=qw4u+aC at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/updation
Must be from India :-o
Scott
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
wrote:
> on the CUCM v7.1(5b)SU2 CDR management Billing Application Server
> Parameters update screen:
>
> ------------------------------
> Updation of IPAddress/Hostname and Directory Path is not allowed, CDR
> Repository Service will not upload files to the new destination. To
Upload
> files to the new Destination, delete the existing server and add a new
> billing server.
> ------------------------------
>
> updation? omg.
>
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/91576
167/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:01:00 -0500
From: "Go0se" <me at go0se.com>
To: "'Lelio Fulgenzi'" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>, "'voyp list'"
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] updation? a new word?
Message-ID: <009c01cb3e4f$4d8680b0$e8938210$@go0se.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/updation
Thanks,
Go0se
My blog:
http://atc.go0se.com
--------------------------------------------
Help Hopegivers International
Feed the orphans of Haiti and India
http://www.hopegivers.org
--------------------------------------------
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 3:17 PM
To: voyp list
Subject: [cisco-voip] updation? a new word?
on the CUCM v7.1(5b)SU2 CDR management Billing Application Server
Parameters update screen:
_____
Updation of IPAddress/Hostname and Directory Path is not allowed, CDR
Repository Service will not upload files to the new destination. To
Upload files to the new Destination, delete the existing server and add
a new billing server.
_____
updation? omg.
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
- LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/09e98
2e2/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 14:21:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: Kim Casserly <solarwinds321 at yahoo.com>
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] OT: Installation cost
Message-ID: <72954.51682.qm at web59512.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I know this is a very generic question, but does anyone have a ballpark
range
(or percentage of HW cost) of installation costs for a VoIP install? We
are
definitely going to bid out the project, but if installation services
are over
"X" amount, we have to jump through some additional hoops. We have a
rough
estimate of what the cost will be for the hardware based upon our usual
discount
off list.
The project would essentially consist of:
Phase 1 - VoIP core and Pilot:
Installation / configuration of CUCM (Qty 4: 1 pub, 3 subs)
Installation, configuration, integration of Unity Connections
Installation of Presence
Setup UCCX (~300 agents)
Integration of Office Communicator through CUCI-MOC
Integration with existing NEC IMX PBX
Configuration of four ISR G2 VGs
Installation of ~300 phones (in pilot)
Installation, configuration of Emergency Responder
Initial setup and testing of VG224s
Phase 2 - Remaining campus cutover
~3500 phones
Phased cut-over based upon building (non-contiguous dial plan in
buildings)
~1000 analog lines (terminated in four different locations) with use of
VG224s
This would be a single-site deployment, with a fairly homogeneous
feature-set
across phones (except for a few small groups requiring ACD & intercoms).
Thanks in advance for taking the time to respond. Hopefully, the OT post
doesn't
offend anyone :-)
Take care.
-K
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:25:24 -0400
From: Ted Nugent <tednugent73 at gmail.com>
To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
Cc: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] updation? a new word?
Message-ID:
<AANLkTinMGDeGiv1shE5+u6VJFTsCf27Z0AT-AGL+mAcc at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
very similar to "*Strategery" I believe...*
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
wrote:
> on the CUCM v7.1(5b)SU2 CDR management Billing Application Server
> Parameters update screen:
>
> ------------------------------
> Updation of IPAddress/Hostname and Directory Path is not allowed, CDR
> Repository Service will not upload files to the new destination. To
Upload
> files to the new Destination, delete the existing server and add a new
> billing server.
> ------------------------------
>
> updation? omg.
>
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/4a7a6
7f0/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:45:12 -0400
From: Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com>
To: Robert Kulagowski <rkulagow at gmail.com>
Cc: Cisco VOIP <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] What controls bearer-cap?
Message-ID: <4C6B02E8.10609 at cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
In that case the router may modify the bearer cap. You may need to use
the new video PRI features in ISR's.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_4t/12_4t11/h320gw.html#wp1234629
Otherwise, you may have applied the workaround for CUVA calls not
working which forces the bearer cap?
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/voicesw/ps556/products_tech_note0
9186a0080569b65.shtml#topic2
/Wes
On Tuesday, August 17, 2010 4:36:45 PM, Robert Kulagowski
<rkulagow at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm generating a PRI for internal use (it's connected to the PRI
> modules of a Polycom HDX 4002). I also have a PRI to the telco; I'm
> trying to get the router to act as a tandem switch.
>
> Here's the q931 on the router:
> 000298: Aug 17 15:28:02.987: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: RX <- SETUP pd = 8
> callref = 0x0001
> Sending Complete
> Bearer Capability i = 0x8890
> Standard = CCITT
> Transfer Capability = Unrestricted Digital
> Transfer Mode = Circuit
> Transfer Rate = 64 kbit/s
> Channel ID i = 0xA98381
> Exclusive, Channel 1
> Called Party Number i = 0x80, '13122455128'
> Plan:Unknown, Type:Unknown
> 000299: Aug 17 15:28:02.991: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: Received SETUP
> callref = 0x8001 callID = 0x0003 switch = primary-net5 interface =
> Network
> 000300: Aug 17 15:28:03.003: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: TX -> CALL_PROC pd
> = 8 callref = 0x8001
> Channel ID i = 0xA98381
> Exclusive, Channel 1
> 000301: Aug 17 15:28:03.011: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: Applying typeplan
> for sw-type 0xD is 0x0 0x0, Calling num
> 000302: Aug 17 15:28:03.011: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: Sending SETUP
> callref = 0x0082 callID = 0x8003 switch = primary-ni interface = User
> 000303: Aug 17 15:28:03.011: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: TX -> SETUP pd = 8
> callref = 0x0082
> Bearer Capability i = 0x8090A2
> Standard = CCITT
> Transfer Capability = Speech
> Transfer Mode = Circuit
> Transfer Rate = 64 kbit/s
> Channel ID i = 0xA98397
> Exclusive, Channel 23
> Calling Party Number i = 0x0080, N/A
> Plan:Unknown, Type:Unknown
> Called Party Number i = 0x80, '13122455128'
> Plan:Unknown, Type:Unknown
> 000304: Aug 17 15:28:03.123: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PROC pd
> = 8 callref = 0x8082
> Channel ID i = 0xA98397
> Exclusive, Channel 23
> 000305: Aug 17 15:28:03.475: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: RX <- ALERTING pd =
> 8 callref = 0x8082
> Progress Ind i = 0x8088 - In-band info or appropriate now
available
> 000306: Aug 17 15:28:03.487: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: TX -> ALERTING pd =
> 8 callref = 0x8001
> Progress Ind i = 0x8188 - In-band info or appropriate now
available
> 000307: Aug 17 15:28:03.675: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: RX <- CONNECT pd =
> 8 callref = 0x8082
> 000308: Aug 17 15:28:03.675: %ISDN-6-CONNECT: Interface Serial0/1/0:22
> is now connected to 13122455128 N/A
> 000309: Aug 17 15:28:03.679: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: TX -> CONNECT_ACK
> pd = 8 callref = 0x0082
> 000310: Aug 17 15:28:03.683: %ISDN-6-CONNECT: Interface Serial0/3/0:0
> is now connected to N/A N/A
> 000311: Aug 17 15:28:03.683: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: TX -> CONNECT pd =
> 8 callref = 0x8001
> 000312: Aug 17 15:28:03.707: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: RX <- CONNECT_ACK
> pd = 8 callref = 0x0001
> 000313: Aug 17 15:28:17.403: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: RX <- DISCONNECT pd
> = 8 callref = 0x0001
> Cause i = 0x8090 - Normal call clearing
> 000314: Aug 17 15:28:17.403: %ISDN-6-DISCONNECT: Interface
> Serial0/3/0:0 disconnected from unknown , call lasted 13 seconds
> 000315: Aug 17 15:28:17.403: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: TX -> RELEASE pd =
> 8 callref = 0x8001
> 000316: Aug 17 15:28:17.427: ISDN Se0/3/0:15 Q931: RX <- RELEASE_COMP
> pd = 8 callref = 0x0001
> 000317: Aug 17 15:28:17.439: %ISDN-6-DISCONNECT: Interface
> Serial0/1/0:22 disconnected from 13122455128 , call lasted 13 seconds
> 000318: Aug 17 15:28:17.439: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: TX -> DISCONNECT pd
> = 8 callref = 0x0082
> Cause i = 0x8090 - Normal call clearing
> 000319: Aug 17 15:28:17.475: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: RX <- RELEASE pd =
> 8 callref = 0x8082
> 000320: Aug 17 15:28:17.475: ISDN Se0/1/0:23 Q931: TX -> RELEASE_COMP
> pd = 8 callref = 0x0082
>
>
> Note that the incoming PRI call from the Polycom is 0x8890, which is
> fine. However, on the outbound call leg from the router to the telco,
> the 2851 has made the bearer cap speech, (0x8090A2), and that's
> causing the issue. The Codian 3241 on the receiving end of the call
> (which is directly connected to the PSTN) sees the incoming call from
> the 2851 as bearer cap speech and tries to process it as a 64K audio
> call rather than starting the bonding process.
>
> Polycom HDX #1 -> PRI module -> crossover PRI -> 2851 router (0/3/0)
> -> 0/1/0 -> PSTN
>
> PSTN -> Codian 3241 H.320 gateway -> H.323 -> Polycom HDX #2
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 14:51:11 -0700
From: "Haas, Neal" <nhaas at co.fresno.ca.us>
To: "'Kim Casserly'" <solarwinds321 at yahoo.com>,
"'cisco-voip at puck.nether.net'" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] OT: Installation cost
Message-ID:
<A607839BE5327F4DB0719710592119C9B2E956EF5A at COFMAIL2.intra.co.fresno.ca.
us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I don't know about costs, for this installation 1 Pub and 2 subs is all
you need with 5200 phones, 3 subs would be over kill. Get 2 Unity
Servers.
With CUCI-MOC you will uninstall this in 90 days or less, We did a soft
rollout of about 200 Computers, Most (90%) or more uninstalled it within
days of being installed on the computers (Personally I loved CUCI-MOC
never had 1 issue) they said it slowed their computers down by 20%, 1
person had to reboot 3 times a day. Wait for the new version to come
out, before doing CUCI-MOC. Right now there are 0 installs of CUCI-MOC.
Our Pilot was 200 - 7965 phones, went smooth. We did not talk about what
the features that people wanted, so did some hand holding on that. Ask
people what they expect from the VoIP phones first and build it into the
system, ie transfer directly to Voicemail without ringing the phone...
Watch out for the VG224's in version 8 I have been told that they use
licensing now (or more....). We use them under 7.1.3... for Emergency
response dial out gateways. Kind of pricy - if it were me I think that I
would do 7911 phones or a 3rd party SIP - but price it out first. If you
want voicemail on those, I don't think that you will get a red light.
UCCX is coming soon to me !!!!!!
Neal
-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Kim Casserly
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 2:21 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] OT: Installation cost
I know this is a very generic question, but does anyone have a ballpark
range (or percentage of HW cost) of installation costs for a VoIP
install? We are definitely going to bid out the project, but if
installation services are over "X" amount, we have to jump through some
additional hoops. We have a rough estimate of what the cost will be for
the hardware based upon our usual discount off list.
The project would essentially consist of:
Phase 1 - VoIP core and Pilot:
Installation / configuration of CUCM (Qty 4: 1 pub, 3 subs)
Installation, configuration, integration of Unity Connections
Installation of Presence Setup UCCX (~300 agents) Integration of Office
Communicator through CUCI-MOC Integration with existing NEC IMX PBX
Configuration of four ISR G2 VGs Installation of ~300 phones (in pilot)
Installation, configuration of Emergency Responder Initial setup and
testing of VG224s
Phase 2 - Remaining campus cutover
~3500 phones
Phased cut-over based upon building (non-contiguous dial plan in
buildings)
~1000 analog lines (terminated in four different locations) with use of
VG224s
This would be a single-site deployment, with a fairly homogeneous
feature-set across phones (except for a few small groups requiring ACD &
intercoms).
Thanks in advance for taking the time to respond. Hopefully, the OT post
doesn't
offend anyone :-)
Take care.
-K
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:51:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
To: Kim Casserly <solarwinds321 at yahoo.com>
Cc: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] OT: Installation cost
Message-ID: <B17F5339-B54F-4347-AB01-239EE63B62AA at uoguelph.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed;
delsp=yes
Installation costs aside, don't forget operating costs. Phones will be
end of life'd and you need UCSS on your products in order to be able
to upgrade.
These are two things that have surprised many going down the road of
voip.
?
Don't look at me, my iPod maid that spilling mistake.
On 2010-08-17, at 5:21 PM, Kim Casserly <solarwinds321 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I know this is a very generic question, but does anyone have a
> ballpark range
> (or percentage of HW cost) of installation costs for a VoIP install?
> We are
> definitely going to bid out the project, but if installation
> services are over
> "X" amount, we have to jump through some additional hoops. We have a
> rough
> estimate of what the cost will be for the hardware based upon our
> usual discount
> off list.
>
> The project would essentially consist of:
>
> Phase 1 - VoIP core and Pilot:
>
> Installation / configuration of CUCM (Qty 4: 1 pub, 3 subs)
> Installation, configuration, integration of Unity Connections
> Installation of Presence
> Setup UCCX (~300 agents)
> Integration of Office Communicator through CUCI-MOC
> Integration with existing NEC IMX PBX
> Configuration of four ISR G2 VGs
> Installation of ~300 phones (in pilot)
> Installation, configuration of Emergency Responder
> Initial setup and testing of VG224s
>
>
> Phase 2 - Remaining campus cutover
>
> ~3500 phones
> Phased cut-over based upon building (non-contiguous dial plan in
> buildings)
> ~1000 analog lines (terminated in four different locations) with use
> of VG224s
>
>
> This would be a single-site deployment, with a fairly homogeneous
> feature-set
> across phones (except for a few small groups requiring ACD &
> intercoms).
>
>
> Thanks in advance for taking the time to respond. Hopefully, the OT
> post doesn't
> offend anyone :-)
>
> Take care.
>
> -K
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 14:55:42 -0700
From: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
To: Kim Casserly <solarwinds321 at yahoo.com>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] OT: Installation cost
Message-ID:
<AANLkTikc-zVdkhU4xLiCYnhONZXMZMX=x0Oeo-9DGJAs at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Don't know rate for installation. I'm guessing in the range of $125/hr
to
$200/hr
Phase 1
- CM 40 hours
- UC 16 hours
- CUPS not sure
- UCCx 300 agents? are you sure you want UCCx? my understanding is
the
top end with UCCx is 300. Might need to look at UCCE. (Really
depends on
Scripting / IVR) 16-???? hours.
- cucimoc ?? not sure have not done it but guessing around 16 hours
if
all the M$ stuff is ready to go.
- NEC What kind of connection? Qsig? 4-?? hours Is NEC running
correct
version etc.
- VGW, H323 or MGCP? 2-6hours
- Phones -- Guessing about 30-45 minutes each if you have them
configured
to unpackage and set on desks. (I would suggest getting a minimum
wage kid
to do that for you..... save a lot of money). Depending on features
etc.
the BAT could do it fairly quickly (10-20 minutes each if you
include
scanning all the phones into the speadsheet)
- ER -- Depends on if everything is ready with the PS-ALI DB vendor.
16-?? hours
- Analog -- Wiring can take some time. Not sure of your setup. VG's
lets say 2 hours each?
If you do it right, Phase two should be a bunch of trained monkeys.
Bottom line your looking at a large labor cost.
Scott
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Kim Casserly
<solarwinds321 at yahoo.com>wrote:
> I know this is a very generic question, but does anyone have a
ballpark
> range
> (or percentage of HW cost) of installation costs for a VoIP install?
We are
> definitely going to bid out the project, but if installation services
are
> over
> "X" amount, we have to jump through some additional hoops. We have a
rough
> estimate of what the cost will be for the hardware based upon our
usual
> discount
> off list.
>
> The project would essentially consist of:
>
> Phase 1 - VoIP core and Pilot:
>
> Installation / configuration of CUCM (Qty 4: 1 pub, 3 subs)
> Installation, configuration, integration of Unity Connections
> Installation of Presence
> Setup UCCX (~300 agents)
> Integration of Office Communicator through CUCI-MOC
> Integration with existing NEC IMX PBX
> Configuration of four ISR G2 VGs
> Installation of ~300 phones (in pilot)
> Installation, configuration of Emergency Responder
> Initial setup and testing of VG224s
>
>
> Phase 2 - Remaining campus cutover
>
> ~3500 phones
> Phased cut-over based upon building (non-contiguous dial plan in
buildings)
> ~1000 analog lines (terminated in four different locations) with use
of
> VG224s
>
>
> This would be a single-site deployment, with a fairly homogeneous
> feature-set
> across phones (except for a few small groups requiring ACD &
intercoms).
>
>
> Thanks in advance for taking the time to respond. Hopefully, the OT
post
> doesn't
> offend anyone :-)
>
> Take care.
>
> -K
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/91b31
faa/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 14:16:35 -0700
From: "Loren.Gray" <Loren.Gray at twinriversusd.org>
To: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Softkey Settings
Message-ID:
<679BC259F1E06244A1600B95E79927710BDB8F0C0D at ARMAILBOXK-Z.TRUSD.LOCAL>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I have a user that receives a high call volume. This user is trying to
transfer calls but when the user is receiving another call they do not
have the call forward softkey.
Do you have any recommendations?
Loren Gray
Network Specialist
Twin Rivers Unified School District
Sacramento, CA 95652
916-286-5150
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/58dcc
394/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 19
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 18:12:26 -0400
From: "Mike Olivere" <mikeeo at msn.com>
To: "'Kim Casserly'" <solarwinds321 at yahoo.com>,
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] OT: Installation cost
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP2473B0F68B8E80C73C2520C59C0 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Figure $175-200 per phone, 250 per phone on phones with presence. Those
rate
includes config of phone, voicemail, presence, dial plan config.
UCCX can vary depending on the type of scripting.
4 hrs per VG @200hr
And I'd do a T&M for the integration with NEC, because you never know
how
good the NEC engineer.
-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Kim Casserly
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 5:21 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] OT: Installation cost
I know this is a very generic question, but does anyone have a ballpark
range
(or percentage of HW cost) of installation costs for a VoIP install? We
are
definitely going to bid out the project, but if installation services
are
over
"X" amount, we have to jump through some additional hoops. We have a
rough
estimate of what the cost will be for the hardware based upon our usual
discount
off list.
The project would essentially consist of:
Phase 1 - VoIP core and Pilot:
Installation / configuration of CUCM (Qty 4: 1 pub, 3 subs)
Installation, configuration, integration of Unity Connections
Installation of Presence
Setup UCCX (~300 agents)
Integration of Office Communicator through CUCI-MOC
Integration with existing NEC IMX PBX
Configuration of four ISR G2 VGs
Installation of ~300 phones (in pilot)
Installation, configuration of Emergency Responder
Initial setup and testing of VG224s
Phase 2 - Remaining campus cutover
~3500 phones
Phased cut-over based upon building (non-contiguous dial plan in
buildings)
~1000 analog lines (terminated in four different locations) with use of
VG224s
This would be a single-site deployment, with a fairly homogeneous
feature-set
across phones (except for a few small groups requiring ACD & intercoms).
Thanks in advance for taking the time to respond. Hopefully, the OT post
doesn't
offend anyone :-)
Take care.
-K
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
------------------------------
Message: 20
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 18:39:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
To: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUE v7.1.2 + CUCM v7.1.5b.SU2
Message-ID: <66CFC200-CDEC-4926-8653-92FBC7609600 at uoguelph.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed";
DelSp="yes"
Looks like the JTAPI login verification process doesn't like special
characters, but all other processes are fine.
CSCtd50030
?
Don't look at me, my iPod maid that spilling mistake.
On 2010-08-13, at 12:00 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca> wrote:
> OK. A restart has got them both registered, but I still get a JTAPI
> login error. :(
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
>
>
> From: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> To: "voyp list" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 11:31:17 AM
> Subject: CUE v7.1.2 + CUCM v7.1.5b.SU2
>
> Having a weird problem in getting my CUE box working w/ v7.1.5bSU2.
>
> Under CallManager configuration, I get a successful web login with
> the admin user, but the JTAPI user login is unsuccessful. When I go
> the the CTI ports screen in CUE, I see the one port that is
> available to that JTAPI user.
>
> I have assigned the JTAP user the CTI route point and CTI port under
> device association and have assigned them the "standard CTI enabled"
> group/role.
>
> CTI ports are registering, but CTI Route Points are not.
>
> What am I doing wrong?
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/d1989
c0e/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 21
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:53:43 +1000
From: Daniel <dan.voip at danofive.id.au>
To: "Loren.Gray" <Loren.Gray at twinriversusd.org>
Cc: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Softkey Settings
Message-ID:
<AANLkTikOjV2Eb=9C2LpE_MfOLM61-+uzQoFM_LZN0phM at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Not sure what your trying to achieve here, are you trying to transfer an
active call while another call arrives? Just that you mention transfer
and
call forward in the same sentence?
If you are on a call when a call arrives the phone focuses on that new
call
so your phones softkey template changes to "ring in" layout. All you
need to
do is use the arrows on your phone to focus on the active call which
will
then bring back the "connected" softkey layout. Then you can transfer
the
call.
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Loren.Gray
<Loren.Gray at twinriversusd.org>wrote:
> I have a user that receives a high call volume. This user is trying
to
> transfer calls but when the user is receiving another call they do not
have
> the call forward softkey.
>
>
>
> Do you have any recommendations?
>
>
>
> Loren Gray
>
> Network Specialist
>
> Twin Rivers Unified School District
>
> Sacramento, CA 95652
>
> 916-286-5150
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/31ae2
3c8/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 22
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:33:32 -0400
From: Matthew Saskin <msaskin at gmail.com>
To: Kim Casserly <solarwinds321 at yahoo.com>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] OT: Installation cost
Message-ID:
<AANLkTikVnmyhZrK1Y-gHZArurVR=Z_dt1sJLqnBjyt94 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
High-level rule of thumb - 30-40% of the hardware price for "all-in"
professional services, including project management, deployment
services,
end-user training, UAT, administrator training & handoff, and
post-migration
support for first few days in service post-cutover.
Matthew Saskin
msaskin at gmail.com
203-253-9571
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Kim Casserly
<solarwinds321 at yahoo.com>wrote:
> I know this is a very generic question, but does anyone have a
ballpark
> range
> (or percentage of HW cost) of installation costs for a VoIP install?
We are
> definitely going to bid out the project, but if installation services
are
> over
> "X" amount, we have to jump through some additional hoops. We have a
rough
> estimate of what the cost will be for the hardware based upon our
usual
> discount
> off list.
>
> The project would essentially consist of:
>
> Phase 1 - VoIP core and Pilot:
>
> Installation / configuration of CUCM (Qty 4: 1 pub, 3 subs)
> Installation, configuration, integration of Unity Connections
> Installation of Presence
> Setup UCCX (~300 agents)
> Integration of Office Communicator through CUCI-MOC
> Integration with existing NEC IMX PBX
> Configuration of four ISR G2 VGs
> Installation of ~300 phones (in pilot)
> Installation, configuration of Emergency Responder
> Initial setup and testing of VG224s
>
>
> Phase 2 - Remaining campus cutover
>
> ~3500 phones
> Phased cut-over based upon building (non-contiguous dial plan in
buildings)
> ~1000 analog lines (terminated in four different locations) with use
of
> VG224s
>
>
> This would be a single-site deployment, with a fairly homogeneous
> feature-set
> across phones (except for a few small groups requiring ACD &
intercoms).
>
>
> Thanks in advance for taking the time to respond. Hopefully, the OT
post
> doesn't
> offend anyone :-)
>
> Take care.
>
> -K
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/46806
430/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 23
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 20:35:14 -0500
From: Dennis Heim <Dennis.Heim at cdw.com>
To: Matthew Saskin <msaskin at gmail.com>, Kim Casserly
<solarwinds321 at yahoo.com>
Cc: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] OT: Installation cost
Message-ID:
<7DF1C42555B37D4BAAD236799B2D05932579E0F755 at EXMB4ILVH.corp.cdw.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
A lot of it depends on the knowledge of your staff and eagerness to take
ownership of the project. Who is placing phones, who is doing the analog
cross-connects? Those two can eat up a ton of hours. If you take
ownership of those you can reduce the total install costs by decent
amount. Make sure you pay attention to training, lack of training will
create a helpdesk headache. If you are able to own and lead the
end-station reviews that can save a lot of time and money.
Do you manage your NEC PBX today?
Dennis Heim
Network Voice Engineer
CDW Advanced Technology Services
11711 N. Meridian Street, Suite 225
Carmel, IN 46032
317.569.4255 Office
317.569.4201 Fax
317.694.6070 Cell
dennis.heim at cdw.com<mailto:dennis.heim at cdw.com>
cdw.com/content/solutions/unified-communications/<http://www.cdw.com/con
tent/solutions/unified-communications/>
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Matthew Saskin
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 7:34 PM
To: Kim Casserly
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] OT: Installation cost
High-level rule of thumb - 30-40% of the hardware price for "all-in"
professional services, including project management, deployment
services, end-user training, UAT, administrator training & handoff, and
post-migration support for first few days in service post-cutover.
Matthew Saskin
msaskin at gmail.com<mailto:msaskin at gmail.com>
203-253-9571
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Kim Casserly
<solarwinds321 at yahoo.com<mailto:solarwinds321 at yahoo.com>> wrote:
I know this is a very generic question, but does anyone have a ballpark
range
(or percentage of HW cost) of installation costs for a VoIP install? We
are
definitely going to bid out the project, but if installation services
are over
"X" amount, we have to jump through some additional hoops. We have a
rough
estimate of what the cost will be for the hardware based upon our usual
discount
off list.
The project would essentially consist of:
Phase 1 - VoIP core and Pilot:
Installation / configuration of CUCM (Qty 4: 1 pub, 3 subs)
Installation, configuration, integration of Unity Connections
Installation of Presence
Setup UCCX (~300 agents)
Integration of Office Communicator through CUCI-MOC
Integration with existing NEC IMX PBX
Configuration of four ISR G2 VGs
Installation of ~300 phones (in pilot)
Installation, configuration of Emergency Responder
Initial setup and testing of VG224s
Phase 2 - Remaining campus cutover
~3500 phones
Phased cut-over based upon building (non-contiguous dial plan in
buildings)
~1000 analog lines (terminated in four different locations) with use of
VG224s
This would be a single-site deployment, with a fairly homogeneous
feature-set
across phones (except for a few small groups requiring ACD & intercoms).
Thanks in advance for taking the time to respond. Hopefully, the OT post
doesn't
offend anyone :-)
Take care.
-K
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100817/aeabd
8db/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 24
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 00:13:06 -0400
From: Nick Matthews <matthnick at gmail.com>
To: Brian Schultz <bms314 at gmail.com>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Install CUCM 8.0(2c) in ESXi
Message-ID:
<AANLkTimW-cTfpyg6tiArYBPXSfTPE9SeY6djRoS1OPtx at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I've heard of problems with processor, motherboard, and NIC problems
using
any of the VMware ESX/ESXi versions that require 64bit. You can try
giving
it more than 80 GB and try 2GB of RAM or larger as well.
-nick
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Brian Schultz <bms314 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Has anyone been able to install CUCM 8.0(2c) in ESXi for lab purposes?
I
> am having a heck of a time trying to get this installed with the Cisco
> media. I've tried on both ESXi 4.0 and 3.5. Tried several variations
of
> 72GB, 73GB and 80GB hard drives. Tried with 1 and 2 processors. Also
tried
> with RHEL 3, 4 and 5 (32 bit). It typically makes it through the
initial OS
> and application install, and then goes to a blue screen with a
blinking
> cursor at the bottom and just sits there. If I restart the VM at this
> point, it goes through it's bootup, detects VMWare, installs VMWare
Tools,
> then gives an Installation Failed error stating 'The installation has
failed
> and must be restarted to recover from the failure'.
>
> I've also tried deploying with the OVF template using the ova file
from
> CCO, same problem. Last night, I let it sit at the blue screen
overnight
> thinking it just needed more time, same blue screen in the morning.
>
> Just to clarify, it's not the typical Windows "blue screen", just a
screen
> of blue color with a blinking cursor at the bottom.
>
> Thanks,
> Brian
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/13d90
2ff/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 25
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:38:40 +0200
From: "cips" <cisco at cips.nl>
To: "'Loren.Gray'" <Loren.Gray at twinriversusd.org>,
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Softkey Settings
Message-ID: <006601cb3e9f$ff0e4ac0$fd2ae040$@nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
You have to increase the max number of calls on the line of the specific
device.
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Loren.Gray
Sent: dinsdag 17 augustus 2010 23:17
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Softkey Settings
I have a user that receives a high call volume. This user is trying to
transfer calls but when the user is receiving another call they do not
have
the call forward softkey.
Do you have any recommendations?
Loren Gray
Network Specialist
Twin Rivers Unified School District
Sacramento, CA 95652
916-286-5150
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/6125f
907/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 26
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 13:49:18 +0200
From: "Peer Kohlstetter" <kohlstetter at blue-networks.de>
To: <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Cisco Unified Department Attendant Console -
Problems with Queue and Directory
Message-ID:
<16A8F2A3B686224481DE4856D8404CFE229BE7 at exc-w2k-blue.blue-networks.local
>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello,
we have a Callmanager 6 and we have installed the version 3 of the new
Attendant Console Department. We plan to make a upgrade to Call Manager
8 and because of this we need the new AC and can not longer use the old
AC.
The new AC is running wit server and client. I can use the client
software to take over calls, call to saved external numbers or forward
calls to external saved numbers. That seems to be ok.
But I still have to problems:
* I do not see any internal Queue at the top window and I cannot
park calls in a queue.
* I cannot see my internal or external dictionary. And because
of that I cannot forward calls to internal users and I cannot see the
status of internal user.
Has somebody experience with the ne AC and can help me with that
problems?
The following links show the new AC Department and describes the
function. The internal Directory and the Queue part of the window is
empty in my installation.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/voicesw/ps6789/ps7046/ps7282/
product_data_sheet0900aecd805e6a67.html
Thanks and best regards,
Peer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/c1836
54c/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 27
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 09:11:29 -0400
From: "James Buchanan" <jbuchanan at ctiusa.com>
To: "Loren.Gray" <Loren.Gray at twinriversusd.org>,
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Softkey Settings
Message-ID:
<79B99C253CB1084FB974C7D4A3C47E430508F437 at EXCHANGE.ctiusa.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello,
The issue appears to be that new calls coming in steal the focus of the
call in progress. If running one of the newer 7941 or 7961 phones or
above, you can change this behavior by setting Auto Call Select and Auto
Line Select to Disabled from the Phone Configuration page in
CallManager.
Thanks,
James Buchanan | Senior Network Engineer | South Region | Presidio
Networked Solutions
12 Cadillac Dr, Suite 130, Brentwood, TN 37027 | jbuchanan at presidio.com
<mailto:jbuchanan at ctiusa.com>
D: 615-866-5729 | F: 615-866-5781 | www.presidio.com
<http://www.presidio.com>
CCIE #25863, Voice
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Loren.Gray
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 4:17 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Softkey Settings
I have a user that receives a high call volume. This user is trying to
transfer calls but when the user is receiving another call they do not
have the call forward softkey.
Do you have any recommendations?
Loren Gray
Network Specialist
Twin Rivers Unified School District
Sacramento, CA 95652
916-286-5150
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/8c799
eb7/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 28
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 06:14:22 -0700
From: "Chris Ward (chrward)" <chrward at cisco.com>
To: "Nick Matthews" <matthnick at gmail.com>, "Brian Schultz"
<bms314 at gmail.com>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Install CUCM 8.0(2c) in ESXi
Message-ID:
<8A7BEFB8FCD25A43BB73B1D879B82F77028DEAAD at xmb-sjc-239.amer.cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Brian,
If you are using the OVF and standard Cisco 8.0.2c bootable media, there
are only a couple other things to check. Make sure you are using ESXi
4.0 or later (ESX is not supported). Also, I would run through a media
check if you haven't already (the option that comes up pre-install after
booting from DVD). And the other item would be the hardware you are
running it on. Maybe a driver or some other incompatibility. You might
want to try ESXi 4.1 to see if it helps or try running ESXi on a
different hardware setup?
+Chris
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Nick Matthews
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 12:13 AM
To: Brian Schultz
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Install CUCM 8.0(2c) in ESXi
I've heard of problems with processor, motherboard, and NIC problems
using any of the VMware ESX/ESXi versions that require 64bit. You can
try giving it more than 80 GB and try 2GB of RAM or larger as well.
-nick
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Brian Schultz <bms314 at gmail.com> wrote:
Has anyone been able to install CUCM 8.0(2c) in ESXi for lab purposes?
I am having a heck of a time trying to get this installed with the Cisco
media. I've tried on both ESXi 4.0 and 3.5. Tried several variations
of 72GB, 73GB and 80GB hard drives. Tried with 1 and 2 processors.
Also tried with RHEL 3, 4 and 5 (32 bit). It typically makes it through
the initial OS and application install, and then goes to a blue screen
with a blinking cursor at the bottom and just sits there. If I restart
the VM at this point, it goes through it's bootup, detects VMWare,
installs VMWare Tools, then gives an Installation Failed error stating
'The installation has failed and must be restarted to recover from the
failure'.
I've also tried deploying with the OVF template using the ova file from
CCO, same problem. Last night, I let it sit at the blue screen
overnight thinking it just needed more time, same blue screen in the
morning.
Just to clarify, it's not the typical Windows "blue screen", just a
screen of blue color with a blinking cursor at the bottom.
Thanks,
Brian
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/d6ffe
881/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 29
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 09:32:34 -0400
From: Ryan Ratliff <rratliff at cisco.com>
To: "ROZA, Ariel" <Ariel.ROZA at la.logicalis.com>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Polycom VVX 1500 & Callmanager
Message-ID: <50C74544-007D-4EF2-AEA8-58699B7C3091 at cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
The initial 401 from CUCM is us telling the phone that it needs to
provide credentials. The phone should resend the register with whatever
credentials you've configured. At that point if you are getting a 404
it means the device registering is not in the database.
-Ryan
On Aug 17, 2010, at 4:15 PM, ROZA, Ariel wrote:
Guys & gals,
Has anyone successfully configured a Polycom VVX video phone under
Callmanager 6.1?
I am following Polycom guides, but all I get is a rejection from the
CUCM server.
A network dump shows callmanager responding with - 401 Unauthorized
and following attempts with 404 Not found.
I have security profiles, User Id & Password.
Regards,
Ariel.
ARIEL ROZA
Advanced Engineering
LOGICALIS
Peru 327 1? Piso - C.A.B.A. - Argentina - C1063ACH
Tel/Fax: +54 (11) 4344-0300
ariel.roza at la.logicalis.com
www.la.logicalis.com
www.logicalisnow.com
Por favor, piense en el medioambiente antes de imprimir este email.
La presente informaci?n se env?a ?nicamente para el destinatario, y
contiene informaci?n de car?cter CONFIDENCIAL o PRIVLEGIADA.
La modificaci?n, retransmisi?n, difus?n, copia u otro uso de esta
informaci?n por cualquier medio, por personas distintas al destinatario,
est?n estrictamente prohibidas.
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/bca89
16a/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 30
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 09:52:32 -0400
From: Peter Pauly <ppauly at gmail.com>
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Custom phone directory
Message-ID:
<AANLkTikqQms5jUs0P9ZmSk_P_ERgt0LNKhrE=zAbmCY=@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
In the old windows based Call Manager, we created a custom directory
entry
after the built-in Corporate directory by modifying XML files on the
server.
How do I do this on the new Linux based CM (7.1(5)? Can anyone point me
in
the right direction?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/7d0ee
672/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 31
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 09:07:28 -0500
From: Robert Kulagowski <rkulagow at gmail.com>
To: Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com>
Cc: Cisco VOIP <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] What controls bearer-cap?
Message-ID:
<AANLkTinq7uFwM_iemp4KeXHtoDEfz4bZfkr-A1O4_-4G at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com> wrote:
> In that case the router may modify the bearer cap. You may need to use
the
> new video PRI features in ISR's.
>
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_4t/12_4t11/h320gw.html#wp1234629
That doesn't work. I've got probably 7 or 8 TAC cases over the past 3
years (basically since day Feature+1) trying to get this to work, and
it never does. TAC guys that I've worked with are great, but when
they ask me to change H.225 parameters on the endpoints that's when I
know that it's not ready for primetime. (None of our endpoints have
any knobs that can be tweaked for that sort of stuff, and they "just
work" when they connect using either native ISDN or Codian 3241s,
so...)
> Otherwise, you may have applied the workaround for CUVA calls not
working
> which forces the bearer cap?
>
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/voicesw/ps556/products_tech_note0
9186a0080569b65.shtml#topic2
Nope, not that:
voice-port 0/1/0:23
translation-profile incoming Prepend_Sitecode
no comfort-noise
!
voice-port 0/2/0:23
translation-profile incoming Prepend_Sitecode
no comfort-noise
!
voice-port 0/3/0:15
!
voice-port 2/0/0
!
0/3/0 is the cross-over PRI to the equipment, and it's showing a
correct bearer channel of Unrestricted Digital. Both 0/1/0 and 0/2/0
make the call Speech on the outbound leg.
------------------------------
Message: 32
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 10:16:43 -0400
From: "Rhodes, Geoff" <GRhodes at rbh.com>
To: <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Options for upgrading 4.2(3) ?
Message-ID:
<6350516B6159444E9D646523EB4526F4080966B4 at Apollo.rbh.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello. We are currently running Call Manager 4.2(3) and Unity 4.2, with
an installed base of around 300 phones. One large site with 95% of
phones, with 2 smaller sites connected via MPLS circuits, which both run
SRST for backup.
Our lease is running out and we have to make some tough decisions. The
majority of our phones are 7970s, which we have decided to buy out and
keep (at least another year). The problem is the back end. EOL/EOS for
CM 4.2 is next spring, so we feel pressured to do something. Here is
what I see our options to be.
1 - upgrade the backend to v8.x on MCS boxes. Not cheap, but doable. I
hate doing this since what we have right now just WORKS..
2 - upgrade the backend to v8.x and run on B-series blades on our new
UCS chassis. At first, this seemed really a great solution (having all
the UC, Unity and Presence server virtualized) until we started hearing
about Cisco's requirements. We have a 10-gig iSCSI framework built with
our UCS and SAN, using Nexus 5000 switching and everything works
perfectly. Cisco says we have to use fiber optic connections back to
the SAN, and require us to boot from SAN for the virtual servers. So
that mean we either buy fiber modules for the Nexus 5000s (expensive due
to license) or use a couple of MDS fiber switches, plus buying converged
net. Adapters throughout. This solution is actually LESS EXPENSIVE than
going the MCS route above, but it involves adding a lot more complexity
to our core, just for UC running 300 phones...
3 - upgrade to 4.3 and maybe virtualize it? Is anyone running 4.3 in a
VM? What is the EOL for 4.3? I know we'd be missing Presence, but
that's not a huge problem. We would plan on upgrading to v8.x sometime
next year or when Cisco decides to support UC on UCS with iSCSI.
Any help, suggestions or comments are most welcome.
Thanks in advance.
Geoff Rhodes
Director of Information Technology
ROBINSON, BRADSHAW & HINSON
101 North Tryon Street, Suite 1900
Charlotte, NC 28246
P: 704.377-8188
F: 704-339-3488
grhodes at rbh.com
www.rbh.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/77bab
e3a/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 33
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 10:26:54 -0400
From: Ryan Ratliff <rratliff at cisco.com>
To: Peter Pauly <ppauly at gmail.com>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Custom phone directory
Message-ID: <DDBC15BE-A5DC-42A5-8362-B30C6D21B2A3 at cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Get the ip phone services SDK from developer.cisco.com for your version.
There will be a sample script in it.
The process hasn't changed all that much except that you have to create
your own directories page now since you can't modify the existing one.
Review the documentation that talks about internal vs external
directories with CUCM 7.x (7.0 release notes will be a good place to
start). Then add your new URL (hosted on your own web server) as
either an internal directories URL or external one (or both depending on
what phones you have).
-Ryan
On Aug 18, 2010, at 9:52 AM, Peter Pauly wrote:
In the old windows based Call Manager, we created a custom directory
entry after the built-in Corporate directory by modifying XML files on
the server.
How do I do this on the new Linux based CM (7.1(5)? Can anyone point me
in the right direction?
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/8f98a
9ed/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 34
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 10:29:45 -0400
From: Ed Leatherman <ealeatherman at gmail.com>
To: "Rhodes, Geoff" <GRhodes at rbh.com>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Options for upgrading 4.2(3) ?
Message-ID:
<AANLkTi=TULDDn6fvz27N9pTeB86+oQ8Myga+XCLaQ5gw at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Geoff,
some thoughts..
what hardware are you running now? You might be able to run CM 7.1.5
on your existing hardware.. i just upgraded a cluster of about the
same size from 4.2 to 7.1 without changing hardware. That would buy
you some time to replace the hardware later for version 8. We also
upgraded purely for support reasons, as 4.2 was doing everything it
needed to.
I don't think the requirements for virtualizing Unity are as strict so
thats still an option for you separate from CM.
Cisco isn't going to support you virtualizing 4.3... in which case why
not just stay on 4.2?
You could look at buying IBM or HP hardware directly to possibly save
some $$ on the new server option.. just be very careful that you order
exactly the right parts. We've done this with HP servers in the past
and haven't had any problems once we got the reseller to understand
the requirements.
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Rhodes, Geoff <GRhodes at rbh.com> wrote:
> Hello.? We are currently running Call Manager 4.2(3) and Unity 4.2,
with an
> installed base of around 300 phones.? One large site with 95% of
phones,
> with 2 smaller sites connected via MPLS circuits, which both run SRST
for
> backup.
>
>
>
> Our lease is running out and we have to make some tough decisions.?
The
> majority of our phones are 7970s, which we have decided to buy out and
keep
> (at least another year).? The problem is the back end.? EOL/EOS for CM
4.2
> is next spring, so we feel pressured to do something.? Here is what I
see
> our options to be.
>
>
>
> 1 ? upgrade the backend to v8.x on MCS boxes.? Not cheap, but doable.?
I
> hate doing this since what we have right now just WORKS..
>
>
>
> 2 ? upgrade the backend to v8.x and run on B-series blades on our new
UCS
> chassis.? At first, this seemed really a great solution (having all
the UC,
> Unity and Presence server virtualized) until we started hearing about
> Cisco?s requirements.? We have a 10-gig iSCSI framework built with our
UCS
> and SAN, using Nexus 5000 switching and everything works perfectly.?
Cisco
> says we have to use fiber optic connections back to the SAN, and
require us
> to boot from SAN for the virtual servers.? So that mean we either buy
fiber
> modules for the Nexus 5000s (expensive due to license) or use a couple
of
> MDS fiber switches, plus buying converged net. Adapters throughout.?
This
> solution is actually LESS EXPENSIVE than going the MCS route above,
but it
> involves adding a lot more complexity to our core, just for UC running
300
> phones?
>
>
>
> 3 ? upgrade to 4.3 and maybe virtualize it?? Is anyone running 4.3 in
a VM?
> What is the EOL for 4.3?? I know we?d be missing Presence, but that?s
not a
> huge problem.? We would plan on upgrading to v8.x sometime next year
or when
> Cisco decides to support UC on UCS with iSCSI.
>
>
>
> Any help, suggestions or comments are most welcome.
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
>
>
> Geoff Rhodes
>
> Director of Information Technology
>
> ROBINSON, BRADSHAW & HINSON
>
> 101 North Tryon Street, Suite 1900
>
> Charlotte, NC 28246
>
> P: 704.377-8188
>
> F:?704-339-3488
>
> grhodes at rbh.com
>
> www.rbh.com
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
--
Ed Leatherman
------------------------------
Message: 35
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 10:34:38 -0400
From: Sandy Lee <Sandy.Lee at dti.ulaval.ca>
To: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] UCCX script problem
Message-ID:
<3C85C8DEE6E8D14D8F92A72C8B702FD401B5DE8A1B at EXCH-MBX-B.ulaval.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi,
In UCCX 7.0(1) we're having an issue with users in queue. If the caller
in queue hits a digit by error or if they press a digit while they're
queued, the call gets disconnected. How can we prevent that?
The queued part in the script only plays prompts in a loop.
Thanks.
Sandy.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/86b6a
c2f/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 36
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 08:04:20 -0700
From: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
To: Ed Leatherman <ealeatherman at gmail.com>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Options for upgrading 4.2(3) ?
Message-ID:
<AANLkTi=FKDDxha8WsQ3wr+Nk87U3KV+Jd9WNy7rmPWT=@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Geoff--
I agree with Ed. we have purchased non MCS servers direct from HP (now
IBM)
and saved a bundle. Not only the HW cost but also the maintenance
contracts.
And it's a whole lot easier to upgrade to a new hardware set then have
to
blow away your current set and reinstall.
Personally I would still go with 7.1 as 8.0 just has not baked long
enough
for me.
YMMV.
Scott
On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 7:29 AM, Ed Leatherman
<ealeatherman at gmail.com>wrote:
> Geoff,
> some thoughts..
>
> what hardware are you running now? You might be able to run CM 7.1.5
> on your existing hardware.. i just upgraded a cluster of about the
> same size from 4.2 to 7.1 without changing hardware. That would buy
> you some time to replace the hardware later for version 8. We also
> upgraded purely for support reasons, as 4.2 was doing everything it
> needed to.
>
> I don't think the requirements for virtualizing Unity are as strict so
> thats still an option for you separate from CM.
>
> Cisco isn't going to support you virtualizing 4.3... in which case why
> not just stay on 4.2?
>
> You could look at buying IBM or HP hardware directly to possibly save
> some $$ on the new server option.. just be very careful that you order
> exactly the right parts. We've done this with HP servers in the past
> and haven't had any problems once we got the reseller to understand
> the requirements.
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Rhodes, Geoff <GRhodes at rbh.com>
wrote:
> > Hello. We are currently running Call Manager 4.2(3) and Unity 4.2,
with
> an
> > installed base of around 300 phones. One large site with 95% of
phones,
> > with 2 smaller sites connected via MPLS circuits, which both run
SRST for
> > backup.
> >
> >
> >
> > Our lease is running out and we have to make some tough decisions.
The
> > majority of our phones are 7970s, which we have decided to buy out
and
> keep
> > (at least another year). The problem is the back end. EOL/EOS for
CM
> 4.2
> > is next spring, so we feel pressured to do something. Here is what
I see
> > our options to be.
> >
> >
> >
> > 1 ? upgrade the backend to v8.x on MCS boxes. Not cheap, but
doable. I
> > hate doing this since what we have right now just WORKS..
> >
> >
> >
> > 2 ? upgrade the backend to v8.x and run on B-series blades on our
new UCS
> > chassis. At first, this seemed really a great solution (having all
the
> UC,
> > Unity and Presence server virtualized) until we started hearing
about
> > Cisco?s requirements. We have a 10-gig iSCSI framework built with
our
> UCS
> > and SAN, using Nexus 5000 switching and everything works perfectly.
> Cisco
> > says we have to use fiber optic connections back to the SAN, and
require
> us
> > to boot from SAN for the virtual servers. So that mean we either
buy
> fiber
> > modules for the Nexus 5000s (expensive due to license) or use a
couple of
> > MDS fiber switches, plus buying converged net. Adapters throughout.
This
> > solution is actually LESS EXPENSIVE than going the MCS route above,
but
> it
> > involves adding a lot more complexity to our core, just for UC
running
> 300
> > phones?
> >
> >
> >
> > 3 ? upgrade to 4.3 and maybe virtualize it? Is anyone running 4.3
in a
> VM?
> > What is the EOL for 4.3? I know we?d be missing Presence, but
that?s not
> a
> > huge problem. We would plan on upgrading to v8.x sometime next year
or
> when
> > Cisco decides to support UC on UCS with iSCSI.
> >
> >
> >
> > Any help, suggestions or comments are most welcome.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Geoff Rhodes
> >
> > Director of Information Technology
> >
> > ROBINSON, BRADSHAW & HINSON
> >
> > 101 North Tryon Street, Suite 1900
> >
> > Charlotte, NC 28246
> >
> > P: 704.377-8188
> >
> > F: 704-339-3488
> >
> > grhodes at rbh.com
> >
> > www.rbh.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Ed Leatherman
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/40ced
6c4/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 37
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:54:04 -0400
From: "Tim Reimers" <treimers at ashevillenc.gov>
To: "Ted Nugent" <tednugent73 at gmail.com>, "Lelio Fulgenzi"
<lelio at uoguelph.ca>
Cc: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] updation? a new word?
Message-ID:
<F3B7C0E8920C414E943AFBF3577D95D91D084CE8 at coa-exchange2k3.asheville.loca
l>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
my word.. I just went and looked at that..
Updation... hmm... I think I agree with Ted -- very similar to
"Strategification" as well.
Tim Reimers
Systems Analyst II
Information Technology Services
City of Asheville
70 Court Plaza
Asheville, NC 28801
phone - 828-259-5512
treimers at ashevillenc.gov <mailto:timreimers at ashevillenc.gov>
________________________________
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ted Nugent
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 5:25 PM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi
Cc: voyp list
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] updation? a new word?
very similar to "Strategery" I believe...
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
wrote:
on the CUCM v7.1(5b)SU2 CDR management Billing Application
Server Parameters update screen:
________________________________
Updation of IPAddress/Hostname and Directory Path is not
allowed, CDR Repository Service will not upload files to the new
destination. To Upload files to the new Destination, delete the existing
server and add a new billing server.
________________________________
updation? omg.
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario
N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
- LFJ (with apologies to Mr.
Popeil)
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/53be1
dcc/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 38
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 11:56:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
To: Tim Reimers <treimers at ashevillenc.gov>
Cc: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] updation? a new word?
Message-ID:
<802968663.359313.1282146971126.JavaMail.root at simcoe.cs.uoguelph.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
more along the lines of Cisco speak would be: co-opetition ;)
that's how Cisco reps describe(d) their relationship with Microsoft
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
- LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
From: "Tim Reimers" <treimers at ashevillenc.gov>
To: "Ted Nugent" <tednugent73 at gmail.com>, "Lelio Fulgenzi"
<lelio at uoguelph.ca>
Cc: "voyp list" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 11:54:04 AM
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] updation? a new word?
my word.. I just went and looked at that..
Updation... hmm... I think I agree with Ted -- very similar to
"Strategification" as well.
Tim Reimers
Systems Analyst II
Information Technology Services
City of Asheville
70 Court Plaza
Asheville, NC 28801
phone - 828-259-5512
treimers at ashevillenc.gov
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ted Nugent
Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 5:25 PM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi
Cc: voyp list
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] updation? a new word?
very similar to " Strategery" I believe...
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi < lelio at uoguelph.ca >
wrote:
on the CUCM v7.1(5b)SU2 CDR management Billing Application Server
Parameters update screen:
Updation of IPAddress/Hostname and Directory Path is not allowed, CDR
Repository Service will not upload files to the new destination. To
Upload files to the new Destination, delete the existing server and add
a new billing server.
updation? omg.
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
- LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100818/45454
6fa/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
End of cisco-voip Digest, Vol 82, Issue 17
******************************************
This email and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only.
Its contents may be confidential and/or subject to legal privilege and should be treated as such.
It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by any other party.
If you are not an intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and then delete this
message and any attachments.
Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and not those of Phoenix IT Group plc
or any of its subsidiaries. This email is not intended to be contractually binding.
Although we have checked this email for viruses, it is your responsibility to scan the message and
attachments prior to opening them. We do not take responsibility for loss or damage caused by viruses.
Phoenix IT Group PLC Registered in England no. 03476115
Phoenix IT Services Limited Registered in England no. 01466217
Trend Network Services Registered in England no. 01049704
Registered offices: Technology House, Hunsbury Hill Avenue, Northampton NN4 8QS.
Servo Limited Registered in England no. 01983540
ICM Business Continuity Services Limited Registered in England no. 02762460
Registered offices: Servo House, Oakwell Way, Oakwell Business Park, Birstall WF17 9LU
For more information about Phoenix IT Group plc please visit our website at http://www.phoenixitgroup.com
More information about the cisco-voip
mailing list