[cisco-voip] cisco-voip Digest, Vol 86, Issue 1
Marcus Queiroz
queiroz.marcus at gmail.com
Wed Dec 1 14:30:36 EST 2010
Hello Friends, I have a doubt.
Cisco 2801 supports up to how many mb?
Thanks
Marcus A. Queiroz
2010/12/1 <cisco-voip-request at puck.nether.net>
> 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. Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music (Jim Reed)
> 2. Re: Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music (Jason Aarons (US))
> 3. Re: Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music (Jason Aarons (US))
> 4. Re: Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music (Jim Reed)
> 5. tone on hold with SRST v4.1? (Lelio Fulgenzi)
> 6. Re: Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music (Wes Sisk)
> 7. Re: Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music (Jim Reed)
> 8. SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7 integration
> (Lelio Fulgenzi)
> 9. Re: SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration (Lelio Fulgenzi)
> 10. Re: SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration (Mike Lydick)
> 11. Re: SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration (Lelio Fulgenzi)
> 12. Re: SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration (Mike Lydick)
> 13. Re: SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration (Lelio Fulgenzi)
> 14. Re: IBM 7816-I4 782x-I4 Filesystem errors (Ryan West)
> 15. CM 4.1(3)SR8a patch install issue (Duane Priebe)
> 16. Re: CM 4.1(3)SR8a patch install issue (Buchanan, James)
> 17. Re: CM 4.1(3)SR8a patch install issue (Duane Priebe)
> 18. Re: IBM 7816-I4 782x-I4 Filesystem errors (Ryan Ratliff)
> 19. Re: SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration (Sandy Lee)
> 20. Re: Anyone setup 7828-I4 CUCMBE 8 before? (Ryan Ratliff)
> 21. Re: Anyone setup 7828-I4 CUCMBE 8 before? (Ryan West)
> 22. Re: SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration (Lelio Fulgenzi)
> 23. Re: SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration (Jason Aarons (US))
> 24. Re: SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration (Lelio Fulgenzi)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 11:37:02 -0700
> From: Jim Reed <jreed at swiftnews.com>
> To: VoIPgroup <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
> Message-ID: <C91A925E.44E62%jreed at swiftnews.com<C91A925E.44E62%25jreed at swiftnews.com>
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> I am using the following call consult transfer step in IPCC 4.0(5) to
> transfer an outside caller to a cell phone. The forwarded call is being
> made from a location that requires long distance codes when placing long
> distance calls. As the cell phone is not in the local calling area of the
> VoIP system, it requires a long distance call. During a brief three (3) or
> four (4) seconds while the forwarded call is setup, the caller is hearing
> hold music, then silence, then the ring to the cell phone. Is there a way
> to eliminate that hold music? The transition from silence to hold music to
> silence again to ringing may cause the caller to think they've been
> disconnected.
>
> Call Consult Transfer (--Triggering Contact-- to "915552220975" with
> "1234#")
>
> Thank You...
> --
> Jim Reed
> Manager of Technical Services
> Swift Communications, Inc.
> 970-384-9141 (Direct)
> 775-772-7666 (Cell)
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101130/6546a452/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 13:45:49 -0500
> From: "Jason Aarons (US)" <jason.aarons at us.didata.com>
> To: Jim Reed <jreed at swiftnews.com>, VoIPgroup
> <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
> Message-ID:
>
> <4E38DB0A1959B04C8C83EDCF069B53ED0C81F59B8A at USISPCLEXDB01.na.didata.local
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> It's using the CTI Port's Music On Hold.
>
> Record a .wav file of silence, use that for the Music On Hold on your IPCC
> CTI Ports.
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jim Reed
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 1:37 PM
> To: VoIPgroup
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
>
> I am using the following call consult transfer step in IPCC 4.0(5) to
> transfer an outside caller to a cell phone. The forwarded call is being
> made from a location that requires long distance codes when placing long
> distance calls. As the cell phone is not in the local calling area of the
> VoIP system, it requires a long distance call. During a brief three (3) or
> four (4) seconds while the forwarded call is setup, the caller is hearing
> hold music, then silence, then the ring to the cell phone. Is there a way
> to eliminate that hold music? The transition from silence to hold music to
> silence again to ringing may cause the caller to think they've been
> disconnected.
>
> Call Consult Transfer (--Triggering Contact-- to "915552220975" with
> "1234#")
>
> Thank You...
> --
> Jim Reed
> Manager of Technical Services
> Swift Communications, Inc.
> 970-384-9141 (Direct)
> 775-772-7666 (Cell)
>
>
> -----------------------------------------
> Disclaimer:
>
> This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
> confidential and privileged information and is for use by the
> designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the
> intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
> this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
> this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be
> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
> notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
> from your computer. Thank you.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101130/e1e109b2/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 13:53:44 -0500
> From: "Jason Aarons (US)" <jason.aarons at us.didata.com>
> To: "Jason Aarons (US)" <jason.aarons at us.didata.com>, Jim Reed
> <jreed at swiftnews.com>, VoIPgroup <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
> Message-ID:
>
> <4E38DB0A1959B04C8C83EDCF069B53ED0C81F59BA1 at USISPCLEXDB01.na.didata.local
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I should elaborate, when you do a transfer the first thing it does it puts
> the line on hold (where you are hearing music). It's no different then if
> you Transfer a call.
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jason Aarons (US)
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 1:46 PM
> To: Jim Reed; VoIPgroup
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
>
> It's using the CTI Port's Music On Hold.
>
> Record a .wav file of silence, use that for the Music On Hold on your IPCC
> CTI Ports.
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jim Reed
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 1:37 PM
> To: VoIPgroup
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
>
> I am using the following call consult transfer step in IPCC 4.0(5) to
> transfer an outside caller to a cell phone. The forwarded call is being
> made from a location that requires long distance codes when placing long
> distance calls. As the cell phone is not in the local calling area of the
> VoIP system, it requires a long distance call. During a brief three (3) or
> four (4) seconds while the forwarded call is setup, the caller is hearing
> hold music, then silence, then the ring to the cell phone. Is there a way
> to eliminate that hold music? The transition from silence to hold music to
> silence again to ringing may cause the caller to think they've been
> disconnected.
>
> Call Consult Transfer (--Triggering Contact-- to "915552220975" with
> "1234#")
>
> Thank You...
> --
> Jim Reed
> Manager of Technical Services
> Swift Communications, Inc.
> 970-384-9141 (Direct)
> 775-772-7666 (Cell)
> ________________________________
>
> Disclaimer: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
> confidential and privileged information and is for use by the designated
> addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the intended addressee, you
> are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and
> that any use or reproduction of this email or its contents is strictly
> prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in
> error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting
> it from your computer. Thank you.
>
>
> -----------------------------------------
> Disclaimer:
>
> This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
> confidential and privileged information and is for use by the
> designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the
> intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
> this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
> this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be
> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
> notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
> from your computer. Thank you.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101130/25aad3d2/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 12:01:57 -0700
> From: Jim Reed <jreed at swiftnews.com>
> To: "Jason Aarons (US)" <jason.aarons at us.didata.com>, VoIPgroup
> <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
> Message-ID: <C91A9835.44E6E%jreed at swiftnews.com<C91A9835.44E6E%25jreed at swiftnews.com>
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Thanks, Jason. I think that will work. I'll have to review their other
> scripts to see if the silence on hold will cause an issue there but I don't
> think so.
> --
> Jim Reed
> Manager of Technical Services
> Swift Communications, Inc.
> 970-384-9141 (Direct)
> 775-772-7666 (Cell)
>
>
>
> On 11/30/10 11:53 AM, "Jason Aarons (US)" <jason.aarons at us.didata.com>
> wrote:
>
> I should elaborate, when you do a transfer the first thing it does it puts
> the line on hold (where you are hearing music). It's no different then if
> you Transfer a call.
>
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jason Aarons (US)
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 1:46 PM
> To: Jim Reed; VoIPgroup
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
>
> It's using the CTI Port's Music On Hold.
>
> Record a .wav file of silence, use that for the Music On Hold on your IPCC
> CTI Ports.
>
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jim Reed
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 1:37 PM
> To: VoIPgroup
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
>
> I am using the following call consult transfer step in IPCC 4.0(5) to
> transfer an outside caller to a cell phone. The forwarded call is being
> made from a location that requires long distance codes when placing long
> distance calls. As the cell phone is not in the local calling area of the
> VoIP system, it requires a long distance call. During a brief three (3) or
> four (4) seconds while the forwarded call is setup, the caller is hearing
> hold music, then silence, then the ring to the cell phone. Is there a way
> to eliminate that hold music? The transition from silence to hold music to
> silence again to ringing may cause the caller to think they've been
> disconnected.
>
> Call Consult Transfer (--Triggering Contact-- to "915552220975" with
> "1234#")
>
> Thank You...
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101130/5070917b/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:02:21 -0500 (EST)
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> To: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] tone on hold with SRST v4.1?
> Message-ID:
> <675681003.710894.1291143741122.JavaMail.root at simcoe.cs.uoguelph.ca
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I have a v4.0 SRST installation which I swear did not have tone on hold, so
> I uploaded a wav file with beeps in it to mimic what we have during regular
> operation.
>
> I'm playing with v4.1 SRST right now, and it seems that tone on hold is now
> included.
>
> Nothing in the docs....
>
> Anyone realize this?
>
> Just wondering...
>
> ---
> 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/20101130/67b102db/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:08:11 -0500
> From: Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com>
> To: Jim Reed <jreed at swiftnews.com>
> Cc: VoIPgroup <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
> Message-ID: <4CF54B9B.5080703 at cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>
> And let your Cisco account team know you want this implemented:
>
> CSCdw68639 Need ability to select tone on hold or silence as an MoH
> hold source
>
> /Wes
>
> Jim Reed wrote:
> > *Thanks, Jason. I think that will work. I'll have to review their
> > other scripts to see if the silence on hold will cause an issue there
> > but I don't think so.
> > **--
> > Jim Reed
> > Manager of Technical Services
> > Swift Communications, Inc.
> > 970-384-9141 (Direct)
> > 775-772-7666 (Cell)
> > *
> >
> >
> > On 11/30/10 11:53 AM, "Jason Aarons (US)" <jason.aarons at us.didata.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > I should elaborate, when you do a transfer the first thing it does
> > it puts the line on hold (where you are hearing music). It's no
> > different then if you Transfer a call.
> >
> >
> > *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]
> > <mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net%5D> *On Behalf Of
> > *Jason Aarons (US)
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 30, 2010 1:46 PM
> > *To:* Jim Reed; VoIPgroup
> > *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
> >
> > It's using the CTI Port's Music On Hold.
> >
> > Record a .wav file of silence, use that for the Music On Hold on
> > your IPCC CTI Ports.
> >
> >
> > *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]
> > <mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net%5D> *On Behalf Of *Jim
> Reed
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 30, 2010 1:37 PM
> > *To:* VoIPgroup
> > *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
> >
> > *I am using the following call consult transfer step in IPCC
> > 4.0(5) to transfer an outside caller to a cell phone. The
> > forwarded call is being made from a location that requires long
> > distance codes when placing long distance calls. As the cell
> > phone is not in the local calling area of the VoIP system, it
> > requires a long distance call. During a brief three (3) or four
> > (4) seconds while the forwarded call is setup, the caller is
> > hearing hold music, then silence, then the ring to the cell phone.
> > Is there a way to eliminate that hold music? The transition from
> > silence to hold music to silence again to ringing may cause the
> > caller to think they've been disconnected.
> >
> > Call Consult Transfer (--Triggering Contact-- to "915552220975"
> > with "1234#")
> >
> > Thank You...
> > *
> >
> > *
> >
> > *
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20101130/4e863141/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 12:12:59 -0700
> From: Jim Reed <jreed at swiftnews.com>
> To: Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com>
> Cc: VoIPgroup <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Eliminating Brief Instance of Hold Music
> Message-ID: <C91A9ACB.44E75%jreed at swiftnews.com<C91A9ACB.44E75%25jreed at swiftnews.com>
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Thanks, Wes. I'm working with them on another project so I'll add this one
> to the list.
> --
> Jim Reed
> Manager of Technical Services
> Swift Communications, Inc.
> 970-384-9141 (Direct)
> 775-772-7666 (Cell)
>
>
>
> On 11/30/10 12:08 PM, "Wes Sisk" <wsisk at cisco.com> wrote:
>
> And let your Cisco account team know you want this implemented:
>
> CSCdw68639 Need ability to select tone on hold or silence as an MoH hold
> source
>
> /Wes
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101130/f3b86d5d/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 16:36:27 -0500 (EST)
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> To: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration
> Message-ID:
> <
> 1426930959.721868.1291152987205.JavaMail.root at simcoe.cs.uoguelph.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I'm working on the migration from CUCM v4.1(3) to v7.1(x).
>
> I think it would be much simpler if I am able to create a SIP trunk from
> CallManager v7 to Connection.
>
> Has anyone seen any huge differences between an SCCP and a SIP integration?
> Do things generally continue to work the same?
>
>
>
> ---
> 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/20101130/30f7a51f/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:54:46 -0500 (EST)
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> To: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and
> UCxN v7 integration
> Message-ID:
> <
> 1760334960.725187.1291157686398.JavaMail.root at simcoe.cs.uoguelph.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Just some further information and questions...
>
> we have three hunt groups so that we can ensure that calls are processed
> accordingly, a group reserved for auto-attendant, a group reserved for
> voicemail access and a group reserved for call processing.
>
> the hunt pilots for each, progressively use the groups, so autoattendant
> uses all three groups, voice mail uses the voice mail and call processing
> groups, and call processing only uses the call processing group.
>
> I'm thinking I can simulate this with three SIP trunks and the appropriate
> number of ports in each SIP trunk group on Unity connection.
>
> On CallManager, I would use route lists to send calls to the group of ports
> over the sip trunks.
>
> The integration guide refers to the issue of having to use MTPs for older
> SCCP phones.
>
> Any comments would be most welcome.
>
> Lelio
>
>
> ---
> 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: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:36:27 PM
> Subject: SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7 integration
>
>
> I'm working on the migration from CUCM v4.1(3) to v7.1(x).
>
> I think it would be much simpler if I am able to create a SIP trunk from
> CallManager v7 to Connection.
>
> Has anyone seen any huge differences between an SCCP and a SIP integration?
> Do things generally continue to work the same?
>
>
>
> ---
> 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/20101130/06d081cd/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:57:21 -0500
> From: Mike Lydick <mike.lydick at gmail.com>
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> Cc: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and
> UCxN v7 integration
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTi=GjPtJuKVaO2Sgd84xbT2ToTbHmT_wF9ox+7t8 at mail.gmail.com<GjPtJuKVaO2Sgd84xbT2ToTbHmT_wF9ox%2B7t8 at mail.gmail.com>
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> >From Callmanager, there maybe few less steps. There is the benefit of not
> assign directory numbers for the vm ports with sip but port setup completed
> correctly numbers should not matter (separate partition and all that).
> The SIP integration is has simpler route logic and less touch points if you
> have to change anything.
>
> >From the Unity the SIP setup is similar to the SCCP port setup. There are
> a
> few caveats with transfer that I have not run into yet such as no MOH with
> supervised transfer.
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Mike Lydick
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca> wrote:
>
> > I'm working on the migration from CUCM v4.1(3) to v7.1(x).
> >
> > I think it would be much simpler if I am able to create a SIP trunk from
> > CallManager v7 to Connection.
> >
> > Has anyone seen any huge differences between an SCCP and a SIP
> integration?
> > Do things generally continue to work the same?
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > 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/20101130/c3c27442/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 18:01:10 -0500 (EST)
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> To: Mike Lydick <mike.lydick at gmail.com>
> Cc: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and
> UCxN v7 integration
> Message-ID:
> <783743672.725415.1291158070458.JavaMail.root at simcoe.cs.uoguelph.ca
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> yes, i'm anticipating less work, but i'd still like to have three groups of
> ports so i can reserve ports for the various functions.
>
> the easiest thing would be to simply make one group, but i'm not sure i
> like the idea of not being able to control things. i'd hate to have everyone
> check voice mail at once after a broadcast message and then auto-attendant
> fails. ugh
>
>
>
> ---
> 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: "Mike Lydick" <mike.lydick at gmail.com>
> To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> Cc: "voyp list" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 5:57:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration
>
> >From Callmanager, there maybe few less steps. There is the benefit of not
> assign directory numbers for the vm ports with sip but port setup completed
> correctly numbers should not matter (separate partition and all that).
> The SIP integration is has simpler route logic and less touch points if you
> have to change anything.
>
>
> >From the Unity the SIP setup is similar to the SCCP port setup. There are
> a few caveats with transfer that I have not run into yet such as no MOH with
> supervised transfer.
>
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Mike Lydick
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi < lelio at uoguelph.ca >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> I'm working on the migration from CUCM v4.1(3) to v7.1(x).
>
> I think it would be much simpler if I am able to create a SIP trunk from
> CallManager v7 to Connection.
>
> Has anyone seen any huge differences between an SCCP and a SIP integration?
> Do things generally continue to work the same?
>
>
>
> ---
> 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/20101130/cf25a29f/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 18:02:56 -0500
> From: Mike Lydick <mike.lydick at gmail.com>
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> Cc: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and
> UCxN v7 integration
> Message-ID:
> <AANLkTi=7vfH6Zdo8+9C1gAgjTMvKW8RR+0+Vsy46BFDP at mail.gmail.com<7vfH6Zdo8%2B9C1gAgjTMvKW8RR%2B0%2BVsy46BFDP at mail.gmail.com>
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> If you are dedicating ports to these call functions, it might be best to
> stick with sccp. I am not sure that your going to be able to set multiple
> trunks to the same unity server.
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Mike Lydick
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca> wrote:
>
> > Just some further information and questions...
> >
> > we have three hunt groups so that we can ensure that calls are processed
> > accordingly, a group reserved for auto-attendant, a group reserved for
> > voicemail access and a group reserved for call processing.
> >
> > the hunt pilots for each, progressively use the groups, so autoattendant
> > uses all three groups, voice mail uses the voice mail and call processing
> > groups, and call processing only uses the call processing group.
> >
> > I'm thinking I can simulate this with three SIP trunks and the
> appropriate
> > number of ports in each SIP trunk group on Unity connection.
> >
> > On CallManager, I would use route lists to send calls to the group of
> ports
> > over the sip trunks.
> >
> > The integration guide refers to the issue of having to use MTPs for older
> > SCCP phones.
> >
> > Any comments would be most welcome.
> >
> > Lelio
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > 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: *Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:36:27 PM
> > *Subject: *SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7 integration
> >
> >
> > I'm working on the migration from CUCM v4.1(3) to v7.1(x).
> >
> > I think it would be much simpler if I am able to create a SIP trunk from
> > CallManager v7 to Connection.
> >
> > Has anyone seen any huge differences between an SCCP and a SIP
> integration?
> > Do things generally continue to work the same?
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > 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/20101130/f8c87515/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 18:04:03 -0500 (EST)
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> To: Mike Lydick <mike.lydick at gmail.com>
> Cc: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and
> UCxN v7 integration
> Message-ID:
> <
> 1785616989.725541.1291158243773.JavaMail.root at simcoe.cs.uoguelph.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> oh. darn. :(
>
> ---
> 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: "Mike Lydick" <mike.lydick at gmail.com>
> To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> Cc: "voyp list" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 6:02:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration
>
> If you are dedicating ports to these call functions, it might be best to
> stick with sccp. I am not sure that your going to be able to set multiple
> trunks to the same unity server.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Mike Lydick
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi < lelio at uoguelph.ca >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Just some further information and questions...
>
> we have three hunt groups so that we can ensure that calls are processed
> accordingly, a group reserved for auto-attendant, a group reserved for
> voicemail access and a group reserved for call processing.
>
> the hunt pilots for each, progressively use the groups, so autoattendant
> uses all three groups, voice mail uses the voice mail and call processing
> groups, and call processing only uses the call processing group.
>
> I'm thinking I can simulate this with three SIP trunks and the appropriate
> number of ports in each SIP trunk group on Unity connection.
>
> On CallManager, I would use route lists to send calls to the group of ports
> over the sip trunks.
>
> The integration guide refers to the issue of having to use MTPs for older
> SCCP phones.
>
> Any comments would be most welcome.
>
> Lelio
>
>
>
> ---
> 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: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:36:27 PM
> Subject: SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7 integration
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm working on the migration from CUCM v4.1(3) to v7.1(x).
>
> I think it would be much simpler if I am able to create a SIP trunk from
> CallManager v7 to Connection.
>
> Has anyone seen any huge differences between an SCCP and a SIP integration?
> Do things generally continue to work the same?
>
>
>
> ---
> 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/20101130/588a3cff/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 14:02:53 +0000
> From: Ryan West <rwest at zyedge.com>
> To: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IBM 7816-I4 782x-I4 Filesystem errors
> Message-ID:
> <5DC4853C6CC3EE4788779E0726E034DD60CBB2 at zy-ex1.zyedge.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ryan West
> >Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 1:20 PM
> >To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> >Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IBM 7816-I4 782x-I4 Filesystem errors
> >
> >Option 2a gives me an out. TAC is recommending a complete re-install if
> it takes several cycles for FSCK to run. If a couple of minor errors are
> detected and >the system looks healthy after recovery, I'll weigh my options
> and see if an upgrade to 8.0.3a SU1 will cover any damaged files.
> >
> >-ryan
>
> Lots of file system errors were detected, SNMPD was toast, parts of JVM
> were corrupt and the process that runs after disc syncing also became
> corrupt. The file system would re-enter read-only mode after 6 hours
> (enough time to resync the disks). Attempted an upgrade to 8.0.3aSU1, only
> to have it fail near the end. My next option was to re-install, but it
> appears the installer does not have a way to interrupt the Out of Sync
> status the controllers go into after the read-only event. Sending over a
> blank Hardware Configuration Error screen and having TAC not understand it
> either did not instill great confidence with the customer or myself. Had a
> new server shipped out (mandated by the customer), upgraded the firmware on
> that 7828-I4, started the install and viola, found the same ominous Hardware
> Configuration Error with no information in it.
>
> All in all, I was able to recover the system to very recent copy. Even
> with the file system corruption, DRS was able to run without errors and the
> restore has been running solid for the last week. Latest bug updates are
> covered here:
>
>
> http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCti52867
>
> I've heard shipment was halted on these boxes, but if you've installed a
> CUP or CMBE server in the last 6 months, I would suggest patching ASAP. The
> disc exerciser takes about 45 mins to run. The firmware upgrade takes about
> 5 mins.
>
> -ryan
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 08:44:23 -0600
> From: "Duane Priebe" <dpriebe at theriverbank.com>
> To: <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] CM 4.1(3)SR8a patch install issue
> Message-ID:
> <43D799CBE4331D44999AB7C9CD67F3020A05FBCD at NTEXCHANGE.riverbank.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hello, I've been trying to get the CM 4.1(3)SR8a patch installed
> (starting with the publisher). Once all AV, CSA, etc.. have been
> disabled I run the patch install executable. It goes forward and reads
> the contacts of the package, completes the file extraction process, then
> stalls out with a generic "Unable to open the script file" message box.
> In the past these SR releases have been pretty straight forward and I
> can't read anything on how this one might be different. Any suggestions
> anyone?
>
>
>
> Duane
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101201/8f09cfbc/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 09:47:17 -0500
> From: "Buchanan, James" <jbuchanan at presidio.com>
> To: Duane Priebe <dpriebe at theriverbank.com>,
> "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CM 4.1(3)SR8a patch install issue
> Message-ID:
> <853687641CF93E40B362F112A3D8F3CE10DA8A6E at SOEXCH01.Presidio.Corp>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> What are you upgrading from?
>
> James Buchanan | Technology Manager, UC | 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 Duane Priebe
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 8:44 AM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [cisco-voip] CM 4.1(3)SR8a patch install issue
>
> Hello, I've been trying to get the CM 4.1(3)SR8a patch installed (starting
> with the publisher). Once all AV, CSA, etc.. have been disabled I run the
> patch install executable. It goes forward and reads the contacts of the
> package, completes the file extraction process, then stalls out with a
> generic "Unable to open the script file" message box. In the past these SR
> releases have been pretty straight forward and I can't read anything on how
> this one might be different. Any suggestions anyone?
>
> Duane
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101201/1af60d00/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 08:51:59 -0600
> From: "Duane Priebe" <dpriebe at theriverbank.com>
> To: "Buchanan, James" <jbuchanan at presidio.com>,
> <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CM 4.1(3)SR8a patch install issue
> Message-ID:
> <43D799CBE4331D44999AB7C9CD67F3020A05FBCE at NTEXCHANGE.riverbank.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Upgrading from CM 4.1(3)ES103
>
>
>
> From: Buchanan, James [mailto:jbuchanan at presidio.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 8:47 AM
> To: Duane Priebe; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: RE: CM 4.1(3)SR8a patch install issue
>
>
>
> What are you upgrading from?
>
>
>
> James Buchanan | Technology Manager, UC | 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 Duane Priebe
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 8:44 AM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [cisco-voip] CM 4.1(3)SR8a patch install issue
>
>
>
> Hello, I've been trying to get the CM 4.1(3)SR8a patch installed
> (starting with the publisher). Once all AV, CSA, etc.. have been
> disabled I run the patch install executable. It goes forward and reads
> the contacts of the package, completes the file extraction process, then
> stalls out with a generic "Unable to open the script file" message box.
> In the past these SR releases have been pretty straight forward and I
> can't read anything on how this one might be different. Any suggestions
> anyone?
>
>
>
> Duane
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101201/501c3a31/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 10:50:33 -0500
> From: Ryan Ratliff <rratliff at cisco.com>
> To: Ryan West <rwest at zyedge.com>
> Cc: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IBM 7816-I4 782x-I4 Filesystem errors
> Message-ID: <9996C9B9-3F15-4402-9104-B2CFC8014E11 at cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> That blank hardware config error just means the array is rebuilding. You
> can continue past it with no issues or go into the array controller and
> delete the array. The install will recreate the array for you and go on
> with life.
>
> The array resyncing after readonly filesystem and after the firmware
> upgrade are normal.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Dec 1, 2010, at 9:02 AM, Ryan West wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ryan West
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 1:20 PM
> > To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IBM 7816-I4 782x-I4 Filesystem errors
> >
> > Option 2a gives me an out. TAC is recommending a complete re-install if
> it takes several cycles for FSCK to run. If a couple of minor errors are
> detected and >the system looks healthy after recovery, I'll weigh my options
> and see if an upgrade to 8.0.3a SU1 will cover any damaged files.
> >
> > -ryan
>
> Lots of file system errors were detected, SNMPD was toast, parts of JVM
> were corrupt and the process that runs after disc syncing also became
> corrupt. The file system would re-enter read-only mode after 6 hours
> (enough time to resync the disks). Attempted an upgrade to 8.0.3aSU1, only
> to have it fail near the end. My next option was to re-install, but it
> appears the installer does not have a way to interrupt the Out of Sync
> status the controllers go into after the read-only event. Sending over a
> blank Hardware Configuration Error screen and having TAC not understand it
> either did not instill great confidence with the customer or myself. Had a
> new server shipped out (mandated by the customer), upgraded the firmware on
> that 7828-I4, started the install and viola, found the same ominous Hardware
> Configuration Error with no information in it.
>
> All in all, I was able to recover the system to very recent copy. Even
> with the file system corruption, DRS was able to run without errors and the
> restore has been running solid for the last week. Latest bug updates are
> covered here:
>
>
> http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCti52867
>
> I've heard shipment was halted on these boxes, but if you've installed a
> CUP or CMBE server in the last 6 months, I would suggest patching ASAP. The
> disc exerciser takes about 45 mins to run. The firmware upgrade takes about
> 5 mins.
>
> -ryan
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20101201/742b39cb/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 19
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 10:52:34 -0500
> From: Sandy Lee <Sandy.Lee at dti.ulaval.ca>
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>, voyp list
> <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and
> UCxN v7 integration
> Message-ID:
> <3C85C8DEE6E8D14D8F92A72C8B702FD40435B92BA5 at EXCH-MBX-B.ulaval.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Lelio,
>
> When I migrated from 4.1(3) to 7.1(3), I tried the SIP trunk, because I
> tought it would be simplier. I ran into a few issues and after discussing
> with my SE, he recommended the SCCP approach, as there are known issues with
> the SIP one. Nice to know ?before?. Maybe it was because I also had another
> SIP trunk to my legacy PBX through TIMG. Will never know, but SCCP works
> fine for me.
>
> Sandy.
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:36 PM
> To: voyp list
> Subject: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration
>
> I'm working on the migration from CUCM v4.1(3) to v7.1(x).
>
> I think it would be much simpler if I am able to create a SIP trunk from
> CallManager v7 to Connection.
>
> Has anyone seen any huge differences between an SCCP and a SIP integration?
> Do things generally continue to work the same?
>
>
>
> ---
> 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/20101201/930451d7/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 10:56:41 -0500
> From: Ryan Ratliff <rratliff at cisco.com>
> To: Ki Wi <kiwi.voice at gmail.com>
> Cc: Cisco VoIP List <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Anyone setup 7828-I4 CUCMBE 8 before?
> Message-ID: <51A081FA-7BE9-41BA-9BEC-D464817B0897 at cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> You should call up Cisco customer service and see if they can help you out
> if you ordered the wrong thing.
>
> You mentioned in your original email that you took the 8.0(3a)SU1 and made
> it bootable. This won't work even with the instructions from a blog out
> there.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Nov 29, 2010, at 9:28 PM, Ki Wi wrote:
>
> Nope. Currently escalating to the BU. Not sure why my team manage to buy it
> even it's end of sales or maybe just a few days before eos
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> Pls pardon my fat fingers.
>
> On Nov 25, 2010, at 10:58 PM, Lee <ender9600 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It's not free to upgrade to a major version.
> >
> > Did you order UCSS along with ESW? That would allow you to go to 8
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Ki Wi <kiwi.voice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Which version should I be using to install it?
> > I tried to get the latest 8.0.3a SU1 but it can't detect the hardware and
> mark it as legacy (i make the disk bootable myself) .
> >
> > My side somehow managed to ordered the cucmbe7 version but I wish to
> upgrade it to 8. I have yet to register the license, I should be able to
> contact licensing and get the license for cucmbe 8 right?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101201/7d688da6/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 21
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 16:00:04 +0000
> From: Ryan West <rwest at zyedge.com>
> To: Ki Wi <kiwi.voice at gmail.com>
> Cc: Cisco VoIP List <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Anyone setup 7828-I4 CUCMBE 8 before?
> Message-ID:
> <5DC4853C6CC3EE4788779E0726E034DD60D147 at zy-ex1.zyedge.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> 8.0.3 is bootable, you can start from there.
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ryan Ratliff
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:57 AM
> To: Ki Wi
> Cc: Cisco VoIP List
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Anyone setup 7828-I4 CUCMBE 8 before?
>
> You should call up Cisco customer service and see if they can help you out
> if you ordered the wrong thing.
>
> You mentioned in your original email that you took the 8.0(3a)SU1 and made
> it bootable. This won't work even with the instructions from a blog out
> there.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Nov 29, 2010, at 9:28 PM, Ki Wi wrote:
>
> Nope. Currently escalating to the BU. Not sure why my team manage to buy it
> even it's end of sales or maybe just a few days before eos
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> Pls pardon my fat fingers.
>
> On Nov 25, 2010, at 10:58 PM, Lee <ender9600 at gmail.com<mailto:
> ender9600 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> It's not free to upgrade to a major version.
>
> Did you order UCSS along with ESW? That would allow you to go to 8
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Ki Wi <kiwi.voice at gmail.com<mailto:
> kiwi.voice at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Which version should I be using to install it?
> I tried to get the latest 8.0.3a SU1 but it can't detect the hardware and
> mark it as legacy (i make the disk bootable myself) .
>
> My side somehow managed to ordered the cucmbe7 version but I wish to
> upgrade it to 8. I have yet to register the license, I should be able to
> contact licensing and get the license for cucmbe 8 right?
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20101201/68ac14bb/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 22
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 11:03:48 -0500 (EST)
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> To: Sandy Lee <Sandy.Lee at dti.ulaval.ca>
> Cc: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and
> UCxN v7 integration
> Message-ID:
> <
> 1628803545.750680.1291219428783.JavaMail.root at simcoe.cs.uoguelph.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Thanks Sandy. I think I will try the SIP trunk, but you are right, I will
> most likely be sticking with an SCCP integration for now. Tried and true.
>
> ---
> 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: "Sandy Lee" <Sandy.Lee at dti.ulaval.ca>
> To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>, "voyp list" <
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 1, 2010 10:52:34 AM
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration
>
>
>
>
> Hi Lelio,
>
>
>
> When I migrated from 4.1(3) to 7.1(3), I tried the SIP trunk, because I
> tought it would be simplier. I ran into a few issues and after discussing
> with my SE, he recommended the SCCP approach, as there are known issues with
> the SIP one. Nice to know ?before?. Maybe it was because I also had another
> SIP trunk to my legacy PBX through TIMG. Will never know, but SCCP works
> fine for me.
>
>
>
>
> Sandy.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:36 PM
> To: voyp list
> Subject: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration
>
>
>
>
> I'm working on the migration from CUCM v4.1(3) to v7.1(x).
>
> I think it would be much simpler if I am able to create a SIP trunk from
> CallManager v7 to Connection.
>
> Has anyone seen any huge differences between an SCCP and a SIP integration?
> Do things generally continue to work the same?
>
>
>
> ---
> 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/20101201/468786ae/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 23
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 11:06:54 -0500
> From: "Jason Aarons (US)" <jason.aarons at us.didata.com>
> To: Sandy Lee <Sandy.Lee at dti.ulaval.ca>, Lelio Fulgenzi
> <lelio at uoguelph.ca>, voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and
> UCxN v7 integration
> Message-ID:
>
> <4E38DB0A1959B04C8C83EDCF069B53ED0C81F59F0B at USISPCLEXDB01.na.didata.local
> >
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I?d like to know what the ?known SIP issues? are ? In general I still
> stick with SCCP out of habit but I?d like to have known what was on his/her
> mind.
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Sandy Lee
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:53 AM
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi; voyp list
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration
>
> Hi Lelio,
>
> When I migrated from 4.1(3) to 7.1(3), I tried the SIP trunk, because I
> tought it would be simplier. I ran into a few issues and after discussing
> with my SE, he recommended the SCCP approach, as there are known issues with
> the SIP one. Nice to know ?before?. Maybe it was because I also had another
> SIP trunk to my legacy PBX through TIMG. Will never know, but SCCP works
> fine for me.
>
> Sandy.
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:36 PM
> To: voyp list
> Subject: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration
>
> I'm working on the migration from CUCM v4.1(3) to v7.1(x).
>
> I think it would be much simpler if I am able to create a SIP trunk from
> CallManager v7 to Connection.
>
> Has anyone seen any huge differences between an SCCP and a SIP integration?
> Do things generally continue to work the same?
>
>
>
> ---
> 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)
>
> -----------------------------------------
> Disclaimer:
>
> This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
> confidential and privileged information and is for use by the
> designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the
> intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
> this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
> this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be
> unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
> notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
> from your computer. Thank you.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101201/8a39d15f/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 24
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 11:10:35 -0500 (EST)
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> To: "Jason Aarons (US)" <jason.aarons at us.didata.com>
> Cc: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and
> UCxN v7 integration
> Message-ID:
> <
> 1260310073.751122.1291219835303.JavaMail.root at simcoe.cs.uoguelph.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> what I read in different spots was DTMF and compatibility with old SCCP
> phones which would likely need an MTP.
>
>
> ---
> 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: "Jason Aarons (US)" <jason.aarons at us.didata.com>
> To: "Sandy Lee" <Sandy.Lee at dti.ulaval.ca>, "Lelio Fulgenzi" <
> lelio at uoguelph.ca>, "voyp list" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 1, 2010 11:06:54 AM
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration
>
>
>
>
> I?d like to know what the ?known SIP issues? are ? In general I still stick
> with SCCP out of habit but I?d like to have known what was on his/her mind.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Sandy Lee
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:53 AM
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi; voyp list
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration
>
>
>
> Hi Lelio,
>
>
>
> When I migrated from 4.1(3) to 7.1(3), I tried the SIP trunk, because I
> tought it would be simplier. I ran into a few issues and after discussing
> with my SE, he recommended the SCCP approach, as there are known issues with
> the SIP one. Nice to know ?before?. Maybe it was because I also had another
> SIP trunk to my legacy PBX through TIMG. Will never know, but SCCP works
> fine for me.
>
>
>
>
> Sandy.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 4:36 PM
> To: voyp list
> Subject: [cisco-voip] SIP trunk vs. SCCP ports for CUCM v7 and UCxN v7
> integration
>
>
>
>
> I'm working on the migration from CUCM v4.1(3) to v7.1(x).
>
> I think it would be much simpler if I am able to create a SIP trunk from
> CallManager v7 to Connection.
>
> Has anyone seen any huge differences between an SCCP and a SIP integration?
> Do things generally continue to work the same?
>
>
>
> ---
> 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)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Disclaimer: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
> confidential and privileged information and is for use by the designated
> addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the intended addressee, you
> are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and
> that any use or reproduction of this email or its contents is strictly
> prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in
> error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting
> it from your computer. Thank you.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101201/8822eb7f/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 86, Issue 1
> *****************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101201/5e48a6e7/attachment.html>
More information about the cisco-voip
mailing list