[cisco-voip] cisco-voip Digest, Vol 91, Issue 10
John Kistler
johnk at nsi1.com
Wed May 11 12:14:43 EDT 2011
Call you in a minute.
--------------------------
Thanks,
John
Sorry this is short. Sent using my fat thumbs on a BlackBerry
----- Original Message -----
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Sent: Wed May 11 12:00:01 2011
Subject: cisco-voip Digest, Vol 91, Issue 10
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: suggested/best practices for DHCP settings on routers
(Lelio Fulgenzi)
2. Re: suggested/best practices for DHCP settings on routers
(Erick B.)
3. Re: suggested/best practices for DHCP settings on routers
(Robert Kulagowski)
4. Re: lync moc desktop p2p & p2m video calls , conferencing
(Scott Voll)
5. Re: suggested/best practices for DHCP settings on routers
(Lelio Fulgenzi)
6. Field Tech Training (Mike Hyde)
7. Server Sizing (Daniel)
8. Upgrade Methods from 6.1.1 to 8.5 with new hardware (Ryan Schwab)
9. Re: Upgrade Methods from 6.1.1 to 8.5 with new hardware
(Lelio Fulgenzi)
10. Re: C2960S Switch High CPU (James Jung)
11. Re: Server Sizing (Wes Sisk)
12. Meridian Voice Service (Edgardo Perez)
13. Re: Meridian Voice Service (Buchanan, James)
14. CDR Database bug (Arnold Lesar)
15. Re: Server Sizing (Daniel)
16. Re: Meridian Voice Service (Erik Goppel)
17. Re: lync moc desktop p2p & p2m video calls , conferencing
(Matt Slaga (AM))
18. Re: lync moc desktop p2p & p2m video calls , conferencing
(Matt Slaga (AM))
19. Re: Meridian Voice Service (Haas, Neal)
20. Re: Meridian Voice Service (Buchanan, James)
21. Re: Integration between CM 7 and an Avaya switch (Bantz John F)
22. Re: suggested/best practices for DHCP settings on routers
(Robert Kulagowski)
23. Subscriber and DHCP Servers for Expansion of CUCM Cluster
(Daniel Martin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 12:01:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
To: Robert Kulagowski <rkulagow at gmail.com>
Cc: "cisco-voip \(cisco-voip at puck.nether.net\)"
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] suggested/best practices for DHCP settings
on routers
Message-ID:
<731312381.790683.1305043282560.JavaMail.root at simcoe.cs.uoguelph.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I also noticed that for IOS v15T, it has the following pre-requisites. However, I can't find a "service dhcp" statement in my config, but I know it's offering up DHCP addresses. Also, I can't issue the "show ip sockets details" command or the "show sockets detail" command.
weird!
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios-xml/ios/ipaddr_dhcp/configuration/15-1mt/Configuring_the_Cisco_IOS_DHCP_Server.html#GUID-9F0ED96D-17EA-4307-A14C-0C23A335B5D4
Before you configure the Cisco IOS DHCP server, you should understand the concepts documented in the DHCP Overview module.
The Cisco IOS DHCP server and relay agent are enabled by default. You can verify if they have been disabled by checking your configuration file. If they have been disabled, the no service dhcp command will appear in the configuration file. Use the service dhcp command to reenable the functionality if necessary.
Port 67 (the server port) is closed in the Cisco IOS DHCP/BOOTP default configuration. There are two logical parts to the service dhcp command: service enabled and service running. The DHCP service is enabled by default, but port 67 is not opened until the DHCP service is running. If the service is running, the show ip sockets details or show sockets detail command displays port 67 as open.
The Cisco IOS DHCP relay agent will be enabled on an interface only when the ip helper-address is configured. This command enables the DHCP broadcast to be forwarded to the configured DHCP server.
---
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)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Kulagowski" <rkulagow at gmail.com>
To: "cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 11:23:59 AM
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] suggested/best practices for DHCP settings on routers
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Ryan Ratliff <rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> An address conflict occurs when two hosts use the same IP address. During
> address assignment, DHCP checks for conflicts using ping and gratuitous
> Address Resolution Protocol (ARP). If a conflict is detected, the address is
> removed from the pool. The address will not be assigned until the
> administrator resolves the conflict.
>
> Yes it does.
> -Ryan
We ended up adding:
no ip dhcp conflict logging
to our router configuration so that we wouldn't end up with _all_
addresses unassignable.
_______________________________________________
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/20110510/e4ca226a/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 11:41:26 -0500
From: "Erick B." <erickbee at gmail.com>
To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
Cc: "cisco-voip \(cisco-voip at puck.nether.net\)"
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] suggested/best practices for DHCP settings
on routers
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=8v4bfVC6x6v=jhP72zw_ZKUPX8A at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
If you log conflicts, I've seen where no IPs can be assigned because
there are no available IPs. DHCP shows either assigned or in the
conflicts table, and no IPs are available until someone manually
clears the dhcp conflict table. So just throwing this out there,
because I've seen it bite people out of the blue and you get calls
that the phones are down.
Erick
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca> wrote:
> I also noticed that for IOS v15T, it has the following pre-requisites.
> However, I can't find a "service dhcp" statement in my config, but I know
> it's offering up DHCP addresses. Also, I can't issue the "show ip sockets
> details" command or the "show sockets detail" command.
>
> weird!
>
> ________________________________
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios-xml/ios/ipaddr_dhcp/configuration/15-1mt/Configuring_the_Cisco_IOS_DHCP_Server.html#GUID-9F0ED96D-17EA-4307-A14C-0C23A335B5D4
>
> Before you configure the Cisco IOS DHCP server, you should understand the
> concepts documented in the DHCP Overview module.
>
> The Cisco IOS DHCP server and relay agent are enabled by default. You can
> verify if they have been disabled by checking your configuration file. If
> they have been disabled, the no service dhcp command will appear in the
> configuration file. Use the service dhcp command to reenable the
> functionality if necessary.
>
> Port 67 (the server port) is closed in the Cisco IOS DHCP/BOOTP default
> configuration. There are two logical parts to the service dhcp command:
> service enabled and service running. The DHCP service is enabled by default,
> but port 67 is not opened until the DHCP service is running. If the service
> is running, the show ip sockets details or show sockets detail command
> displays port 67 as open.
>
> The Cisco IOS DHCP relay agent will be enabled on an interface only when the
> ip helper-address is configured. This command enables the DHCP broadcast to
> be forwarded to the configured DHCP server.
>
> ________________________________
> ---
> 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: "Robert Kulagowski" <rkulagow at gmail.com>
> To: "cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 11:23:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] suggested/best practices for DHCP settings
> on????????routers
>
> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Ryan Ratliff <rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
>> An address conflict occurs when two hosts use the same IP address. During
>> address assignment, DHCP checks for conflicts using ping and gratuitous
>> Address Resolution Protocol (ARP). If a conflict is detected, the address
>> is
>> removed from the pool. The address will not be assigned until the
>> administrator resolves the conflict.
>>
>> Yes it does.
>> -Ryan
>
> We ended up adding:
>
> no ip dhcp conflict logging
>
> to our router configuration so that we wouldn't end up with _all_
> addresses unassignable.
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 12:34:02 -0500
From: Robert Kulagowski <rkulagow at gmail.com>
To: "cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)"
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] suggested/best practices for DHCP settings
on routers
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=ksTougNEQxXcMvPPAOP_hWfRKig at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Erick B. <erickbee at gmail.com> wrote:
> If you log conflicts, I've seen where no IPs can be assigned because
> there are no available IPs. DHCP shows either assigned or in the
> conflicts table, and no IPs are available until someone manually
> clears the dhcp conflict table. So just throwing this out there,
> because I've seen it bite people out of the blue and you get calls
> that the phones are down.
Which is precisely the reason that we added the command to our configurations...
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 11:08:56 -0700
From: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
To: Tony Edwards <tonyedwards.rs at gmail.com>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] lync moc desktop p2p & p2m video calls ,
conferencing
Message-ID: <BANLkTimb5wpK=M7N+5jtB5Fz1uqhzwRPgg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Are you doing a pilot of both M$ and Ci$co? Comparing the two?
1. M$ can do the same stuff that CM does. It does not have to be
configured together to get it working.
2. I think it depends on what your planing to end up with. are you
planning on integrating the two?
3. Not really sure. Someone told me (YMMV) that MS just pushes more
packets if it starts loosing packets. Can fill up pipes if its having
issues getting the packets through. Don't know if it's true or not.
4. & 5. I don't know.
Scott
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Tony Edwards <tonyedwards.rs at gmail.com>wrote:
> hi guys,
>
> can some one please guide me on the below queries?
>
> i am planning to run a pilot with a lync2010 server with 10 odd lync moc
> clients on 10 user windows7 computers with an aim to
> turn on a desktop video p2p and p2m ( conference) streams both with in lan
> environment as well as between 2 x wan site , separated by a 512k frame
> relay pipe.
>
> in isolation i do have a ccm running with 10 sites with 100 sccp end points
> and lync platform will be totally separate to begin with while i trial
> desktop to desktop video.
>
> so that being the aim , i am not sure on how to address following 4
> aspects.
>
> 1. can my 10 pilot lync moc clients do p2p or p2m desktop video sessions
> with rt audio and rt video codecs with out going via ccm cluster or with out
> the help of ccm at all.
>
> 2. just like ccm's sccp end points which will have a dn # , should my lync
> moc clients too need to have dn # or lync moc can audio & video call each
> other via their sip addresses or user names ?
>
> 3.from qos perspective , what tcp & udp ports should i have to mark and
> classify for rt audio or rt video signalling and payloads ? from my very
> limited understanding on lync so far , moc clients when they talk to lync
> server via sip , they do open up peer to peer sort of 1024 to 65534 sort of
> huge port range. which i gather , can we locked in to smaller range via
> in-band signalling. so as you can see here , i am totally confused on best
> possible qos templates to protect and give some sort of priority (perhaps IP
> Prec 2 or AF21) lync desktop video p2p and p2p sessions.
> 4. i do gather that , lync do offer cac , similar to ccm. if that is the
> case , how much bw shall i have to configure for 2 x desktop video sessions
> ?
>
> 5. lastly , i was just checking nbar class maps on my is router and i
> spotted match protocol rtp audio and rtp video and rtp payload , but nbar
> match options does not offer rt audio or rt video to cover microsoft lync
> protocol matching. so , i am just wondering , are they both same or not. if
> they are not same , then perhaps , the bets i could do it is match tcp and
> udp port ranges of rt audio and rt video traffic streams.
>
> thank you a lot.
>
> tony
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110510/8af97430/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 14:12:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
To: Robert Kulagowski <rkulagow at gmail.com>
Cc: "cisco-voip \(cisco-voip at puck.nether.net\)"
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] suggested/best practices for DHCP settings
on routers
Message-ID: <E9BFEEFD-A117-4659-87E3-CB195DB1820E at uoguelph.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Question: does this command just disable logging or conflict testing altogether?
Sent from my iPhone
On May 10, 2011, at 1:41 PM, Robert Kulagowski <rkulagow at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Erick B. <erickbee at gmail.com> wrote:
>> If you log conflicts, I've seen where no IPs can be assigned because
>> there are no available IPs. DHCP shows either assigned or in the
>> conflicts table, and no IPs are available until someone manually
>> clears the dhcp conflict table. So just throwing this out there,
>> because I've seen it bite people out of the blue and you get calls
>> that the phones are down.
>
> Which is precisely the reason that we added the command to our configurations...
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 13:35:32 -0500
From: Mike Hyde <mhyde at monitor.mts.net>
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Field Tech Training
Message-ID: <FED50401-3E86-45AE-B3D4-7DD1BB8695B8 at monitor.mts.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Does anyone know of a course that can be given to field techs that covers Callmanager and Callmamanger Express? This would be for people who are first on site trainings, so basic trouble shooting, set replacement, etc.
Mike
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 07:48:22 +1000
From: Daniel <dan.voip at danofive.id.au>
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Server Sizing
Message-ID: <BANLkTinU5hJb2F9=cbdL9e0_r2cXEfR+Ug at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi Guys,
I'm setting up a new cluster that has 7 nodes, publisher, 4 subscribers, and
2 dedicated servers with each running TFTP and IPVMS.
This is all UC on UCS. The publisher and subscirbers have been setup with
the 7500 user OVA/F file. I would like to get peoples thoughts on setting
the last two servers that are each running TFTP and IPVMS only (no call
processing) to be setup with the 2500 user OVA/F file?
It will use less space from our SAN etc.. does it need to be the same size
since they're not doing call processing?
cheers,
Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110511/4a660cc3/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 15:56:11 -0600
From: "Ryan Schwab" <schwaby81 at shaw.ca>
To: <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Upgrade Methods from 6.1.1 to 8.5 with new
hardware
Message-ID: <002d01cc0f5d$133f1c20$39bd5460$@shaw.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
An open question on any methods that have worked well for an upgrade
situation as below:
Customer has CUCM 6.1.1 and CCX 5.x wanting to upgrade to the latest version
(8.5x) on new hardware, most likely UCS C-Series.
Is there a supported migration path by installing the latest software on the
C-Series in parallel and "importing" data from CUCM and CCX?
Thanks,
Ryan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110510/719f9381/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 19:27:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
To: Ryan Schwab <schwaby81 at shaw.ca>
Cc: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Upgrade Methods from 6.1.1 to 8.5 with new
hardware
Message-ID: <42A90A3C-63BD-4E98-BF30-9B404966A4A9 at uoguelph.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I haven't researched migration options, but from what I've seen on the list, you'll likely find yourself using the DRF backups. Keeping this in mind you have two options: (a) upgrade the existing hardware to v8 and restore the backups to the newly installed v8 on new hardware. (b) install the same version on the new hardware, restore from backups, then upgrade.
Each has their own benefits.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 10, 2011, at 5:58 PM, "Ryan Schwab" <schwaby81 at shaw.ca> wrote:
> An open question on any methods that have worked well for an upgrade situation as below:
>
>
>
> Customer has CUCM 6.1.1 and CCX 5.x wanting to upgrade to the latest version (8.5x) on new hardware, most likely UCS C-Series.
>
>
>
> Is there a supported migration path by installing the latest software on the C-Series in parallel and ?importing? data from CUCM and CCX?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> 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/20110510/7faba41e/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 11:33:16 +1200
From: James Jung <James.Jung at telecom.co.nz>
To: Dennis Heim <Dennis.Heim at cdw.com>, "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net"
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] C2960S Switch High CPU
Message-ID:
<4321ACAE338FD04A9D267C7F3F7AF3414A8F559274 at AKEXMBX02.telecom.tcnz.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The IOS is c2960s-universalk9-mz.122-55.SE.bin and the switch model is WS-C2960S-24TS-L.
Cheers,
James Jung.
________________________________
From: Dennis Heim [mailto:Dennis.Heim at cdw.com]
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2011 4:50 PM
To: James Jung; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: C2960S Switch High CPU
What version of code are you running?
Dennis Heim
Network Voice Engineer
CDW Advanced Technology Services
11711 N. Meridian Street, Suite 225
Carmel, IN 46032
317.569.4255 Single Number Reach
317.569.4201 Fax
dennis.heim at cdw.com<mailto:dennis.heim at cdw.com>
cdw.com/content/solutions/unified-communications/<http://www.cdw.com/content/solutions/unified-communications/>
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of James Jung
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 7:41 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] C2960S Switch High CPU
Hi guys
I have C2960S switches and one of it has high cpu rate constantly.
It seems that this switch processes lots of traffic and shows lots of output drops too.
The show process cpu sort shows that 'VLAN Manager' process takes up 40 to 60% of the total cpu time.
Does anyone know about the VLAN Manager process? Is this because traffic load?
show interfaces summ
*: interface is up
IHQ: pkts in input hold queue IQD: pkts dropped from input queue
OHQ: pkts in output hold queue OQD: pkts dropped from output queue
RXBS: rx rate (bits/sec) RXPS: rx rate (pkts/sec)
TXBS: tx rate (bits/sec) TXPS: tx rate (pkts/sec)
TRTL: throttle count
Interface IHQ IQD OHQ OQD RXBS RXPS TXBS TXPS TRTL
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vlan1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
* Vlan5 0 0 0 0 4000 4 4000 4 0
FastEthernet0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
* GigabitEthernet1/0/1 0 0 0 32591 17096000 3361 12046000 3614 0
* GigabitEthernet1/0/2 0 0 0 200324518 9420000 1702 10401000 1645 0
* GigabitEthernet1/0/3 0 0 0 1021 2662000 1601 8050000 2241 0
* GigabitEthernet1/0/4 0 0 0 5212707 398000 254 332000 531 0
GigabitEthernet1/0/5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
* GigabitEthernet1/0/6 0 0 0 7449328 544000 383 2142000 867 0
* GigabitEthernet1/0/7 0 0 0 6268202 20000 15 1333000 485 0
GigabitEthernet1/0/8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GigabitEthernet1/0/9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
show controllers cpu-interface
cpu-queue-frames retrieved dropped invalid hol-block stray
----------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
rpc 0 0 0 0 0
stp 34876674 0 1741 0 0
ipc 0 0 0 0 0
routing protocol 34399658 0 312 0 0
L2 protocol 452136688 317119329 4290266136 0 0
show process cpu sorted
CPU utilization for five seconds: 83%/20%; one minute: 84%; five minutes: 84%
PID Runtime(ms) Invoked uSecs 5Sec 1Min 5Min TTY Process
272 699167327 140378773 4980 47.78% 45.89% 46.28% 0 VLAN Manager
135 71568385 68413023 1046 7.99% 8.48% 8.55% 0 Hulc LED Process
188 24754528 32288669 766 0.69% 0.75% 0.74% 0 Spanning Tree
104 18693053 3192604 5855 0.39% 0.50% 0.53% 0 hpm counter proc
Thanks in advance guys.
James Jung
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110511/b2d31057/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 21:18:46 -0400
From: Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com>
To: Daniel <dan.voip at danofive.id.au>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Server Sizing
Message-ID: <4DC9E3F6.9030507 at cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
With more than 3 nodes in the cluster the publisher generally should not
run call processing. It should be a dedicated publisher.
Regards,
Wes
On 5/10/2011 5:48 PM, Daniel wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> I'm setting up a new cluster that has 7 nodes, publisher, 4
> subscribers, and 2 dedicated servers with each running TFTP and IPVMS.
>
> This is all UC on UCS. The publisher and subscirbers have been setup
> with the 7500 user OVA/F file. I would like to get peoples thoughts on
> setting the last two servers that are each running TFTP and IPVMS only
> (no call processing) to be setup with the 2500 user OVA/F file?
>
> It will use less space from our SAN etc.. does it need to be the same
> size since they're not doing call processing?
>
> cheers,
>
> Dan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110510/45ca617b/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 17:01:44 -0500
From: "Edgardo Perez" <edgardo.perez at swri.org>
To: <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Meridian Voice Service
Message-ID: <009501cc0f5d$d9e2db00$8da89100$@perez at swri.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
What is the equivalent service in the Cisco IP Telephony environment for the
Nortel Meridian Voice Service?
We have some DNs in our company for announcements that use this Meridian
Voice Service. Some of these announcements are updated daily, like the
Cafeteria Menu, and others once in a while, like the Job Fair Announcement
or the Inclement Weather Announcement.
Any ideas?
We have Unity Connection and IPCC if that helps.
Thanks for your help.
Edgardo (Ed) Perez
Assistant Director
Network Services
Southwest Research Institute, Information Technology Center,
6220 Culebra Rd., P.O. Drawer 28510, San Antonio, TX 78228-0510
voice: (210) 522-2880, fax: (210) 522-3424
e-mail: edgardo.perez at swri.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110510/4ada2be5/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 22:34:02 -0400
From: "Buchanan, James" <jbuchanan at presidio.com>
To: Edgardo Perez <edgardo.perez at swri.org>,
"cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Meridian Voice Service
Message-ID:
<853687641CF93E40B362F112A3D8F3CE1FA6B4E1 at SOEXCH01.Presidio.Corp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Call handlers in Cisco Unity/Unity Connection voicemail handle this.
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 Edgardo Perez
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 5:02 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Meridian Voice Service
What is the equivalent service in the Cisco IP Telephony environment for the Nortel Meridian Voice Service?
We have some DNs in our company for announcements that use this Meridian Voice Service. Some of these announcements are updated daily, like the Cafeteria Menu, and others once in a while, like the Job Fair Announcement or the Inclement Weather Announcement.
Any ideas?
We have Unity Connection and IPCC if that helps.
Thanks for your help.
Edgardo (Ed) Perez
Assistant Director
Network Services
Southwest Research Institute, Information Technology Center,
6220 Culebra Rd., P.O. Drawer 28510, San Antonio, TX 78228-0510
voice: (210) 522-2880, fax: (210) 522-3424
e-mail: edgardo.perez at swri.org<mailto:edgardo.perez at swri.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110510/49a6dfa1/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 03:39:10 +0100 (BST)
From: Arnold Lesar <arnoldlesar at yahoo.co.uk>
To: VoIPgroup <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] CDR Database bug
Message-ID: <787236.7476.qm at web26307.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Dear all,
have you seen bug in CDR database in calling party number "+12622233344?"?
i used Cisco Call Manager 4.2
let me know if you have some kind of problem like this.
thanks guys.
GBU
Regards,
Arnold Samuel Lesar
------------------------------------------------------
Note: This message was created by ARNOLD SAMUEL LESAR.
------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
PT. PELITA RELIANCE INTERNATIONAL
Eka Hospital BSD City, Tangerang
Address : CBD Lot IX, BSD City, Tangerang
Phone : (+62-21) 256 555 55
Fax : (+62-21) 256 555 44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110511/bdb78dcc/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 12:41:33 +1000
From: Daniel <dan.voip at danofive.id.au>
To: Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com>
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Server Sizing
Message-ID: <BANLkTimPL8QDVXVDdfh7fOyZ=Tt0fFuT-Q at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
The publisher is not running any call processing.
I was asking for opinions on sizing the last two TFTP and IPVMS servers with
less resources.
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com> wrote:
> With more than 3 nodes in the cluster the publisher generally should not
> run call processing. It should be a dedicated publisher.
>
> Regards,
> Wes
>
>
> On 5/10/2011 5:48 PM, Daniel wrote:
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> I'm setting up a new cluster that has 7 nodes, publisher, 4 subscribers,
> and 2 dedicated servers with each running TFTP and IPVMS.
>
> This is all UC on UCS. The publisher and subscirbers have been setup with
> the 7500 user OVA/F file. I would like to get peoples thoughts on setting
> the last two servers that are each running TFTP and IPVMS only (no call
> processing) to be setup with the 2500 user OVA/F file?
>
> It will use less space from our SAN etc.. does it need to be the same
> size since they're not doing call processing?
>
> cheers,
>
> Dan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing listcisco-voip at puck.nether.nethttps://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110511/dcdc1bfb/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 09:06:06 +0200
From: Erik Goppel <egoppel at gmail.com>
To: "Buchanan, James" <jbuchanan at presidio.com>
Cc: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Meridian Voice Service
Message-ID: <BANLkTin1x+WWZN-pFV4KgeZ9zo4Hx+qHsw at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Edgardo,
You might want to use IPCC instead of Unity to achieve this.
it is way easier, and more flexible than call handlers.
Good luck,
Erik Goppel
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:34 AM, Buchanan, James <jbuchanan at presidio.com>wrote:
> Call handlers in Cisco Unity/Unity Connection voicemail handle this.
>
>
>
> *James Buchanan *|* Technology Manager, UC *| *South Region *|* Presidio
> Networked Solutions
> 12 Cadillac Dr, Suite 130, Brentwood, TN 37027 *|* **
> jbuchanan at presidio.com <jbuchanan at ctiusa.com>
> **D: 615-866-5729* | *F:* *615-866-5781* | *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 *Edgardo Perez
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 10, 2011 5:02 PM
> *To:* cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Meridian Voice Service
>
>
>
> What is the equivalent service in the Cisco IP Telephony environment for
> the Nortel Meridian Voice Service?
>
>
>
> We have some DNs in our company for announcements that use this Meridian
> Voice Service. Some of these announcements are updated daily, like the
> Cafeteria Menu, and others once in a while, like the Job Fair Announcement
> or the Inclement Weather Announcement.
>
>
>
> Any ideas?
>
>
>
> We have Unity Connection and IPCC if that helps.
>
>
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
>
>
> Edgardo (Ed) Perez
>
> Assistant Director
>
> Network Services
>
> Southwest Research Institute, Information Technology Center,
>
> 6220 Culebra Rd., P.O. Drawer 28510, San Antonio, TX 78228-0510
>
> voice: (210) 522-2880, fax: (210) 522-3424
>
> e-mail: edgardo.perez at swri.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110511/d0c939ed/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 09:36:40 -0400
From: "Matt Slaga (AM)" <matt.slaga at dimensiondata.com>
To: Tony Edwards <tonyedwards.rs at gmail.com>,
"cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] lync moc desktop p2p & p2m video calls ,
conferencing
Message-ID:
<5FE225375F6E3F4493474B90BC1B94EFC3AA0F475F at USISPCLEXDB01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
1. can my 10 pilot lync moc clients do p2p or p2m desktop video sessions with rt audio and rt video codecs with out going via ccm cluster or with out the help of ccm at all.
Yes, between themselves but not between a Cisco endpoint and a MOC endpoint.
2. just like ccm's sccp end points which will have a dn # , should my lync moc clients too need to have dn # or lync moc can audio & video call each other via their sip addresses or user names ?
You will configure each user for 'Enterprise Voice' and assign a tel URI which is their telephone number. Normally, this is an E164 number (i.e. tel:+12125551212)
3.from qos perspective , what tcp & udp ports should i have to mark and classify for rt audio or rt video signalling and payloads ? from my very limited understanding on lync so far , moc clients when they talk to lync server via sip , they do open up peer to peer sort of 1024 to 65534 sort of huge port range. which i gather , can we locked in to smaller range via in-band signalling. so as you can see here , i am totally confused on best possible qos templates to protect and give some sort of priority (perhaps IP Prec 2 or AF21) lync desktop video p2p and p2p sessions.
Out of the box, Lync clients use 1024-65535 for audio or video. This can be adjusted, search around technet for QoS settings.
3. i do gather that , lync do offer cac , similar to ccm. if that is the case , how much bw shall i have to configure for 2 x desktop video sessions ?
2 desktop video sessions at CIF will be around 512kbps. You also need to factor in audio though, don't think your 512k pipe will handle this well.
5. lastly , i was just checking nbar class maps on my is router and i spotted match protocol rtp audio and rtp video and rtp payload , but nbar match options does not offer rt audio or rt video to cover microsoft lync protocol matching. so , i am just wondering , are they both same or not. if they are not same , then perhaps , the bets i could do it is match tcp and udp port ranges of rt audio and rt video traffic streams.
Your best bet is to configure Lync to use different port ranges for audio and video and classify and mark on the edge switches.
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Tony Edwards
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 6:17 AM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] lync moc desktop p2p & p2m video calls , conferencing
hi guys,
can some one please guide me on the below queries?
i am planning to run a pilot with a lync2010 server with 10 odd lync moc clients on 10 user windows7 computers with an aim to
turn on a desktop video p2p and p2m ( conference) streams both with in lan environment as well as between 2 x wan site , separated by a 512k frame relay pipe.
in isolation i do have a ccm running with 10 sites with 100 sccp end points and lync platform will be totally separate to begin with while i trial desktop to desktop video.
so that being the aim , i am not sure on how to address following 4 aspects.
1. can my 10 pilot lync moc clients do p2p or p2m desktop video sessions with rt audio and rt video codecs with out going via ccm cluster or with out the help of ccm at all.
2. just like ccm's sccp end points which will have a dn # , should my lync moc clients too need to have dn # or lync moc can audio & video call each other via their sip addresses or user names ?
3.from qos perspective , what tcp & udp ports should i have to mark and classify for rt audio or rt video signalling and payloads ? from my very limited understanding on lync so far , moc clients when they talk to lync server via sip , they do open up peer to peer sort of 1024 to 65534 sort of huge port range. which i gather , can we locked in to smaller range via in-band signalling. so as you can see here , i am totally confused on best possible qos templates to protect and give some sort of priority (perhaps IP Prec 2 or AF21) lync desktop video p2p and p2p sessions.
4. i do gather that , lync do offer cac , similar to ccm. if that is the case , how much bw shall i have to configure for 2 x desktop video sessions ?
5. lastly , i was just checking nbar class maps on my is router and i spotted match protocol rtp audio and rtp video and rtp payload , but nbar match options does not offer rt audio or rt video to cover microsoft lync protocol matching. so , i am just wondering , are they both same or not. if they are not same , then perhaps , the bets i could do it is match tcp and udp port ranges of rt audio and rt video traffic streams.
thank you a lot.
tony
-----------------------------------------
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/20110511/30a4e15a/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 111051114365201901.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 17719 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110511/30a4e15a/attachment-0001.gif>
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 09:42:26 -0400
From: "Matt Slaga (AM)" <matt.slaga at dimensiondata.com>
To: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>, Tony Edwards
<tonyedwards.rs at gmail.com>
Cc: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] lync moc desktop p2p & p2m video calls ,
conferencing
Message-ID:
<5FE225375F6E3F4493474B90BC1B94EFC3AA0F4761 at USISPCLEXDB01.na.didata.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
On #3, yes, it will enable FEC for packet loss, however it also uses RTCP to determine bandwidth, jitter and delay to adjust audio and video as part of RT's adjustable codec. FEC only kicks in though if there is high bandwidth and high loss though. FEC takes two voice segments, say segment 1 and 2, and puts it into a single packet. The next packet will include segments 2 and 3, next 3 and 4 and so on. It ends up using more bandwidth overall which is why it is used for high bandwidth high loss situations.
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Scott Voll
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 2:09 PM
To: Tony Edwards
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] lync moc desktop p2p & p2m video calls , conferencing
Are you doing a pilot of both M$ and Ci$co? Comparing the two?
1. M$ can do the same stuff that CM does. It does not have to be configured together to get it working.
2. I think it depends on what your planing to end up with. are you planning on integrating the two?
3. Not really sure. Someone told me (YMMV) that MS just pushes more packets if it starts loosing packets. Can fill up pipes if its having issues getting the packets through. Don't know if it's true or not.
4. & 5. I don't know.
Scott
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Tony Edwards <tonyedwards.rs<http://tonyedwards.rs>@gmail.com<http://gmail.com>> wrote:
hi guys,
can some one please guide me on the below queries?
i am planning to run a pilot with a lync2010 server with 10 odd lync moc clients on 10 user windows7 computers with an aim to
turn on a desktop video p2p and p2m ( conference) streams both with in lan environment as well as between 2 x wan site , separated by a 512k frame relay pipe.
in isolation i do have a ccm running with 10 sites with 100 sccp end points and lync platform will be totally separate to begin with while i trial desktop to desktop video.
so that being the aim , i am not sure on how to address following 4 aspects.
1. can my 10 pilot lync moc clients do p2p or p2m desktop video sessions with rt audio and rt video codecs with out going via ccm cluster or with out the help of ccm at all.
2. just like ccm's sccp end points which will have a dn # , should my lync moc clients too need to have dn # or lync moc can audio & video call each other via their sip addresses or user names ?
3.from qos perspective , what tcp & udp ports should i have to mark and classify for rt audio or rt video signalling and payloads ? from my very limited understanding on lync so far , moc clients when they talk to lync server via sip , they do open up peer to peer sort of 1024 to 65534 sort of huge port range. which i gather , can we locked in to smaller range via in-band signalling. so as you can see here , i am totally confused on best possible qos templates to protect and give some sort of priority (perhaps IP Prec 2 or AF21) lync desktop video p2p and p2p sessions.
4. i do gather that , lync do offer cac , similar to ccm. if that is the case , how much bw shall i have to configure for 2 x desktop video sessions ?
5. lastly , i was just checking nbar class maps on my is router and i spotted match protocol rtp audio and rtp video and rtp payload , but nbar match options does not offer rt audio or rt video to cover microsoft lync protocol matching. so , i am just wondering , are they both same or not. if they are not same , then perhaps , the bets i could do it is match tcp and udp port ranges of rt audio and rt video traffic streams.
thank you a lot.
tony
_______________________________________________
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
itevomcid
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110511/8e682ff2/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 19
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 07:20:40 -0700
From: "Haas, Neal" <nhaas at co.fresno.ca.us>
To: "'Erik Goppel'" <egoppel at gmail.com>, "Buchanan, James"
<jbuchanan at presidio.com>
Cc: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Meridian Voice Service
Message-ID:
<A607839BE5327F4DB0719710592119C90116DE174A54 at COFMAIL2.intra.co.fresno.ca.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
We are moving from a Nortel Shop, We used Meridian, MER Mail and such. We currently use Unity Connection for all of our voice announcements. In the future we are going to IPCC because it has more features. I don't know if it is easier or not.
Neal
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Erik Goppel
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 12:06 AM
To: Buchanan, James
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Meridian Voice Service
Edgardo,
You might want to use IPCC instead of Unity to achieve this.
it is way easier, and more flexible than call handlers.
Good luck,
Erik Goppel
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:34 AM, Buchanan, James <jbuchanan at presidio.com<mailto:jbuchanan at presidio.com>> wrote:
Call handlers in Cisco Unity/Unity Connection voicemail handle this.
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> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>] On Behalf Of Edgardo Perez
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 5:02 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Meridian Voice Service
What is the equivalent service in the Cisco IP Telephony environment for the Nortel Meridian Voice Service?
We have some DNs in our company for announcements that use this Meridian Voice Service. Some of these announcements are updated daily, like the Cafeteria Menu, and others once in a while, like the Job Fair Announcement or the Inclement Weather Announcement.
Any ideas?
We have Unity Connection and IPCC if that helps.
Thanks for your help.
Edgardo (Ed) Perez
Assistant Director
Network Services
Southwest Research Institute, Information Technology Center,
6220 Culebra Rd., P.O. Drawer 28510, San Antonio, TX 78228-0510
voice: (210) 522-2880, fax: (210) 522-3424
e-mail: edgardo.perez at swri.org<mailto:edgardo.perez at swri.org>
_______________________________________________
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/20110511/8df0e9f7/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 20
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 10:22:33 -0400
From: "Buchanan, James" <jbuchanan at presidio.com>
To: "Haas, Neal" <nhaas at co.fresno.ca.us>, "'Erik Goppel'"
<egoppel at gmail.com>
Cc: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Meridian Voice Service
Message-ID:
<853687641CF93E40B362F112A3D8F3CE1FA6B5B7 at SOEXCH01.Presidio.Corp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
The ease of it is really determined by two things: a) For Unity/Unity Connection, is Greetings Administrator configured to administrator call handler greetings, and b) for IPCC, is there a recording interface configured to easily change prompt recordings?
If those two things are in place, either solution can be fairly easy.
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: Haas, Neal [mailto:nhaas at co.fresno.ca.us]
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 9:21 AM
To: 'Erik Goppel'; Buchanan, James
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] Meridian Voice Service
We are moving from a Nortel Shop, We used Meridian, MER Mail and such. We currently use Unity Connection for all of our voice announcements. In the future we are going to IPCC because it has more features. I don't know if it is easier or not.
Neal
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Erik Goppel
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 12:06 AM
To: Buchanan, James
Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Meridian Voice Service
Edgardo,
You might want to use IPCC instead of Unity to achieve this.
it is way easier, and more flexible than call handlers.
Good luck,
Erik Goppel
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 4:34 AM, Buchanan, James <jbuchanan at presidio.com<mailto:jbuchanan at presidio.com>> wrote:
Call handlers in Cisco Unity/Unity Connection voicemail handle this.
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> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>] On Behalf Of Edgardo Perez
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 5:02 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Meridian Voice Service
What is the equivalent service in the Cisco IP Telephony environment for the Nortel Meridian Voice Service?
We have some DNs in our company for announcements that use this Meridian Voice Service. Some of these announcements are updated daily, like the Cafeteria Menu, and others once in a while, like the Job Fair Announcement or the Inclement Weather Announcement.
Any ideas?
We have Unity Connection and IPCC if that helps.
Thanks for your help.
Edgardo (Ed) Perez
Assistant Director
Network Services
Southwest Research Institute, Information Technology Center,
6220 Culebra Rd., P.O. Drawer 28510, San Antonio, TX 78228-0510
voice: (210) 522-2880, fax: (210) 522-3424
e-mail: edgardo.perez at swri.org<mailto:edgardo.perez at swri.org>
_______________________________________________
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/20110511/449d13b8/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 21
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 10:08:15 -0500
From: Bantz John F <BantzJohnF at johndeere.com>
To: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Integration between CM 7 and an Avaya switch
Message-ID:
<BC0343EFCAEF1C4282C145F379E6A51A026376A33C at edxmb31.jdnet.deere.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Quick update for the group in case you were curious.
We did get our H.323 Tie trunk between our Avaya & Cisco systems working.
It ended up being two things. First, on the Avaya side, there is a special application that needed to be turned on called "SA8507 - H245 support with other vendors". This is a $0 feature, but you do have to pay Avaya a fee to update your license file and turn it on, but it was minor. Second, we turned off "Enable Outbound FastStart" in the Gateway on the Cisco side. After making these changes, everything came up and we are now able to make calls in both directions!
Thanks
John Bantz
John Deere - Global Infrastructure Services
515-267-4628 - office
515-314-6478 - cell
BantzJohnF at JohnDeere.Com<mailto:BantzJohnF%40JohnDeere.Com>
CONFIDENTIALITY. This electronic mail and any files transmitted with it may contain information proprietary to Deere & Company, or one of its subsidiaries or affiliates, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed, shall be maintained in confidence and not disclosed to third parties without the written consent of the sender. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the electronic mail to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this electronic mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this electronic mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by return mail.
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Bantz John F
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 6:51 PM
To: ATIENZA, Gonzalo; Haas, Neal; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Integration between CM 7 and an Avaya switch
Thanks for the links and the tips!
We are working with TAC right now trying to get this up and working.
We have it setup using H.323 with a trunk on the Avaya side and a Gateway configured on the CM side. It appears that the connection is up. We can place calls from the Avaya side, and they will traverse the IP Trunk and ring on the Cisco phones, but we cannot place calls from Cisco to Avaya. TAC tells us that it looks like CM is trying to place the call, but not getting a response from Avaya. When I watch the Avaya trunk during test calls from CM to Avaya, I don't see anything hitting it.
Tomorrow we are going to setup port mirroring on the data ports on the Avaya side and the Cisco side and see if we see packets going both ways when we make test calls. If I see packets from the CM IP Address hitting the Avaya CLAN card, but the call is failing, I will assume that TAC is correct and the Avaya side is not responding. If I don't see any packets hitting the Avaya side coming from CM, we will then look at the port that CM is connected to on the other side, place more test calls and see if CM is sending packets out towards the Avaya side. If it is, then we should be able to assume that we have something odd going on in our LAN/WAN that is blocking the traffic in that direction.
We will also take a look at the info from the links Neil sent and from Gonzalo's suggestions and see if we can make it work.
Thanks
John Bantz
John Deere - Global Infrastructure Services
515-267-4628 - office
515-314-6478 - cell
BantzJohnF at JohnDeere.Com<mailto:BantzJohnF%40JohnDeere.Com>
CONFIDENTIALITY. This electronic mail and any files transmitted with it may contain information proprietary to Deere & Company, or one of its subsidiaries or affiliates, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed, shall be maintained in confidence and not disclosed to third parties without the written consent of the sender. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the electronic mail to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this electronic mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this electronic mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by return mail.
From: ATIENZA, Gonzalo [mailto:Gonzalo.ATIENZA at LA.LOGICALIS.COM]
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 6:25 PM
To: Haas, Neal; Bantz John F; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] Integration between CM 7 and an Avaya switch
I?ve worked with an integration between Avaya and UCM 7.
The only thing configured on the UCM was H323 GWs pointing to the H323 cards from the Avaya platform, that?s pretty much all there is...
There was a problem with DTMFs at some point, Avaya works with in-band DTMFs, and as you may know, with H323 UCM sends them OOB. Somehow the problem was solved by the Avaya engineers, doing something on their platform.
To avoid that you could try using SIP, configuring on the UCM to use RFC 2833...
Hope it helps!
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Haas, Neal
Sent: lunes, 02 de mayo de 2011 07:32 p.m.
To: 'Bantz John F'; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Integration between CM 7 and an Avaya switch
http://www.jaymzworld.com/w/images/0/07/Cisco-ses.pdf
https://devconnect.avaya.com/public/download/interop/CUCM-IPO-SIPtrk.pdf
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Bantz John F
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 2:43 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Integration between CM 7 and an Avaya switch
Does anyone have any documentation on integrating an Avaya ACM 4.x and CM 7?
We are trying to connect the two systems with an H.323 or SIP trunk so we can extension dial between the two systems.
We have found documents showing us how to integrate a CM 4 and an Avaya, but cannot find anything on CM 7.
Thanks
John Bantz
John Deere - Global Infrastructure Services
515-267-4628 - office
515-314-6478 - cell
BantzJohnF at JohnDeere.Com<mailto:BantzJohnF%40JohnDeere.Com>
CONFIDENTIALITY. This electronic mail and any files transmitted with it may contain information proprietary to Deere & Company, or one of its subsidiaries or affiliates, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed, shall be maintained in confidence and not disclosed to third parties without the written consent of the sender. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the electronic mail to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this electronic mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this electronic mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by return mail.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110511/53587c4a/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 22
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 10:21:29 -0500
From: Robert Kulagowski <rkulagow at gmail.com>
To: "cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)"
<cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] suggested/best practices for DHCP settings
on routers
Message-ID: <BANLkTik7boQ9xuMXPTk=A1cXzrQE_=rhTw at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca> wrote:
> Question: does this command just disable logging or conflict testing altogether?
In the 12.4(9)T era (which is when we first ran into this issue, it
kept IP addresses from being eaten up in the DHCP pool and _never_
being made available. Not sure what version your're deploying, but as
a test you can make a micro DHCP pool of 3 or 4 addresses (by
reserving the rest of the range as unavailable) and just see what
happens in your environment.
------------------------------
Message: 23
Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 11:49:50 -0400
From: Daniel Martin <daniel.martin at cae.com>
To: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Subscriber and DHCP Servers for Expansion of
CUCM Cluster
Message-ID:
<036E318629FE72468FE7FD44C4C798664E5FBBBE2E at CAEMEX80.caecorp.cae.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi,
I would like to get the community's feedback on Subscribers and DHCP Servers setup for a cluster of 6000-7000 phones. We currently have about 2000 phones running off two 7835 subscribers which are also the DHCP servers. The 7835 are old and must be replaced. We will be adding between 4000-5000 IP phones in the next 12-24 months for a total of about 6000. With softphone and mobility, that will go close to 7500 devices I project long term.
The cluster is located in the headquarters within multiple computer rooms.
What would be the recommended architecture for subscribers?
- Currently looking at having 3 x 7845 for Subs
- 2 CCM Groups to have all phones split 50-50
CUCM Group1 CUCM Group2
Sub A Sub B
Sub B Sub A
Sub C Sub C
What would be the recommended setup for DHCP service?
- Currently looking at having Sub C be the primary DHCP Server and have one of the other Subs as backup DHCP Server
As per Cisco Sales Support, I need two Mobility servers as well. Are other people using these? Recommendations?
Any feedback would be much appreciated.
Daniel.
Daniel Martin
Chef de Groupe - Gestion du R?seau des TI
Group Leader - IT Network Management
CAE Inc.
St-Laurent, Qu?bec Canada
H4T 1G6
T?l: 1-514-341-2000 x4878
Fax: 1-514-340-5489
daniel.martin at cae.com<mailto:daniel.martin at cae.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20110511/10d4c4fa/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 91, Issue 10
******************************************
More information about the cisco-voip
mailing list