[cisco-voip] Billing Software for CME
Birni Tkachuk
birnit at nait.ca
Mon Oct 18 12:23:00 EDT 2010
We use CallBill - a Phoneware product. They are a vendor located in Ireland but we are very impressed with the product, the cost and their customer service is amazing. Let me know if you want more info - we can discuss offline.
Birni Tkachuk
Network Services
Department of Information Services
P 780.471.7532 F 780.491.3083
-----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: Monday, October 18, 2010 10:00 AM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: cisco-voip Digest, Vol 84, Issue 18
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. Re: ccm upgrade 4 to 6 (Robert Knapp)
2. Re: ccm upgrade 4 to 6 (Robert Knapp)
3. Bulk Admin Permission (svr.file at gmail.com)
4. Re: Voice recording issue (Tim Smith)
5. Re: Voice recording issue (Tim Smith)
6. Sub pub synchronization (shary shary)
7. Re: CISCO UC 8.X solution over MS OCS/Lync 2010. Why?
(Syed Khalid Ali)
8. Billing software for CME (Jawad A Hai)
9. Call monitoring (polo person)
10. PWR-C45-2800ACV (george.hendrix at l-3com.com)
11. Re: PWR-C45-2800ACV (Jason Aarons (US))
12. 7925 roaming bug (Jim McBurnett)
13. Re: Call monitoring (Wes Sisk)
14. Re: 7925 roaming bug (Jason Aarons (US))
15. Re: Billing software for CME (Haas, Neal)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 12:43:59 -0500
From: Robert Knapp <robert.knapp at spanlink.com>
To: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] ccm upgrade 4 to 6
Message-ID:
<0265D29403E7EE46B37A63FEE0026A2F0977900438 at SPLKEXCH07.spanlink.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I know upgrading to 6, just go with it.
I have proper license files from Cisco. When uploaded and restarted the pub does not show a server license. Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Robert Knapp
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 16:16:22 -0500
From: Robert Knapp <robert.knapp at spanlink.com>
To: "Buchanan, James" <jbuchanan at presidio.com>,
"cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] ccm upgrade 4 to 6
Message-ID:
<0265D29403E7EE46B37A63FEE0026A2F0977900446 at SPLKEXCH07.spanlink.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
yes, but ccm said it was corrupt, ended up opening a case with TAC because in addition to that issue, the PAK's had 0 quantity. TAC solved it by issuing an awesome license. thanks for the reply.
Thanks,
Robert Knapp
________________________________________
From: Buchanan, James [jbuchanan at presidio.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 17:15
To: Robert Knapp; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: ccm upgrade 4 to 6
Did you apply the export license created by the DMA tool?
James Buchanan | Senior Network Engineer | South Region | Presidio Networked Solutions
12 Cadillac Dr, Suite 130, Brentwood, TN 37027 | jbuchanan at presidio.com
D: 615-866-5729 | F: 615-866-5781 | www.presidio.com <http://www.presidio.com>
CCIE #25863, Voice
-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Robert Knapp
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 12:44 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] ccm upgrade 4 to 6
I know upgrading to 6, just go with it.
I have proper license files from Cisco. When uploaded and restarted the pub does not show a server license. Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Robert Knapp
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 14:36:53 +1100
From: "svr.file at gmail.com" <svr.file at gmail.com>
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Bulk Admin Permission
Message-ID:
<AANLkTikeii_ts8ysovYwZ39KnTbKgH=C_HR25COdHQNe at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi All,
There there a way to add/changes permissions for users in CUCM in bulk?
Thanks.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101018/cde271a2/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 16:18:21 +1100
From: Tim Smith <smithsonianwa at gmail.com>
To: Tahir Uddin <tahir.uddin at riyadbank.com>
Cc: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Voice recording issue
Message-ID:
<AANLkTinC-9C2=3dPKoAdh3TQtDrBfRaqB2FRwFAkUuwa at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I'm not familiar with this particular product.
But my guess is that if it is 4.1 CCM, it is probably based off packet
capturing the signalling and media off the wire.
So usually they sniff the SCCP and this signalling traffic is used to build
tables of extension numbers to device IP addresses for instance.
Typically, in your recording software you then select which extensions to
record. The software typically then applies filters to it's packet capturing
process to exclude non-interesting traffic.
In terms of recording, it also uses the SCCP sniffing to figure out when a
call is happening, and who is involved, and therefore which RTP media
packets to pluck off the wire and put into a recording file.
So recorder placement, and what traffic you have spanning to it, can be
important. i.e. you probably dont want to capture duplicate packets.
This is how it all used to work before SIP forking etc. Since you are on 4.1
think this is off the table anyway.
The key thing from the CM perspective is to make sure the recorders have
visibility of both the SCCP and RTP packets required, and as you know these
take different paths sometimes.
These products typically use common components such as WINPCAP (same as used
in Ethereal and Wireshark).
As Ahmed says, it does sound like a software issue on their side.
The fact that it is crossing calls is strange, because it means their
system, is taking audio from other conversations that it is not supposed to
be listening to. i.e. Not correlating the media streams and correct involved
call parties.
Hope that helps a bit.
Cheers,
Tim
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Tahir Uddin <tahir.uddin at riyadbank.com>wrote:
> Thanks Ahmed,
> Could this be a version incompatibility issue, we are running CM 4.1 while
> the Etalk software is one of the latest versions.
> Also, are there extenion numbers or other info in the wav files that it
> might not be able to decipher. How does it identify the packets belonging to
> one conversation?
>
> Regards
>
>
> Tahir Uddin
> Assistant Vice President / Information Technology Officer
> Information Technology Division - Mgmt.
> Information Technology Division
> Phone: +966-1-276-3000 ext. 5305
> Email: tahir.uddin at riyadbank.com
>
> **
> **
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Ahmed Elnagar [mailto:ahmed_elnagar at rayacorp.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 13, 2010 6:50 PM
> *To:* Tahir Uddin
> *Cc:* voyp list
> *Subject:* RE: [cisco-voip] Voice recording issue
>
> It must be a problem in the recording servers in interpreting the sniffed
> voice streams and reconstructing the wav files, I saw this problem a lot in
> other product and every time it happen the vendor has to change their
> code!!!
>
>
>
> Best Regards;
>
> Ahmed Elnagar
>
> Senior Network PS Engineer
>
> Mob: +2019-0016211
>
> CCIE#24697 (Voice)
>
> [image: ccie_voice_large.gif]
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Tahir Uddin
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 13, 2010 4:25 PM
> *To:* voyp list
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Voice recording issue
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> We have call manager express and Etalk recorders
>
> We have an issue where the recording files for each call is getting mixed
> up. When agent A talks to customer A and agent B talks to customer B, in the
> recording files, we hear agent A interlaced with customer B. Has anyone come
> across this issue.
>
> I am probably not providing enough information on this, just wanted to get
> an initial take to start out.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Tahir
>
> ************************************************************************************************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
> Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely
> those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Riyad Bank.
> Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the
> presence of any viruses. Riyad Bank accepts no liability for any damage
> caused by any virus / error transmitted by this email.
> ************************************************************************************************************************************
>
>
> Disclaimer: NOTICE The information contained in this message is
> confidential and is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you have received
> this message in error or there are any problems please notify the originator
> immediately. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this
> message is strictly forbidden. Raya will not be liable for direct, special,
> indirect or consequential damages arising from alteration of the contents of
> this message by a third party or as a result of any malicious code or virus
> being passed on. Views expressed in this communication are not necessarily
> those of Raya.If you have received this message in error, please notify the
> sender immediately by email, facsimile or telephone and return and/or
> destroy the original message.
> ************************************************************************************************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
> Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely
> those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Riyad Bank.
> Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the
> presence of any viruses. Riyad Bank accepts no liability for any damage
> caused by any virus / error transmitted by this email.
> ************************************************************************************************************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20101018/5158df59/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1801 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101018/5158df59/attachment-0001.jpg>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 16:19:54 +1100
From: Tim Smith <smithsonianwa at gmail.com>
To: Tahir Uddin <tahir.uddin at riyadbank.com>
Cc: voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Voice recording issue
Message-ID:
<AANLkTimw8a=63FnVPcP5g=ytCFCQ+=1GP3nW51d0YEry at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
haha..
Sorry just had CCM 4.1 on my brain!
Minute I sent it, I realised you are on CME.
I am assuming it is actually working off the same principle though.
Cheers,
Tim
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Tim Smith <smithsonianwa at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not familiar with this particular product.
>
> But my guess is that if it is 4.1 CCM, it is probably based off packet
> capturing the signalling and media off the wire.
>
> So usually they sniff the SCCP and this signalling traffic is used to build
> tables of extension numbers to device IP addresses for instance.
>
> Typically, in your recording software you then select which extensions to
> record. The software typically then applies filters to it's packet capturing
> process to exclude non-interesting traffic.
>
> In terms of recording, it also uses the SCCP sniffing to figure out when a
> call is happening, and who is involved, and therefore which RTP media
> packets to pluck off the wire and put into a recording file.
>
> So recorder placement, and what traffic you have spanning to it, can be
> important. i.e. you probably dont want to capture duplicate packets.
>
> This is how it all used to work before SIP forking etc. Since you are on
> 4.1 think this is off the table anyway.
>
> The key thing from the CM perspective is to make sure the recorders have
> visibility of both the SCCP and RTP packets required, and as you know these
> take different paths sometimes.
>
> These products typically use common components such as WINPCAP (same as
> used in Ethereal and Wireshark).
>
> As Ahmed says, it does sound like a software issue on their side.
>
> The fact that it is crossing calls is strange, because it means their
> system, is taking audio from other conversations that it is not supposed to
> be listening to. i.e. Not correlating the media streams and correct involved
> call parties.
>
> Hope that helps a bit.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tim
>
> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Tahir Uddin <tahir.uddin at riyadbank.com>wrote:
>
>> Thanks Ahmed,
>> Could this be a version incompatibility issue, we are running CM 4.1 while
>> the Etalk software is one of the latest versions.
>> Also, are there extenion numbers or other info in the wav files that it
>> might not be able to decipher. How does it identify the packets belonging to
>> one conversation?
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>> Tahir Uddin
>> Assistant Vice President / Information Technology Officer
>> Information Technology Division - Mgmt.
>> Information Technology Division
>> Phone: +966-1-276-3000 ext. 5305
>> Email: tahir.uddin at riyadbank.com
>>
>> **
>> **
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Ahmed Elnagar [mailto:ahmed_elnagar at rayacorp.com]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 13, 2010 6:50 PM
>> *To:* Tahir Uddin
>> *Cc:* voyp list
>> *Subject:* RE: [cisco-voip] Voice recording issue
>>
>> It must be a problem in the recording servers in interpreting the
>> sniffed voice streams and reconstructing the wav files, I saw this problem a
>> lot in other product and every time it happen the vendor has to change their
>> code!!!
>>
>>
>>
>> Best Regards;
>>
>> Ahmed Elnagar
>>
>> Senior Network PS Engineer
>>
>> Mob: +2019-0016211
>>
>> CCIE#24697 (Voice)
>>
>> [image: ccie_voice_large.gif]
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
>> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Tahir Uddin
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 13, 2010 4:25 PM
>> *To:* voyp list
>> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Voice recording issue
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We have call manager express and Etalk recorders
>>
>> We have an issue where the recording files for each call is getting mixed
>> up. When agent A talks to customer A and agent B talks to customer B, in the
>> recording files, we hear agent A interlaced with customer B. Has anyone come
>> across this issue.
>>
>> I am probably not providing enough information on this, just wanted to get
>> an initial take to start out.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Tahir
>>
>> ************************************************************************************************************************************
>> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
>> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
>> Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely
>> those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Riyad Bank.
>> Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the
>> presence of any viruses. Riyad Bank accepts no liability for any damage
>> caused by any virus / error transmitted by this email.
>> ************************************************************************************************************************************
>>
>>
>> Disclaimer: NOTICE The information contained in this message is
>> confidential and is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you have received
>> this message in error or there are any problems please notify the originator
>> immediately. The unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this
>> message is strictly forbidden. Raya will not be liable for direct, special,
>> indirect or consequential damages arising from alteration of the contents of
>> this message by a third party or as a result of any malicious code or virus
>> being passed on. Views expressed in this communication are not necessarily
>> those of Raya.If you have received this message in error, please notify the
>> sender immediately by email, facsimile or telephone and return and/or
>> destroy the original message.
>> ************************************************************************************************************************************
>> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
>> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
>> Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely
>> those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Riyad Bank.
>> Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for the
>> presence of any viruses. Riyad Bank accepts no liability for any damage
>> caused by any virus / error transmitted by this email.
>> ************************************************************************************************************************************
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20101018/07c2f7cc/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1801 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101018/07c2f7cc/attachment-0001.jpg>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 05:38:31 +0000
From: shary shary <shaary1 at hotmail.com>
To: <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Sub pub synchronization
Message-ID: <DUB102-w3454723514046E09A42C18EE5A0 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi Folks,
I want to know how can check the synchronization of CUCM 7.01 between subscriber and publisher and what could be common cause of this issue.
Br.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101018/951f3e2d/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 12:47:02 +0500
From: Syed Khalid Ali <syed.khalid.khursheed at gmail.com>
To: Bill Riley <bill at hitechconnection.net>
Cc: cisco voip <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>, JA Colmenares
<sforcejr at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CISCO UC 8.X solution over MS OCS/Lync 2010.
Why?
Message-ID:
<AANLkTi=2mXbcm3a3U1=Bw-=FQR6N3Hg8QoHGVgGbvFrJ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
This might be interesting:
http://www.proexchange.be/blogs/ocs2007r2/archive/2009/12/04/interesting-whitepaper-microsoft-amp-cisco-on-interop-statement-for-uc.aspx
On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Bill Riley <bill at hitechconnection.net>wrote:
> I have the same situation in my company. They just renewed their
> enterprise agreement which gets the E-CAL of Lync and I am being asked about
> deploying new sites with Lync instead of CUCM. I would be interested in
> hearing everyone?s opinion.
>
>
>
> I have already given up on trying to fight the replacement of Unity with
> Exchange 2010.
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *JA Colmenares
> *Sent:* Sunday, October 17, 2010 6:12 AM
> *To:* cisco voip
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] CISCO UC 8.X solution over MS OCS/Lync 2010. Why?
>
>
> If you were asked why choosing CUC 8.X over OCS/Lync 2010 when the
> costs of setup and licensing for the MIcrosoft solution are much cheaper?.
> Please take my word about being cheaper due to particular circumstances in
> our company.
>
>
>
> What would your reply be? , I need help justifying the CISCO option. I read
> this document:
>
>
>
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/collateral/ns151/C11-604516-00_Evaluating_UC_Solutions_WP.pdf<https://webmail.duckcreektech.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=7d9a2103295c47799dacf3a191228bc1&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.cisco.com%2fen%2fUS%2fsolutions%2fcollateral%2fns151%2fC11-604516-00_Evaluating_UC_Solutions_WP.pdf>
>
>
>
> I need a more objective and unbiased resource. If you believe you can still
> take a "jab" on the cost aspect, elaborate on it. But I am looking more on
> the benefits and robustness of the solution. A Hybrid solution is not an
> option. Either all CISCO or all Microsoft.
>
>
>
> Not even CISCO partners in my area have been able to provide solid answers
> to this question.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
--
Thanks,
Syed Khalid Ali
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101018/658befab/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 12:48:19 +0300
From: "Jawad A Hai" <ahjawad at hotmail.com>
To: <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Billing software for CME
Message-ID: <BLU130-DS636A93A4E429C52A4A420BF5A0 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hello All,
Can any body suggest a good Billing software for CME( I have 3925) other than Stonevoice.
I was using stonevoice till recently, it was good but now they have increased their prices heavily.
company does not seems to agree to new pricing.
so hunting for a software.
Please advise.
Aali
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101018/a011c084/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 10:51:16 +0100
From: polo person <poloperson57 at hotmail.com>
To: <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Call monitoring
Message-ID: <SNT102-W20BC2AA513EB13FA3CE027C45A0 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi,
I've been asked to look into how we can monitor calls for training purposes on our Call Manager 7.1.3
I'm tryting to think of all the various ways to do this, but ultimately we need to be able to listen in to calls, but not to be heard wbhilst listening in.
Has anyone got any good ideas how best to do this?
Thanks
Simon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101018/28b7c653/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 08:30:57 -0400
From: george.hendrix at l-3com.com
To: <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] PWR-C45-2800ACV
Message-ID:
<CE53D1CDCF611C45A6BD90A84D15027601CC4839 at rstn-exch01.net.its.l-3com.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi,
I was wondering if any knows if the Cisco PWR-C45-2800ACV power supply
for the 4500 will work connected to 125v? I know Cisco documentation
only states 240v for this power supply.
Thanks,
Bill
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101018/5e9c881d/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 09:54:57 -0400
From: "Jason Aarons (US)" <jason.aarons at us.didata.com>
To: "george.hendrix at l-3com.com" <george.hendrix at l-3com.com>,
"cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] PWR-C45-2800ACV
Message-ID:
<4E38DB0A1959B04C8C83EDCF069B53ED0C811AE79B at USISPCLEXDB01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
It looks to me per Table 9 you need 20A/240V connection or move to a bigger power supply that does work at 120V. My electrical engineer friends say 240V is more efficient and a better choice (amps = watts over volts). It's more and more common to see the UPS/Network gear needing 240V.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps4324/product_data_sheet09186a00801f3dd9.html
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of george.hendrix at l-3com.com
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 8:31 AM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] PWR-C45-2800ACV
Hi,
I was wondering if any knows if the Cisco PWR-C45-2800ACV power supply for the 4500 will work connected to 125v? I know Cisco documentation only states 240v for this power supply.
Thanks,
Bill
-----------------------------------------
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/20101018/22ea1bb8/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 10:58:47 -0400
From: Jim McBurnett <jim at tgasolutions.com>
To: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] 7925 roaming bug
Message-ID:
<CCD4153D830F584982521DFC986BFF31536095E4AA at tgainf06.TGASolutions.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Guys,
I remember a thread here some time ago about a roaming bug on a 7925 phone with AP controllers.
But I just cannot seem to find it... 7921 roams and has good coverage, 7925 does not..
21 has good signal and the 25 has none.. Standing right under the AP!!
Like I said there was a bug on this, but I cannot find it....
Ideas?
Thanks,
Jim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20101018/3d733cf0/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 11:07:59 -0400
From: Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com>
To: polo person <poloperson57 at hotmail.com>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Call monitoring
Message-ID: <4CBC62CF.5050403 at cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
silent monitoring feature:
http://tools.cisco.com/Support/SNMP/do/BrowseOID.do?local=en
you need a separate software package to invoke it such as IPCC or Verint.
/Wes
polo person wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been asked to look into how we can monitor calls for training
> purposes on our Call Manager 7.1.3
>
> I'm tryting to think of all the various ways to do this, but
> ultimately we need to be able to listen in to calls, but not to be
> heard wbhilst listening in.
>
> Has anyone got any good ideas how best to do this?
>
> Thanks
>
> Simon
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20101018/2c0e07ea/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 11:11:34 -0400
From: "Jason Aarons (US)" <jason.aarons at us.didata.com>
To: Jim McBurnett <jim at tgasolutions.com>, "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net"
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 7925 roaming bug
Message-ID:
<4E38DB0A1959B04C8C83EDCF069B53ED0C811AE84F at USISPCLEXDB01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
You should be using the latest 7925 firmware which fixes the below. If you roamed away and came back the radio would be stuck at full power killing the battery life.
Avoid 7925SCCP 1.3(4) it has a bug CSCtf82507 with PowerSave, the 7925s stay at 17dbm the whole time. Extended battery life goes from 2-3 days to 6-7 hours.
https://supportforums.cisco.com/message/3050419#3050419
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jim McBurnett
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 10:59 AM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] 7925 roaming bug
Guys,
I remember a thread here some time ago about a roaming bug on a 7925 phone with AP controllers.
But I just cannot seem to find it... 7921 roams and has good coverage, 7925 does not..
21 has good signal and the 25 has none.. Standing right under the AP!!
Like I said there was a bug on this, but I cannot find it....
Ideas?
Thanks,
Jim
-----------------------------------------
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/20101018/2a40c795/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 08:27:09 -0700
From: "Haas, Neal" <nhaas at co.fresno.ca.us>
To: Jawad A Hai <ahjawad at hotmail.com>, "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net"
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Billing software for CME
Message-ID:
<A607839BE5327F4DB0719710592119C9FCE00029D0 at COFMAIL2.intra.co.fresno.ca.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I am not sure about CME but have a look at ISI software. www.isi-ino.com<http://www.isi-ino.com/><http://www.isi-ino.com/>
Neal Haas
ITSD Analyst - Communications
494-3298
________________________________
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jawad A Hai [ahjawad at hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 2:48 AM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Billing software for CME
Hello All,
Can any body suggest a good Billing software for CME( I have 3925) other than Stonevoice.
I was using stonevoice till recently, it was good but now they have increased their prices heavily.
company does not seems to agree to new pricing.
so hunting for a software.
Please advise.
Aali
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
End of cisco-voip Digest, Vol 84, Issue 18
******************************************
More information about the cisco-voip
mailing list