[cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service (davidytk)

irivas at fasis.es irivas at fasis.es
Sat Jun 4 13:16:51 EDT 2011 

 We have this same problem for 9 months ago. Since that time we open a 
 Cisco TAC. Unable to find the problem. They have tried everything. What 
 else does to remain in Service, a solution is passed cti CCM router as 
 trigger of UCCX

 best regards
 Ignacio



 On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 12:00:00 -0400, cisco-voip-request at puck.nether.net 
 wrote:
> 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: CallManager 8.0 Verisign Certificate Installation (Mike 
> King)
>    2. Re: CallManager 8.0 Verisign Certificate Installation (Mike 
> King)
>    3. Re: qos help (me at go0se.com)
>    4. ATT IP Flex Reach (Haas, Neal)
>    5. Re: (no subject) (Ted Nugent)
>    6. audio conference bridge (Tony Edwards)
>    7. Re: UCCX application manager in partal service (davidytk)
>    8. Re: UCCX application manager in partal service (Buchanan, 
> James)
>    9. Number Presentation (Nick)
>   10. Re: UCCX application manager in partal service (davidytk)
>
>
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 12:26:11 -0400
> From: Mike King <me at mpking.com>
> To: Joe Martini <joemar2 at cisco.com>
> Cc: "cisco-voip \(cisco-voip at puck.nether.net\)"
> 	<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CallManager 8.0 Verisign Certificate
> 	Installation
> Message-ID: <BANLkTimBaVomuzJT4jVt4=a2Lj_VkUBFpw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> FYI, also referenced in the document that Erick posted:
>
> CUCM in versions 8.0(3) and later will generate a 2048 bit key / CSR 
> for
> Tomcat. This defect currently only addresses Tomcat in 8.0(3). Other 
> types
> of CSRs (like CallManager) will be addressed in future versions. 
> Follow
> defect
> 
> CSCtn01236<http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCso62711>
> for
> 2048 bit updates.
>
> That means that versions that have not been "fixed" will generate 
> 1024
> CSR's, which will not be accepted by ANY CA.
>
> Mike
>
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Joe Martini <joemar2 at cisco.com> 
> wrote:
>
>> Here's an even better document:
>> https://supportforums.cisco.com/docs/DOC-6119
>>
>> On Jun 2, 2011, at 5:21 PM, Wellnitz, Erick A. wrote:
>>
>>
>> 
>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/cucos/8_0_2/cucos/iptpch6.html
>>
>> Security section of the OS Administration guide.
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
>> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Jason Aarons (AM)
>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2011 3:50 PM
>> *To:* cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)
>> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] CallManager 8.0 Verisign Certificate 
>> Installation
>>
>> Is there a similar url for CallManager 8.0 installing a Trusted 
>> Certificate
>> from say Verisign, etc?
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/voicesw/ps556/products_tech_note09186a00808e9e1e.shtml
>>
>>
>> ===========================================================
>> CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to Regulations Governing Practice 
>> Before the Internal Revenue
>> Service, any tax advice contained herein is not intended or written 
>> to be used and cannot be used
>> by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be 
>> imposed on the taxpayer.
>> ===========================================================
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
>> This electronic mail message and any attached files contain 
>> information intended for the exclusive
>> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may 
>> contain information that is
>> proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure 
>> under applicable law.  If you
>> are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
>> viewing, copying, disclosure or
>> distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction 
>> or sanction.  Please notify
>> the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended 
>> recipients and delete the original
>> message without making any copies.
>> ===========================================================
>> NOTIFICATION:  Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited 
>> liability partnership that has
>> elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act 
>> (1997).
>> ===========================================================
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20110603/379f3fc4/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 12:27:08 -0400
> From: Mike King <me at mpking.com>
> To: "cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)"
> 	<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CallManager 8.0 Verisign Certificate
> 	Installation
> Message-ID: <BANLkTi=C5FPGbaZeqcMJyq8_U7hh9xrScQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Actually, that was Joe's link
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Mike King <me at mpking.com> wrote:
>
>> FYI, also referenced in the document that Erick posted:
>>
>> CUCM in versions 8.0(3) and later will generate a 2048 bit key / CSR 
>> for
>> Tomcat. This defect currently only addresses Tomcat in 8.0(3). Other 
>> types
>> of CSRs (like CallManager) will be addressed in future versions. 
>> Follow
>> defect 
>> CSCtn01236<http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCso62711> 
>> for
>> 2048 bit updates.
>>
>> That means that versions that have not been "fixed" will generate 
>> 1024
>> CSR's, which will not be accepted by ANY CA.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Joe Martini <joemar2 at cisco.com> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Here's an even better document:
>>> https://supportforums.cisco.com/docs/DOC-6119
>>>
>>> On Jun 2, 2011, at 5:21 PM, Wellnitz, Erick A. wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/cucos/8_0_2/cucos/iptpch6.html
>>>
>>> Security section of the OS Administration guide.
>>>
>>> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
>>> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Jason Aarons 
>>> (AM)
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2011 3:50 PM
>>> *To:* cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)
>>> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] CallManager 8.0 Verisign Certificate 
>>> Installation
>>>
>>> Is there a similar url for CallManager 8.0 installing a Trusted
>>> Certificate from say Verisign, etc?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/voicesw/ps556/products_tech_note09186a00808e9e1e.shtml
>>>
>>>
>>> ===========================================================
>>> CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to Regulations Governing Practice 
>>> Before the Internal Revenue
>>> Service, any tax advice contained herein is not intended or written 
>>> to be used and cannot be used
>>> by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be 
>>> imposed on the taxpayer.
>>> ===========================================================
>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
>>> This electronic mail message and any attached files contain 
>>> information intended for the exclusive
>>> use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may 
>>> contain information that is
>>> proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure 
>>> under applicable law.  If you
>>> are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
>>> viewing, copying, disclosure or
>>> distribution of this information may be subject to legal 
>>> restriction or sanction.  Please notify
>>> the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended 
>>> recipients and delete the original
>>> message without making any copies.
>>> ===========================================================
>>> NOTIFICATION:  Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited 
>>> liability partnership that has
>>> elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act 
>>> (1997).
>>> ===========================================================
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20110603/65fdca1f/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 12:47:57 -0500
> From: me at go0se.com
> To: "gokhan senol" <gokhanciscottl at yahoo.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] qos help
> Message-ID: <279b1f47cc291bb05d0390ae8622e31f.squirrel at go0se.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
> There are a 1000 ways to do QoS. Everyone does it a little different.
>
> 
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk543/tk545/technologies_tech_note09186a0080114326.shtml
>
> Thanks,
>
> Go0se
>
> My blog:
> http://atc.go0se.com
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Help Hopegivers International
> Feed the orphans of Haiti and India
> http://www.hopegivers.org
> --------------------------------------------
>
>> hello,
>> ?
>> I need for qos setup pls
>> topology is? here
>> ?
>> (ccm and database )-central----mpls ISP--?branch?- (ccm and 
>> database)
>> there is database replication between cental and branch and also ccm
>> servers
>> signaling and voip.
>> ?
>> central router connected to ths ISP viq gi0/2.222? subif.
>> my qos config here. any suggestion.is that corect config do you thnk 
>> ?
>> should i specfy band command under main int also. but this time 
>> other vlan
>> traffic will suffer.
>> ?
>> class-map match-all ccmsig
>> ?match access-group name ccmqos (acl between central ccm and branch 
>> ccm)
>> class-map match-all replication
>> ?match access-group 130(acl between database server ip's)
>> class-map match-any voice
>> ?match? dscp ef
>> ?match access-group 151(udp any any 16384 32767)
>> !
>> policy-map ccm
>> ?class ccmsig
>> ? bandwidth 512
>> ?class voice
>> ? priority percent 25
>> ? set dscp ef
>> ?class replikasyon
>> ??? police 5000000
>> policy-map parent
>> ?class class-default
>> ? shape average percent 100
>> ? service-policy ccm
>> ?
>> interface GigabitEthernet0/3.232
>> ?des?toISP_mpls
>> ?bandwidth 10000
>> ?encapsulation dot1Q 232
>> ?service-policy output parent
>> !_______________________________________________
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 22:15:58 +0000
> From: "Haas, Neal" <nhaas at co.fresno.ca.us>
> To: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] ATT IP Flex Reach
> Message-ID:
> 
> 	<3BFADA3C46E5A4428C76DC87FCF5FADE01F0D4 at COFMAIL03.intra.co.fresno.ca.us>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> So has anyone worked with AT&T IP Flexible Reach Service? We will be
> moving all or our PRI's to this service and I was just wondering if
> anyone has had issues with the service.
>
> Thanks
>
> Neal
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> 
> <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110603/4d2a0ba7/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 20:13:24 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Ted Nugent <tednugent69 at yahoo.com>
> To: ccie_voice at onlinestudylist.com, blakbeard at gmail.com,
> 	kabbeboy at gmail.com, all4ie at gmail.com, cisco-voip at puck.nether.net,
> 	dmbfrisbee at gmail.com, jamey.a.milner at ssa.gov
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] (no subject)
> Message-ID: <29865.42315.qm at web36108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> http://classic-clay.com/indexz35X.php
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2011 18:22:20 +1000
> From: Tony Edwards <tonyedwards.rs at gmail.com>
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [cisco-voip] audio conference bridge
> Message-ID: <BANLkTim6w-aiB5nJp0tKWTex=uknarkkEA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> hi all,
>
> among cisco meeting place express , polycom hw conf bridge and call 
> manager
> meet me , the meet me option sound more cheapest and most cost 
> effective
> option for audio conference functionality for internal ipt users for 
> their
> day to day use. even though earlier 2 other solutions can offer more 
> bells
> and whistles such as web collaboration and video conferencing as well 
> in
> addition.
>
> but with reference to ccm based meet me conference functionality , is 
> any
> one pushed this usage on a ccm 6 or ccm 7 boxes ? i mean , what are 
> the
> maximum meet me conference bridge numbers or sessions you have 
> enabled on
> your cluster and how many participants you have caped on your 
> deployment so
> far?
>
> also , by considering most common topologies such as using h729 on 
> wan and
> g711 on lan users , do you see any issues with bringing in both wan & 
> lan
> users on to same meet me audio conf session , assuming that lan users
> initiate the session 1st on g711 ?
>
> thanking you
>
> tony
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> 
> <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110604/503d6ce2/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2011 18:44:52 +0800
> From: "davidytk" <davidytk at netvigator.com>
> To: "'Rasim Duric'" <rduric at uoguelph.ca>,
> 	<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>, <ccielab at groupstudy.com>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service
> Message-ID: <004401cc22a4$6f69d710$0502a8c0 at davidchristy>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi Rasim
>
>
>
> If the problem like "subflow script" , what should be the message in 
> MIVR
> log. Also any recommendation to avoid this problem happen in future.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Best Regards
>
> David
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> From: Rasim Duric [mailto:rduric at uoguelph.ca]
> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 8:16 PM
> To: 'davidytk'; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net; ccielab at groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service
>
>
>
> Search for the 'partial' in the MIVR logs. I had this problem a 
> couple of
> times. The first time a call subflow script was missing and the 
> second time
> I had a wrong name of the queue.
>
>
>
> Rasim Duric
>
> Network Analyst (CCS)
>
> University of Guelph
>
> Guelph, N1G 2W1, ON
>
> 519-824-4120x53146
>
> rduric at uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of davidytk
> Sent: June-03-11 6:46 AM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net; ccielab at groupstudy.com
> Subject: [cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service
>
>
>
> Hi All
>
>
>
> My customer face a problem on the UCCX. The application manager run 
> in
> partial service suddenly. The customer restart it and the problem 
> resumed.
>
>
>
> We have logged a case to Cisco to investigate this case, but Cisco 
> said they
> can't find any root cause why the service run in partial service.
>
>
>
> Does any one know any possible reason why the application manager run 
> in
> partial service? The customer did not change/upload any new script.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Best Regards
>
> David
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature
> database 6176 (20110603) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature
> database 6176 (20110603) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> 
> <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110604/209890f7/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2011 07:58:37 -0400
> From: "Buchanan, James" <jbuchanan at presidio.com>
> To: davidytk <davidytk at netvigator.com>, "'Rasim Duric'"
> 	<rduric at uoguelph.ca>,  "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net"
> 	<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>, "ccielab at groupstudy.com"
> 	<ccielab at groupstudy.com>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service
> Message-ID:
> 	<853687641CF93E40B362F112A3D8F3CE1FE2C437 at SOEXCH01.Presidio.Corp>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hello,
> If you stop and restart the CRS Engine, does the problem go away? If
> not, look in your MIVR log immediately after restarting the CRS
> Engine. That should give you the script that is causing the Partial
> Service (if one indeed is).
>
> Thanks,
>
> 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 davidytk
> Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2011 5:45 AM
> To: 'Rasim Duric'; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net; ccielab at groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service
>
> Hi Rasim
>
> If the problem like "subflow script" , what should be the message in
> MIVR log. Also any recommendation to avoid this problem happen in
> future.
>
> Thanks
> Best Regards
> David
>
> ________________________________
> From: Rasim Duric [mailto:rduric at uoguelph.ca]
> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 8:16 PM
> To: 'davidytk'; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net; ccielab at groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service
>
> Search for the 'partial' in the MIVR logs. I had this problem a
> couple of times. The first time a call subflow script was missing and
> the second time I had a wrong name of the queue.
>
> Rasim Duric
> Network Analyst (CCS)
> University of Guelph
> Guelph, N1G 2W1, ON
> 519-824-4120x53146
> rduric at uoguelph.ca<mailto:rduric at uoguelph.ca>
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of davidytk
> Sent: June-03-11 6:46 AM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net; ccielab at groupstudy.com
> Subject: [cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service
>
> Hi All
>
> My customer face a problem on the UCCX. The application manager run
> in partial service suddenly. The customer restart it and the problem
> resumed.
>
> We have logged a case to Cisco to investigate this case, but Cisco
> said they can't find any root cause why the service run in partial
> service.
>
> Does any one know any possible reason why the application manager run
> in partial service? The customer did not change/upload any new 
> script.
>
> Thanks
> Best Regards
> David
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 6176 (20110603) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 6176 (20110603) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
> signature database 6179 (20110604) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> 
> <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110604/3a48144d/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2011 13:20:52 +0100
> From: Nick <csvoip at googlemail.com>
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Number Presentation
> Message-ID: <BANLkTin48Luo9-OvufhqxQUemeCxj4AjVw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> I have just migrated a customer to CUCM 8.5 from CUCM 4.0.2,
> one of their H323 gateways is the primary outbound route for all 
> calls, the
> CLI was
> blocked on the gateway config with ?Calling Party Presentation? set 
> to
> Restricted.
> I have the same config on the new CUCM but now when you dial
> the number it displays Private on the handset display and then shows 
> Unknown
> number in the placed calls list, this was not happening before.
> Any idea how I can restrict the CLI but still show the
> number they are calling on the handset.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> 
> <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110604/191450dd/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2011 20:25:17 +0800
> From: "davidytk" <davidytk at netvigator.com>
> To: "'Buchanan, James'" <jbuchanan at presidio.com>, "'Rasim Duric'"
> 	<rduric at uoguelph.ca>, <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>,
> 	<ccielab at groupstudy.com>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service
> Message-ID: <005801cc22b2$76ad6560$0502a8c0 at davidchristy>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi Buchanan
>
>
>
> When we restart the application manager service, the service resume 
> normal.
> However, Cisco cannot find any error in the MIVR log. Do you have 
> experience
> on this before ? If yes, what is the possible reason and any 
> recommendation
> to avoid this problem.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Best Regards
>
> David
>
>
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> From: Buchanan, James [mailto:jbuchanan at presidio.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2011 7:59 PM
> To: davidytk; 'Rasim Duric'; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net;
> ccielab at groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service
>
>
>
> Hello,
>
> If you stop and restart the CRS Engine, does the problem go away? If 
> not,
> look in your MIVR log immediately after restarting the CRS Engine. 
> That
> should give you the script that is causing the Partial Service (if 
> one
> indeed is).
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> 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 davidytk
> Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2011 5:45 AM
> To: 'Rasim Duric'; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net; ccielab at groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service
>
>
>
> Hi Rasim
>
>
>
> If the problem like "subflow script" , what should be the message in 
> MIVR
> log. Also any recommendation to avoid this problem happen in future.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Best Regards
>
> David
>
>
>
>   _____
>
> From: Rasim Duric [mailto:rduric at uoguelph.ca]
> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 8:16 PM
> To: 'davidytk'; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net; ccielab at groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service
>
>
>
> Search for the 'partial' in the MIVR logs. I had this problem a 
> couple of
> times. The first time a call subflow script was missing and the 
> second time
> I had a wrong name of the queue.
>
>
>
> Rasim Duric
>
> Network Analyst (CCS)
>
> University of Guelph
>
> Guelph, N1G 2W1, ON
>
> 519-824-4120x53146
>
> rduric at uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of davidytk
> Sent: June-03-11 6:46 AM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net; ccielab at groupstudy.com
> Subject: [cisco-voip] UCCX application manager in partal service
>
>
>
> Hi All
>
>
>
> My customer face a problem on the UCCX. The application manager run 
> in
> partial service suddenly. The customer restart it and the problem 
> resumed.
>
>
>
> We have logged a case to Cisco to investigate this case, but Cisco 
> said they
> can't find any root cause why the service run in partial service.
>
>
>
> Does any one know any possible reason why the application manager run 
> in
> partial service? The customer did not change/upload any new script.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Best Regards
>
> David
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature
> database 6176 (20110603) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature
> database 6176 (20110603) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature
> database 6179 (20110604) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature
> database 6179 (20110604) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> 
> <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110604/a88a7cc4/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 92, Issue 4
> *****************************************

More information about the cisco-voip mailing list