[cisco-voip] cisco-voip Digest, Vol 132, Issue 27
Dharambir kumar varma
dharambirku at gmail.com
Thu Oct 30 16:13:14 EDT 2014
Hi,
I have one problem......
At one location, all cisco phone are going register/ unregister in couple
hours.
Local Gateway is as MGCP with SRST.
where can i check logs whicn confirm me this register/Unregister message.
In RTMT tool i did not find. Culd u please help me on this.
Thanks in advance!!
Dharam
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:30 PM, <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: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Scott Voll)
> 2. Callmanager TomCat (Jason Aarons (AM))
> 3. Re: Callmanager TomCat (Josh Warcop)
> 4. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Anthony Holloway)
> 5. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Ryan Ratliff (rratliff))
> 6. Re: Callmanager TomCat (Ryan Ratliff (rratliff))
> 7. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Scott Voll)
> 8. Re: Callmanager TomCat (Chris Ward (chrward))
> 9. Re: Callmanager TomCat (Josh Warcop)
> 10. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Anthony Holloway)
> 11. Re: Callmanager TomCat (Jason Aarons (AM))
> 12. DirSync Not Generating Logs? (Matthew Loraditch)
> 13. any CCW users out there? how do i delete an estimate?
> (Lelio Fulgenzi)
> 14. Re: DirSync Not Generating Logs? (Jason Aarons (AM))
> 15. Re: DirSync Not Generating Logs? (Matthew Loraditch)
> 16. Re: any CCW users out there? how do i delete an estimate?
> (Matthew Loraditch)
> 17. Re: BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue (Mike )
> 18. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Erick Wellnitz)
> 19. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Wes Sisk (wsisk))
> 20. Re: BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue (Josh Warcop)
> 21. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Josh Warcop)
> 22. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Brian Meade)
> 23. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Erick Wellnitz)
> 24. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Josh Warcop)
> 25. Any experience with services for updating the LIDB?
> (Robert Kulagowski)
> 26. CUCM 10.5 VM boot-up time? (Zoltan.Kelemen at Emerson.com)
> 27. Re: CUCM 10.5 VM boot-up time? (Matthew Loraditch)
> 28. Re: CUCM 10.5 VM boot-up time? (Heim, Dennis)
> 29. Re: CUCM 10.5 VM boot-up time? (Maciej Karpinski)
> 30. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Scott Voll)
> 31. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (MManly at TEP.com)
> 32. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Erick Wellnitz)
> 33. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Ryan Ratliff (rratliff))
> 34. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Scott Voll)
> 35. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Ryan Ratliff (rratliff))
> 36. Re: Remove lines on phones with BAT (Erick Wellnitz)
> 37. LDAP search in Jabber for Windows 10.5 (Jason Aarons (AM))
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 09:20:25 -0700
> From: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> To: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <rratliff at cisco.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID:
> <CAHgd+3_r3Jo5HRny=-bXa-3Efw5nXUje62TP=
> j+6MKiBoJK8NA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> no they are all 7961 running SCCP
>
> Scott
>
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
>
> > All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >
> > -Ryan
> >
> > On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >
> > we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines on
> > all the phones
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > scott
> >
> > CM 8.6.2
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20141029/2d986219/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 17:46:43 +0000
> From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>
> To: "cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)"
> <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Callmanager TomCat
> Message-ID:
>
> <2EB6888CFB98614EA7384BEB9AF8B382112E2E at usispsvexdb03.na.didata.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Customer is asking if they can leave CallManager > CCMAdmin > Server > IP
> address and change the Tomcat Certificate to IP Address for Jabber for
> Windows client to be happy and not prompt an error first time opening? Can
> you even do that in CUCM? So keep the ip address as the Subject Alternate
> Name?
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141029/b32a0e1c/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 13:56:13 -0400
> From: Josh Warcop <josh at warcop.com>
> To: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>, "cisco-voip
> (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Callmanager TomCat
> Message-ID: <BLU404-EAS3608BE7C29CA7A5D3A3105FB39C0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Not recommended approach. SSL future guidelines dictates that non approved
> TLDs in SAN names will no longer be supported. IP address and short names
> in SANs is a bandaid. The proper way to to change the server name setting
> to the FQDN and ensure every device is getting proper DNS suffix and DNS
> servers.
>
> The second problem is that Jabber doesn't just look at the tomcat. It also
> checks callmanager.pen which should also be signed by a valid CA using
> valid subject and alternate names.
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Jason Aarons (AM)<mailto:jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>
> Sent: ?10/?29/?2014 1:50 PM
> To: cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)<mailto:
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Callmanager TomCat
>
> Customer is asking if they can leave CallManager > CCMAdmin > Server > IP
> address and change the Tomcat Certificate to IP Address for Jabber for
> Windows client to be happy and not prompt an error first time opening? Can
> you even do that in CUCM? So keep the ip address as the Subject Alternate
> Name?
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141029/b6a0608a/attachment-0001.html
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 13:05:36 -0500
> From: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
> To: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <rratliff at cisco.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID:
> <CACRCJOhxu4LVWjzFUr5=
> Zdj7ssQmFNOMOAXsWVeh-9ocYz5TJw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Scott,
>
> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones laying
> about, unable to save a life when people depend on the reliability of 911.
>
> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or limitations:
> Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the phones.
>
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com
> > wrote:
>
> > All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >
> > -Ryan
> >
> > On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >
> > we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines on
> > all the phones
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > scott
> >
> > CM 8.6.2
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20141029/e8b0f8d3/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:11:41 +0000
> From: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <rratliff at cisco.com>
> To: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID: <592790E7-D9DD-4F6F-9773-9D455791F328 at cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of somebody
> picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting dialtone.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Scott,
>
> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the reliability
> of 911.
>
> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or limitations:
> Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the phones.
>
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com<mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>> wrote:
> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com<mailto:
> svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
>
> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines on
> all the phones
>
> Thanks
>
> scott
>
> CM 8.6.2
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141029/e8284759/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:13:44 +0000
> From: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <rratliff at cisco.com>
> To: Josh Warcop <josh at warcop.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Callmanager TomCat
> Message-ID: <0116AF5A-56FD-47B3-98AD-CC81D693D218 at cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> It's not only not recommended but UCM won't put an IP address in cert
> subject or SAN.
>
> For Jabber it's a matter of getting signed certs, getting the certs loaded
> onto the PC, and fixing System->Server values so UDS doesn't screw up
> things by giving IPs to the client (this may be only a concern with MRA).
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 29, 2014, at 1:56 PM, Josh Warcop <josh at warcop.com<mailto:
> josh at warcop.com>> wrote:
>
> Not recommended approach. SSL future guidelines dictates that non approved
> TLDs in SAN names will no longer be supported. IP address and short names
> in SANs is a bandaid. The proper way to to change the server name setting
> to the FQDN and ensure every device is getting proper DNS suffix and DNS
> servers.
>
> The second problem is that Jabber doesn't just look at the tomcat. It also
> checks callmanager.pen which should also be signed by a valid CA using
> valid subject and alternate names.
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Jason Aarons (AM)<mailto:jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>
> Sent: ?10/?29/?2014 1:50 PM
> To: cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)<mailto:
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Callmanager TomCat
>
>
> Customer is asking if they can leave CallManager > CCMAdmin > Server > IP
> address and change the Tomcat Certificate to IP Address for Jabber for
> Windows client to be happy and not prompt an error first time opening? Can
> you even do that in CUCM? So keep the ip address as the Subject Alternate
> Name?
>
>
>
>
> <Mail Attachment.txt>_______________________________________________
> 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/20141029/5eb40d8c/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 11:33:33 -0700
> From: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> To: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <rratliff at cisco.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAHgd+39-33daQxQKrPG_Zt4S+oqhSp_D7cHC8GmPU0GKuz83fg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment? Burning
> two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
>
> scott
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
>
> > Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> > I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of somebody
> > picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting dialtone.
> >
> > -Ryan
> >
> > On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> > avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Scott,
> >
> > SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> > laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the reliability
> > of 911.
> >
> > Here's one option without knowing your environment design or
> > limitations: Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the
> phones.
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> > rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >
> >> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >>
> >> -Ryan
> >>
> >> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >>
> >> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines on
> >> all the phones
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> scott
> >>
> >> CM 8.6.2
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/20141029/7d006e25/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:40:17 +0000
> From: "Chris Ward (chrward)" <chrward at cisco.com>
> To: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>, "cisco-voip
> (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Callmanager TomCat
> Message-ID:
> <C3D1FCA271936B48839E081F898E17AA15ED08F7 at xmb-rcd-x13.cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> IP/Hostname isn't the issue. It's the self-signed certificate that
> CUCM/IMP is using.
>
> The fix is either to get a cert signed by a publicly trusted cert
> authority like GoDaddy or Verisign OR you need a CA on the local network
> (AD) that the Windows system trusts (has the root cert loaded) and use that
> to generate a new cert for CUCM.
>
> The latter is free except for time and allows a little more flexibility.
>
> +Chris
> TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Jason Aarons (AM)
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 1:47 PM
> To: cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Callmanager TomCat
>
> Customer is asking if they can leave CallManager > CCMAdmin > Server > IP
> address and change the Tomcat Certificate to IP Address for Jabber for
> Windows client to be happy and not prompt an error first time opening? Can
> you even do that in CUCM? So keep the ip address as the Subject Alternate
> Name?
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141029/ae794ede/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 15:01:46 -0400
> From: Josh Warcop <josh at warcop.com>
> To: "Chris Ward (chrward)" <chrward at cisco.com>, "Jason Aarons (AM)"
> <jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>, "cisco-voip
> (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Callmanager TomCat
> Message-ID: <BLU404-EAS4152B25D6E26FE3803AB698B39C0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> 3rd party CA signed is important for an actual BYOD strategy so you're not
> doing certificate deployment to non-corporate devices. Granted it costs a
> bit more but the I rather pay that vs. Managing an internal CA properly.
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Chris Ward (chrward)<mailto:chrward at cisco.com>
> Sent: ?10/?29/?2014 2:43 PM
> To: Jason Aarons (AM)<mailto:jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>; cisco-voip (
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Callmanager TomCat
>
> IP/Hostname isn't the issue. It's the self-signed certificate that
> CUCM/IMP is using.
>
> The fix is either to get a cert signed by a publicly trusted cert
> authority like GoDaddy or Verisign OR you need a CA on the local network
> (AD) that the Windows system trusts (has the root cert loaded) and use that
> to generate a new cert for CUCM.
>
> The latter is free except for time and allows a little more flexibility.
>
> +Chris
> TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Jason Aarons (AM)
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 1:47 PM
> To: cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Callmanager TomCat
>
> Customer is asking if they can leave CallManager > CCMAdmin > Server > IP
> address and change the Tomcat Certificate to IP Address for Jabber for
> Windows client to be happy and not prompt an error first time opening? Can
> you even do that in CUCM? So keep the ip address as the Subject Alternate
> Name?
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141029/f62dcef4/attachment-0001.html
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:03:14 -0500
> From: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
> To: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID:
> <CACRCJOjfH05nQUnib85ab8x3Pg0UgB2vR3O3VD_qSC_qbRD=-
> w at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default state of
> the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a CSS
> restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID in
> most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> > Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
> >
> > scott
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> > rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> >> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of somebody
> >> picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting dialtone.
> >>
> >> -Ryan
> >>
> >> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> >> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Scott,
> >>
> >> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> >> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the
> reliability
> >> of 911.
> >>
> >> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or
> >> limitations: Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the
> phones.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >>>
> >>> -Ryan
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >>>
> >>> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines on
> >>> all the phones
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>> scott
> >>>
> >>> CM 8.6.2
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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/20141029/e5ada897/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 19:31:22 +0000
> From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>
> To: "Chris Ward (chrward)" <chrward at cisco.com>, "cisco-voip
> (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Callmanager TomCat
> Message-ID:
>
> <2EB6888CFB98614EA7384BEB9AF8B382113643 at usispsvexdb03.na.didata.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Tomcat was signed by Enterprise Root that clients have. The Jabber 10.5
> with cisco_uds you must be FQDN under CCMAdmin > System > Server for
> everything, all.
>
> From: Chris Ward (chrward) [mailto:chrward at cisco.com] CCM
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 2:40 PM
> To: Jason Aarons (AM); cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)
> Subject: RE: Callmanager TomCat
>
> IP/Hostname isn't the issue. It's the self-signed certificate that
> CUCM/IMP is using.
>
> The fix is either to get a cert signed by a publicly trusted cert
> authority like GoDaddy or Verisign OR you need a CA on the local network
> (AD) that the Windows system trusts (has the root cert loaded) and use that
> to generate a new cert for CUCM.
>
> The latter is free except for time and allows a little more flexibility.
>
> +Chris
> TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Jason Aarons (AM)
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 1:47 PM
> To: cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>)
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Callmanager TomCat
>
> Customer is asking if they can leave CallManager > CCMAdmin > Server > IP
> address and change the Tomcat Certificate to IP Address for Jabber for
> Windows client to be happy and not prompt an error first time opening? Can
> you even do that in CUCM? So keep the ip address as the Subject Alternate
> Name?
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141029/72f44238/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 19:43:12 +0000
> From: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>
> To: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] DirSync Not Generating Logs?
> Message-ID:
> <C75AF2AD9308C246AFBDDB994E3E29832F0F7DF1 at PHANES.helion.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Unity Connection 10.5SU1, trying to enable LDAP sync.. not working, no
> logs for DirSync service, DirSync is activated and running.. just not doing
> anything..
> Any hints on another log I can look at or am I calling TAC?
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
> 1965 Greenspring Drive
> Timonium, MD 21093
>
> direct voice. 443.541.1518
> fax. 410.252.9284
>
> Twitter<http://twitter.com/heliontech> | Facebook<
> http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Helion/252157915296> | Website<
> http://www.heliontechnologies.com/> | Email Support<mailto:
> support at heliontechnologies.com?subject=Technical%20Support%20Request>
> Support Phone. 410.252.8830
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141029/70f3ed0b/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 15:55:43 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> To: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] any CCW users out there? how do i delete an
> estimate?
> Message-ID: <72624639.829308.1414612543110.JavaMail.root at uoguelph.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
> For the life of me, I can't figure out how to delete an estimate in CCW.
>
>
>
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
> Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
> University of Guelph
>
> 519?824?4120 Ext 56354
> lelio at uoguelph.ca
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
> Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
> Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141029/798d2887/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 20:04:25 +0000
> From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>
> To: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>,
> "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] DirSync Not Generating Logs?
> Message-ID:
>
> <2EB6888CFB98614EA7384BEB9AF8B382113795 at usispsvexdb03.na.didata.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Utils network capture do you see traffic to ldap server?
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Matthew Loraditch
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 3:43 PM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [cisco-voip] DirSync Not Generating Logs?
>
>
> Unity Connection 10.5SU1, trying to enable LDAP sync.. not working, no
> logs for DirSync service, DirSync is activated and running.. just not doing
> anything..
> Any hints on another log I can look at or am I calling TAC?
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch ? CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
> 1965 Greenspring Drive
> Timonium, MD 21093
>
> direct voice. 443.541.1518
> fax. 410.252.9284
>
> Twitter<http://twitter.com/heliontech> | Facebook<
> http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Helion/252157915296> | Website<
> http://www.heliontechnologies.com/> | Email Support<mailto:
> support at heliontechnologies.com?subject=Technical%20Support%20Request>
> Support Phone. 410.252.8830
>
>
>
>
> itevomcid
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141029/c4d6f62d/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 20:07:53 +0000
> From: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>
> To: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>,
> "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] DirSync Not Generating Logs?
> Message-ID:
> <C75AF2AD9308C246AFBDDB994E3E29832F0F7F77 at PHANES.helion.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Yes, that occurred to me about 2 minutes after I sent this? DOH, my custom
> filter is not working? argh.
> Thanks!
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch ? CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
> 1965 Greenspring Drive
> Timonium, MD 21093
>
> direct voice. 443.541.1518
> fax. 410.252.9284
>
> Twitter<http://twitter.com/heliontech> | Facebook<
> http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Helion/252157915296> | Website<
> http://www.heliontechnologies.com/> | Email Support<mailto:
> support at heliontechnologies.com?subject=Technical%20Support%20Request>
> Support Phone. 410.252.8830
>
>
> From: Jason Aarons (AM) [mailto:jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 4:04 PM
> To: Matthew Loraditch; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: RE: DirSync Not Generating Logs?
>
> Utils network capture do you see traffic to ldap server?
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Matthew Loraditch
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 3:43 PM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] DirSync Not Generating Logs?
>
>
> Unity Connection 10.5SU1, trying to enable LDAP sync.. not working, no
> logs for DirSync service, DirSync is activated and running.. just not doing
> anything..
> Any hints on another log I can look at or am I calling TAC?
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch ? CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
> 1965 Greenspring Drive
> Timonium, MD 21093
>
> direct voice. 443.541.1518
> fax. 410.252.9284
>
> Twitter<http://twitter.com/heliontech> | Facebook<
> http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Helion/252157915296> | Website<
> http://www.heliontechnologies.com/> | Email Support<mailto:
> support at heliontechnologies.com?subject=Technical%20Support%20Request>
> Support Phone. 410.252.8830
>
>
>
>
> itevomcid
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141029/c9d128ac/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 20:11:10 +0000
> From: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>, cisco-voip voyp list
> <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] any CCW users out there? how do i delete an
> estimate?
> Message-ID:
> <C75AF2AD9308C246AFBDDB994E3E29832F0F7FB9 at PHANES.helion.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Yeah I don?t think you can.. I don?t use them but I use ccw all the time
> and what I see for deals, orders, etc I don?t see here for estimates.
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch ? CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
> 1965 Greenspring Drive
> Timonium, MD 21093
>
> direct voice. 443.541.1518
> fax. 410.252.9284
>
> Twitter<http://twitter.com/heliontech> | Facebook<
> http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Helion/252157915296> | Website<
> http://www.heliontechnologies.com/> | Email Support<mailto:
> support at heliontechnologies.com?subject=Technical%20Support%20Request>
> Support Phone. 410.252.8830
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Lelio Fulgenzi
> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 3:56 PM
> To: cisco-voip voyp list
> Subject: [cisco-voip] any CCW users out there? how do i delete an estimate?
>
>
> For the life of me, I can't figure out how to delete an estimate in CCW.
>
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
> Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
> University of Guelph
>
> 519?824?4120 Ext 56354
> lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://www.uoguelph.ca/ccs>
> Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
> Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141029/0c053d5b/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 16:18:43 -0400
> From: "Mike " <mikeeo at msn.com>
> To: "'Mike '" <mikeeo at msn.com>, "'Josh Warcop'" <josh at warcop.com>,
> "'Ryan Ratliff \(rratliff\)'" <rratliff at cisco.com>
> Cc: 'cisco-voip voyp list' <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
> Message-ID: <BLU436-SMTP184ED1D063152ED879DF02EC59C0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Well I finally have my licenses issued under UCSS.
>
>
>
> Why does it have to be such a process to get entitlement?
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Mike
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 11:04 AM
> To: 'Josh Warcop'; 'Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)'
> Cc: 'cisco-voip voyp list'
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
>
>
> It?s the run around you get from GLO. The BE6k migration guide clearly
> states if you are on BE5K and have valid UCSS you are entitled to BE6K
> licenses at no-cost.
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Josh Warcop
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 10:41 AM
> To: Mike ; 'Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)'
> Cc: 'cisco-voip voyp list'
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
>
>
> It all works fairly well IMO. Are you running pre license checks? AKA
> license migration utility?
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
>
> _____
>
> From: Mike <mailto:mikeeo at msn.com>
> Sent: ?10/?20/?2014 10:23 AM
> To: 'Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)' <mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>
> Cc: 'Josh Warcop' <mailto:josh at warcop.com> ; 'cisco-voip voyp list'
> <mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
> Ryan,
>
>
>
> I did exactly that. The customer (car dealer) had 3 sites. One completely
> new ordered BE6K bundle. Second had CUCM/UCN 7.x with no UCSS we ordered
> BE6K bundle with 25 UCL promo then did a get current promo for the rest of
> the licenses and the 3rd site which is the site in question had valid UCSS
> on a BE5K and ordered the BE6K-ST-BDL-K9= which had everything
> pre-installed.
>
>
>
> The migration is complete and we are just waiting to get the licenses owed
> to them.
>
>
>
> I have to do a BE6K 8.6 to 9.1.2 upgrade next week and I know it?s going
> to be a nightmare getting those licenses issued(valid UCSS).
>
>
>
> Cisco needs to stream line this issue because its not working for guys in
> the field. I start with Cisco in 2 weeks building collab labs and will be
> working with the BU and maybe I?ll let them know about the frustrations.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> From: Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) [mailto:rratliff at cisco.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 10:12 AM
> To: Mike
> Cc: Josh Warcop; cisco-voip voyp list
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
>
>
> While on the topic and since you mentioned ordering the UCS. Please make
> sure when ordering BE6Ks for customers that you follow the ordering guide
> and use the correct top-level BE6K SKU (eg BE6K-ST-BDL-K9=).
>
> I've had a few escalations for folks that ordered UCSC-C220-M3SBE= (the
> BE6K spare) and blow up when it doesn't come with any software
> pre-installed.
>
>
>
> -Ryan
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2014, at 9:26 AM, Mike <mikeeo at msn.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I did verify UCSS and even have the email from the UCSS team. I was able
> to order the software and the customer ordered the UCS C-220. The migration
> is done we are now up against the clock waiting for the licenses.
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Josh Warcop
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 9:06 AM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
>
>
> First email ucss-support at external.cisco.com with your UCSS and ESW
> contract numbers to see if it was ever set up correctly. Ask about
> association and license verification. Once cleared there you should be able
> to use the PUT tool to create an order for upgrade licensing based on your
> ESW number.
>
> The next course of action with the licensing team is to request being sent
> to the upgrades team or the on duty manager. There is a whole separate team
> for upgrades once reached via mp-upgrades at cisco.com.
>
> In all correspondence include the UCSS PAK, the ESW contract, and the
> Cisco SO number. The Cisco SO number is your golden ticket.
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
>
> _____
>
> From: Mike <mailto:mikeeo at msn.com>
> Sent: ?10/?20/?2014 8:52 AM
> To: 'Matthew Loraditch' <mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com> ;
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
> I have a valid UCSS contract for 100 BE5K licenses. I know the first level
> guys are contractors, but it?s like he didn?t even read my case notes and
> just closed it.
>
>
>
> From: Matthew Loraditch [mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 8:45 AM
> To: Mike ; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
>
>
> I have not had any problem with this. What exactly do you have license
> wise?
>
>
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch ? CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
>
> 1965 Greenspring Drive
> Timonium, MD 21093
>
> direct voice. 443.541.1518
> fax. 410.252.9284
>
> Twitter <http://twitter.com/heliontech> | Facebook <
> http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Helion/252157915296> | Website <
> http://www.heliontechnologies.com/> | Email Support <mailto:
> support at heliontechnologies.com?subject=Technical%20Support%20Request>
>
> Support Phone. 410.252.8830
>
>
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Mike
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 8:24 AM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
>
>
> I see quite a few partners on this list and I?m wondering how many have
> had trouble getting licenses from Cisco licensing when you had a valid
> UCSSS contract?
>
>
>
> I?ve opened 2 cases and put in the customers valid UCSS contract and they
> are immediately closed with the same verbiage ?contact your reseller to
> purchase the upgrade?
>
>
>
> Any ideas?
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20141029/90d2cc87/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 14:13:27 -0600
> From: Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> To: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID:
> <CAK0wOsCQd=
> pzvX8LEiZMj_PEw3c_f+4U76sP_ybAPQVQ+_b7Jg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision if
> someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the nearest logged
> out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm not a lawyer so take
> that for what you will.
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default state
> of
> > the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a CSS
> > restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID in
> > most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> >> Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
> >>
> >> scott
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> >>> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of somebody
> >>> picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting dialtone.
> >>>
> >>> -Ryan
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> >>> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Scott,
> >>>
> >>> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> >>> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the
> reliability
> >>> of 911.
> >>>
> >>> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or
> >>> limitations: Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the
> phones.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >>> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >>>>
> >>>> -Ryan
> >>>>
> >>>> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >>>>
> >>>> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines
> on
> >>>> all the phones
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>>
> >>>> scott
> >>>>
> >>>> CM 8.6.2
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> 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
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20141029/d0783cd3/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 19
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 21:17:51 +0000
> From: "Wes Sisk (wsisk)" <wsisk at cisco.com>
> To: Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>, Scott Voll
> <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID: <54F911D2-D58E-4AE7-85AF-619FBED88D1D at cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Agreed with Ryan, Anthony, and Erick.
>
> Give the phones DN?s, even just internal DN?s. It is ?burning a DN? in the
> sense that number is allocated. That number does not have to be a DID. Give
> the phones/lines a CSS that PLAR?s to a help desk. Or at least allow them
> to invoke local emergency services - private or public.
>
> -Wes
>
> On Oct 29, 2014, at 3:13 PM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com
> <mailto:ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision if
> someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the nearest logged
> out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm not a lawyer so take
> that for what you will.
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default state of
> the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a CSS
> restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID in
> most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com<mailto:
> svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
> So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
>
> scott
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com<mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>> wrote:
> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of somebody
> picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting dialtone.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Scott,
>
> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the reliability
> of 911.
>
> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or limitations:
> Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the phones.
>
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com<mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>> wrote:
> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com<mailto:
> svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
>
> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines on
> all the phones
>
> Thanks
>
> scott
>
> CM 8.6.2
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141029/a302fc76/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 17:35:48 -0400
> From: Josh Warcop <josh at warcop.com>
> To: "Mike " <mikeeo at msn.com>, "'Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)'"
> <rratliff at cisco.com>
> Cc: 'cisco-voip voyp list' <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
> Message-ID: <BLU404-EAS267101F3B86FC2FC28C08C0B39C0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> My first email always states to forward immediately to migration support
> because first level has no access to 90% of what I'm usually doing.
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Mike <mailto:mikeeo at msn.com>
> Sent: ?10/?29/?2014 4:19 PM
> To: 'Mike '<mailto:mikeeo at msn.com>; 'Josh Warcop'<mailto:josh at warcop.com>;
> 'Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)'<mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>
> Cc: 'cisco-voip voyp list'<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
> Well I finally have my licenses issued under UCSS.
>
>
>
> Why does it have to be such a process to get entitlement?
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Mike
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 11:04 AM
> To: 'Josh Warcop'; 'Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)'
> Cc: 'cisco-voip voyp list'
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
>
>
> It?s the run around you get from GLO. The BE6k migration guide clearly
> states if you are on BE5K and have valid UCSS you are entitled to BE6K
> licenses at no-cost.
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Josh Warcop
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 10:41 AM
> To: Mike ; 'Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)'
> Cc: 'cisco-voip voyp list'
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
>
>
> It all works fairly well IMO. Are you running pre license checks? AKA
> license migration utility?
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
>
> _____
>
> From: Mike <mailto:mikeeo at msn.com>
> Sent: ?10/?20/?2014 10:23 AM
> To: 'Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)' <mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>
> Cc: 'Josh Warcop' <mailto:josh at warcop.com> ; 'cisco-voip voyp list'
> <mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
> Ryan,
>
>
>
> I did exactly that. The customer (car dealer) had 3 sites. One completely
> new ordered BE6K bundle. Second had CUCM/UCN 7.x with no UCSS we ordered
> BE6K bundle with 25 UCL promo then did a get current promo for the rest of
> the licenses and the 3rd site which is the site in question had valid UCSS
> on a BE5K and ordered the BE6K-ST-BDL-K9= which had everything
> pre-installed.
>
>
>
> The migration is complete and we are just waiting to get the licenses owed
> to them.
>
>
>
> I have to do a BE6K 8.6 to 9.1.2 upgrade next week and I know it?s going
> to be a nightmare getting those licenses issued(valid UCSS).
>
>
>
> Cisco needs to stream line this issue because its not working for guys in
> the field. I start with Cisco in 2 weeks building collab labs and will be
> working with the BU and maybe I?ll let them know about the frustrations.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> From: Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) [mailto:rratliff at cisco.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 10:12 AM
> To: Mike
> Cc: Josh Warcop; cisco-voip voyp list
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
>
>
> While on the topic and since you mentioned ordering the UCS. Please make
> sure when ordering BE6Ks for customers that you follow the ordering guide
> and use the correct top-level BE6K SKU (eg BE6K-ST-BDL-K9=).
>
> I've had a few escalations for folks that ordered UCSC-C220-M3SBE= (the
> BE6K spare) and blow up when it doesn't come with any software
> pre-installed.
>
>
>
> -Ryan
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2014, at 9:26 AM, Mike <mikeeo at msn.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I did verify UCSS and even have the email from the UCSS team. I was able
> to order the software and the customer ordered the UCS C-220. The migration
> is done we are now up against the clock waiting for the licenses.
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Josh Warcop
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 9:06 AM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
>
>
> First email ucss-support at external.cisco.com with your UCSS and ESW
> contract numbers to see if it was ever set up correctly. Ask about
> association and license verification. Once cleared there you should be able
> to use the PUT tool to create an order for upgrade licensing based on your
> ESW number.
>
> The next course of action with the licensing team is to request being sent
> to the upgrades team or the on duty manager. There is a whole separate team
> for upgrades once reached via mp-upgrades at cisco.com.
>
> In all correspondence include the UCSS PAK, the ESW contract, and the
> Cisco SO number. The Cisco SO number is your golden ticket.
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
>
> _____
>
> From: Mike <mailto:mikeeo at msn.com>
> Sent: ?10/?20/?2014 8:52 AM
> To: 'Matthew Loraditch' <mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com> ;
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
> I have a valid UCSS contract for 100 BE5K licenses. I know the first level
> guys are contractors, but it?s like he didn?t even read my case notes and
> just closed it.
>
>
>
> From: Matthew Loraditch [mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 8:45 AM
> To: Mike ; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
>
>
> I have not had any problem with this. What exactly do you have license
> wise?
>
>
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch ? CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
>
> 1965 Greenspring Drive
> Timonium, MD 21093
>
> direct voice. 443.541.1518
> fax. 410.252.9284
>
> Twitter <http://twitter.com/heliontech> | Facebook <
> http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Helion/252157915296> | Website <
> http://www.heliontechnologies.com/> | Email Support <mailto:
> support at heliontechnologies.com?subject=Technical%20Support%20Request>
>
> Support Phone. 410.252.8830
>
>
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Mike
> Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 8:24 AM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [cisco-voip] BE5K to BE6K license with valid UCSS issue
>
>
>
> I see quite a few partners on this list and I?m wondering how many have
> had trouble getting licenses from Cisco licensing when you had a valid
> UCSSS contract?
>
>
>
> I?ve opened 2 cases and put in the customers valid UCSS contract and they
> are immediately closed with the same verbiage ?contact your reseller to
> purchase the upgrade?
>
>
>
> Any ideas?
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20141029/c353137b/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 21
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 17:40:42 -0400
> From: Josh Warcop <josh at warcop.com>
> To: Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>, Anthony Holloway
> <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID: <BLU404-EAS25636E91F8ED78712ADC8C6B39C0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Negative. A corporation is not required to offer 911 services to the
> internal PBX connected phones. The business pays the 911 access fees via
> their bill but that doesn't have to translate to an internally built
> system. The ACTUAL problem is that in states with E911 legislation is
> you'll get a very very very hefty bill from emergency services if they
> dispatch and you didn't tell them what building, floor, aisle, and cube
> they should respond to. Legally is one thing but it quickly becomes if you
> want to pay that fine for NOT having E911. If you don't have emergency
> responder be prepared to add it soon as many states are adding more E911
> laws.
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Erick Wellnitz<mailto:ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> Sent: ?10/?29/?2014 4:47 PM
> To: Anthony Holloway<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
>
> Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision if
> someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the nearest logged
> out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm not a lawyer so take
> that for what you will.
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default state
> of
> > the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a CSS
> > restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID in
> > most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> >> Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
> >>
> >> scott
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> >>> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of somebody
> >>> picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting dialtone.
> >>>
> >>> -Ryan
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> >>> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Scott,
> >>>
> >>> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> >>> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the
> reliability
> >>> of 911.
> >>>
> >>> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or
> >>> limitations: Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the
> phones.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >>> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >>>>
> >>>> -Ryan
> >>>>
> >>>> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >>>>
> >>>> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines
> on
> >>>> all the phones
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>>
> >>>> scott
> >>>>
> >>>> CM 8.6.2
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> 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
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20141029/f8987e1f/attachment-0001.html
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 22
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:17:22 -0400
> From: Brian Meade <bmeade90 at vt.edu>
> To: Josh Warcop <josh at warcop.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID:
> <CAGcuYh1E2FL=
> 0WFbrwCpCAxkcQDG-zy4WxzoHkfNr3egUA07aA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> That's dangerous info to pass around without being a lawyer. The law is
> going to vary state by state about whether all phones have to be able to
> dial 911. And legislation is constantly changing. Right now, there's
> Kari's law going around trying to get passed which will force everyone to
> not require any sort of access code to dial 911-
>
> http://www.change.org/p/let-hotel-phones-dial-911-easily-help-enact-kari-s-law
>
> Brian
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Josh Warcop <josh at warcop.com> wrote:
>
> > Negative. A corporation is not required to offer 911 services to the
> > internal PBX connected phones. The business pays the 911 access fees via
> > their bill but that doesn't have to translate to an internally built
> > system. The ACTUAL problem is that in states with E911 legislation is
> > you'll get a very very very hefty bill from emergency services if they
> > dispatch and you didn't tell them what building, floor, aisle, and cube
> > they should respond to. Legally is one thing but it quickly becomes if
> you
> > want to pay that fine for NOT having E911. If you don't have emergency
> > responder be prepared to add it soon as many states are adding more E911
> > laws.
> >
> > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > ------------------------------
> > From: Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> > Sent: ?10/?29/?2014 4:47 PM
> > To: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
> > Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> >
> > Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision
> > if someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the
> > nearest logged out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm not a
> > lawyer so take that for what you will.
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> > avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default state
> of
> > the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a CSS
> > restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID in
> > most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> > Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
> >
> > scott
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> > rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >
> > Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> > I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of somebody
> > picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting dialtone.
> >
> > -Ryan
> >
> > On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> > avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Scott,
> >
> > SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> > laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the reliability
> > of 911.
> >
> > Here's one option without knowing your environment design or
> > limitations: Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the
> phones.
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> > rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >
> > All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >
> > -Ryan
> >
> > On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >
> > we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines on
> > all the phones
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > scott
> >
> > CM 8.6.2
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20141029/565adf43/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 23
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 16:31:27 -0600
> From: Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> To: Brian Meade <bmeade90 at vt.edu>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID:
> <CAK0wOsDd0LC-TscS7=
> MsegeVuhdmpVC0W_z-rdJqc_PNpwSkjA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> The FCC is also looking at the possibility of regulating this. I'd be
> very, very wary of not providing emergency services in some way, shape or
> form. Even if it is to a security desk who then places the call.
>
> Personally, I don't want any of my clients to be the next one in the news
> because someone can't call for help.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Brian Meade <bmeade90 at vt.edu> wrote:
>
> > That's dangerous info to pass around without being a lawyer. The law is
> > going to vary state by state about whether all phones have to be able to
> > dial 911. And legislation is constantly changing. Right now, there's
> > Kari's law going around trying to get passed which will force everyone to
> > not require any sort of access code to dial 911-
> >
> http://www.change.org/p/let-hotel-phones-dial-911-easily-help-enact-kari-s-law
> >
> > Brian
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Josh Warcop <josh at warcop.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Negative. A corporation is not required to offer 911 services to the
> >> internal PBX connected phones. The business pays the 911 access fees via
> >> their bill but that doesn't have to translate to an internally built
> >> system. The ACTUAL problem is that in states with E911 legislation is
> >> you'll get a very very very hefty bill from emergency services if they
> >> dispatch and you didn't tell them what building, floor, aisle, and cube
> >> they should respond to. Legally is one thing but it quickly becomes if
> you
> >> want to pay that fine for NOT having E911. If you don't have emergency
> >> responder be prepared to add it soon as many states are adding more E911
> >> laws.
> >>
> >> Sent from my Windows Phone
> >> ------------------------------
> >> From: Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> >> Sent: ?10/?29/?2014 4:47 PM
> >> To: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
> >> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> >> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> >>
> >> Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision
> >> if someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the
> >> nearest logged out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm not
> a
> >> lawyer so take that for what you will.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> >> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default state
> >> of the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a CSS
> >> restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID in
> >> most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> >> Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
> >>
> >> scott
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> >> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of somebody
> >> picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting dialtone.
> >>
> >> -Ryan
> >>
> >> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> >> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Scott,
> >>
> >> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> >> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the
> reliability
> >> of 911.
> >>
> >> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or
> >> limitations: Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the
> phones.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >>
> >> -Ryan
> >>
> >> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >>
> >> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines on
> >> all the phones
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> scott
> >>
> >> CM 8.6.2
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/20141029/80a53fcf/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 24
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:34:29 -0400
> From: Josh Warcop <josh at warcop.com>
> To: Brian Meade <bmeade90 at vt.edu>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID: <BLU404-EAS97306E6FBC8BCA8BE28429B39C0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Even with that info I haven't seen a business elect to not provide 911.
> The legality question was raised and a business generally isn't going to be
> taken to court for failing to have 911 immediately accessible on their
> corporate provided phones. What I am seeing is an upcoming wave of folks
> that do not have E911. The immediate counter argument is people have mobile
> phones.
>
> I work with law firms and they've done all the research for me.
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: Brian Meade<mailto:bmeade90 at vt.edu>
> Sent: ?10/?29/?2014 6:17 PM
> To: Josh Warcop<mailto:josh at warcop.com>
> Cc: Erick Wellnitz<mailto:ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>; Anthony
> Holloway<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>; cisco-voip voyp
> list<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
>
> That's dangerous info to pass around without being a lawyer. The law is
> going to vary state by state about whether all phones have to be able to
> dial 911. And legislation is constantly changing. Right now, there's
> Kari's law going around trying to get passed which will force everyone to
> not require any sort of access code to dial 911-
>
> http://www.change.org/p/let-hotel-phones-dial-911-easily-help-enact-kari-s-law
>
> Brian
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Josh Warcop <josh at warcop.com> wrote:
>
> > Negative. A corporation is not required to offer 911 services to the
> > internal PBX connected phones. The business pays the 911 access fees via
> > their bill but that doesn't have to translate to an internally built
> > system. The ACTUAL problem is that in states with E911 legislation is
> > you'll get a very very very hefty bill from emergency services if they
> > dispatch and you didn't tell them what building, floor, aisle, and cube
> > they should respond to. Legally is one thing but it quickly becomes if
> you
> > want to pay that fine for NOT having E911. If you don't have emergency
> > responder be prepared to add it soon as many states are adding more E911
> > laws.
> >
> > Sent from my Windows Phone
> > ------------------------------
> > From: Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> > Sent: ?10/?29/?2014 4:47 PM
> > To: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
> > Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> >
> > Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision
> > if someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the
> > nearest logged out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm not a
> > lawyer so take that for what you will.
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> > avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default state
> of
> > the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a CSS
> > restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID in
> > most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> > Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
> >
> > scott
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> > rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >
> > Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> > I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of somebody
> > picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting dialtone.
> >
> > -Ryan
> >
> > On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> > avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Scott,
> >
> > SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> > laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the reliability
> > of 911.
> >
> > Here's one option without knowing your environment design or
> > limitations: Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the
> phones.
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> > rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >
> > All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >
> > -Ryan
> >
> > On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >
> > we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines on
> > all the phones
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > scott
> >
> > CM 8.6.2
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20141029/5d52607d/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 25
> Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 18:39:26 -0500
> From: Robert Kulagowski <rkulagow at gmail.com>
> To: Cisco VOIP <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Any experience with services for updating the
> LIDB?
> Message-ID:
> <CAGe0w3QEHmMTd0z0J+Vw=mP1aOMHRQNcY9=
> Ed2r7MTZh+R9Okw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> We may be moving to syncing our DIDs with actual names instead of a
> generic company name. Has anyone done this in bulk; we might have a
> few thousand in the first go-around.
>
> Are there services that allow you to update the LIDB on your own, or
> is it up to the provider that "owns" the DID range?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 26
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 10:26:03 +0000
> From: <Zoltan.Kelemen at Emerson.com>
> To: <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM 10.5 VM boot-up time?
> Message-ID:
> <CC23F130F7902D4DAB431BFF6655F775014EC1AA at GBLONZ-PMSG107.emrsn.org
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to plan some maintenance time for an upgrade cut-over and I
> would need a ball-park figure at least for the boot-up time of a 10.5 VM
> (C240 M3, TRC#2)
> There are no phones on this cluster as it's a SME, only a handful of SIP
> trunks and plenty route patterns etc.
> (As with the wonders of big companies, I was not around while the cluster
> was staged, so I have no helpful information from there)
>
> Any ideas welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Zoltan Kelemen
> Emerson
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141030/cb06b918/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 27
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 11:54:59 +0000
> From: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>
> To: "Zoltan.Kelemen at Emerson.com" <Zoltan.Kelemen at Emerson.com>,
> "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 10.5 VM boot-up time?
> Message-ID:
> <C75AF2AD9308C246AFBDDB994E3E29832F0FA6D7 at PHANES.helion.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I'm wondering what others are seeing, but in my environments (BE6K up to
> 1000 users) 10.5 seems to be ~15 minutes from utils system restart to
> everything being live. This is a rough guess as I haven't actually timed
> it.. The various tomcat pieces for the admin pages take quite a bit of time
> to become functional. Frankly this is one of the few things that haven't
> improved since earlier versions.
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
> 1965 Greenspring Drive
> Timonium, MD 21093
>
> direct voice. 443.541.1518
> fax. 410.252.9284
>
> Twitter<http://twitter.com/heliontech> | Facebook<
> http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Helion/252157915296> | Website<
> http://www.heliontechnologies.com/> | Email Support<mailto:
> support at heliontechnologies.com?subject=Technical%20Support%20Request>
> Support Phone. 410.252.8830
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Zoltan.Kelemen at Emerson.com
> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 6:26 AM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM 10.5 VM boot-up time?
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to plan some maintenance time for an upgrade cut-over and I
> would need a ball-park figure at least for the boot-up time of a 10.5 VM
> (C240 M3, TRC#2)
> There are no phones on this cluster as it's a SME, only a handful of SIP
> trunks and plenty route patterns etc.
> (As with the wonders of big companies, I was not around while the cluster
> was staged, so I have no helpful information from there)
>
> Any ideas welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Zoltan Kelemen
> Emerson
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141030/d554e79f/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 28
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 07:03:00 -0500
> From: "Heim, Dennis" <Dennis.Heim at wwt.com>
> To: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>,
> "Zoltan.Kelemen at Emerson.com" <Zoltan.Kelemen at Emerson.com>,
> "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 10.5 VM boot-up time?
> Message-ID:
> <0CC57FCAB07CEB4595526952471493D37E47A9C2E4 at PRODCMS1.wwt.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> 10.x items seem to hold CPU at 100% for the first 10-12 minutes, and then
> a little after that the services actual start.
>
> Dennis Heim | Collaboration Solutions Architect
> World Wide Technology, Inc. | +1 314-212-1814
> [cid:image001.png at 01CFF40F.8A703550]<https://twitter.com/CollabSensei>
> [cid:image002.png at 01CFF40F.8A703550]<xmpp:dennis.heim at wwt.com
> >[cid:image003.png at 01CFF40F.8A703550
> ]<tel:+13142121814>[cid:image004.png at 01CFF40F.8A703550]<
> sip:dennis.heim at wwt.com>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Matthew Loraditch
> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 6:55 AM
> To: Zoltan.Kelemen at Emerson.com; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 10.5 VM boot-up time?
>
> I'm wondering what others are seeing, but in my environments (BE6K up to
> 1000 users) 10.5 seems to be ~15 minutes from utils system restart to
> everything being live. This is a rough guess as I haven't actually timed
> it.. The various tomcat pieces for the admin pages take quite a bit of time
> to become functional. Frankly this is one of the few things that haven't
> improved since earlier versions.
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
> 1965 Greenspring Drive
> Timonium, MD 21093
>
> direct voice. 443.541.1518
> fax. 410.252.9284
>
> Twitter<http://twitter.com/heliontech> | Facebook<
> http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Helion/252157915296> | Website<
> http://www.heliontechnologies.com/> | Email Support<mailto:
> support at heliontechnologies.com?subject=Technical%20Support%20Request>
> Support Phone. 410.252.8830
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Zoltan.Kelemen at Emerson.com<mailto:Zoltan.Kelemen at Emerson.com>
> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2014 6:26 AM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM 10.5 VM boot-up time?
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to plan some maintenance time for an upgrade cut-over and I
> would need a ball-park figure at least for the boot-up time of a 10.5 VM
> (C240 M3, TRC#2)
> There are no phones on this cluster as it's a SME, only a handful of SIP
> trunks and plenty route patterns etc.
> (As with the wonders of big companies, I was not around while the cluster
> was staged, so I have no helpful information from there)
>
> Any ideas welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Zoltan Kelemen
> Emerson
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141030/5714cd50/attachment-0001.html
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image001.png
> Type: image/png
> Size: 3876 bytes
> Desc: image001.png
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141030/5714cd50/attachment-0004.png
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image002.png
> Type: image/png
> Size: 1389 bytes
> Desc: image002.png
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141030/5714cd50/attachment-0005.png
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image003.png
> Type: image/png
> Size: 1292 bytes
> Desc: image003.png
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141030/5714cd50/attachment-0006.png
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image004.png
> Type: image/png
> Size: 1391 bytes
> Desc: image004.png
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141030/5714cd50/attachment-0007.png
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 29
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 13:25:04 +0100
> From: Maciej Karpinski <maciej.karpinski at consign.se>
> To: Zoltan.Kelemen at emerson.com
> Cc: Cisco VOIP <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 10.5 VM boot-up time?
> Message-ID:
> <CAJa+mEvgd-z0PJXrKOZ=
> phL4Fxqij5yrD6FfbN+xc1drA7MgYg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Just made a test on our SME 10.5.1 running on (C240 M3, TRC#2)
>
> Everything was up and running and database was synced 10 minutes and 20
> seconds after the restart command was entered from CLI.
>
> But this is a regular restart, a restart during upgrade usually takes
> longer time.
>
> Br.
> Maciej
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 11:26 AM, <Zoltan.Kelemen at emerson.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > I?m trying to plan some maintenance time for an upgrade cut-over and I
> > would need a ball-park figure at least for the boot-up time of a 10.5 VM
> > (C240 M3, TRC#2)
> >
> > There are no phones on this cluster as it?s a SME, only a handful of SIP
> > trunks and plenty route patterns etc.
> >
> > (As with the wonders of big companies, I was not around while the cluster
> > was staged, so I have no helpful information from there)
> >
> >
> >
> > Any ideas welcome.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > *Zoltan Kelemen*
> > Emerson
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20141030/c1591d26/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 30
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 07:22:56 -0700
> From: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> To: "Wes Sisk (wsisk)" <wsisk at cisco.com>, Ryan Ratliff
> <rratliff at cisco.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID:
> <CAHgd+3-khfxkc=
> i5761+5RKbBja8TWyDbXBJeXh7zfhQrViktg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> OK I get the picture.......
>
> So if I'm going to put a line on all phones, can I put a shared line on all
> 1300 phones? If so, how does CER work? will the PSAP call back the line
> or does it call back the phone?
>
> I have a dialing plan that doesn't allow for much in the way of non DID
> numbers so have a very limited amount to use.
>
> TIA
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Wes Sisk (wsisk) <wsisk at cisco.com> wrote:
>
> > Agreed with Ryan, Anthony, and Erick.
> >
> > Give the phones DN?s, even just internal DN?s. It is ?burning a DN? in
> > the sense that number is allocated. That number does not have to be a
> DID.
> > Give the phones/lines a CSS that PLAR?s to a help desk. Or at least allow
> > them to invoke local emergency services - private or public.
> >
> > -Wes
> >
> > On Oct 29, 2014, at 3:13 PM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision
> > if someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the
> > nearest logged out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm not a
> > lawyer so take that for what you will.
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> > avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default state
> >> of the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a CSS
> >> restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID in
> >> most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> >>> Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
> >>>
> >>> scott
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >>> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> >>>> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of
> somebody
> >>>> picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting
> dialtone.
> >>>>
> >>>> -Ryan
> >>>>
> >>>> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> >>>> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Scott,
> >>>>
> >>>> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> >>>> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the
> reliability
> >>>> of 911.
> >>>>
> >>>> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or
> >>>> limitations: Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the
> phones.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >>>> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -Ryan
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines
> >>>>> on all the phones
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>
> >>>>> scott
> >>>>>
> >>>>> CM 8.6.2
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> 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
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/20141030/e9ea6175/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 31
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:00:41 +0000
> From: <MManly at TEP.com>
> To: <wsisk at cisco.com>, <rratliff at cisco.com>, <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID:
> <7FF64F8A3BF3504B9B2F3DC444D2EB223DF62C74 at tuswpmb01.unisource.corp
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> CER will call back the number associated with the ERL assigned to the
> switchport.
>
> Sent from my Android phone using TouchDown (www.nitrodesk.com)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Voll [svoll.voip at gmail.com]
> Received: Thursday, 30 Oct 2014, 7:33AM
> To: Wes Sisk (wsisk) [wsisk at cisco.com]; Ryan Ratliff [rratliff at cisco.com]
> CC: cisco-voip voyp list [cisco-voip at puck.nether.net]
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
>
> OK I get the picture.......
>
> So if I'm going to put a line on all phones, can I put a shared line on
> all 1300 phones? If so, how does CER work? will the PSAP call back the
> line or does it call back the phone?
>
> I have a dialing plan that doesn't allow for much in the way of non DID
> numbers so have a very limited amount to use.
>
> TIA
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Wes Sisk (wsisk) <wsisk at cisco.com<mailto:
> wsisk at cisco.com>> wrote:
> Agreed with Ryan, Anthony, and Erick.
>
> Give the phones DN?s, even just internal DN?s. It is ?burning a DN? in the
> sense that number is allocated. That number does not have to be a DID. Give
> the phones/lines a CSS that PLAR?s to a help desk. Or at least allow them
> to invoke local emergency services - private or public.
>
> -Wes
>
> On Oct 29, 2014, at 3:13 PM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com
> <mailto:ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision if
> someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the nearest logged
> out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm not a lawyer so take
> that for what you will.
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default state of
> the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a CSS
> restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID in
> most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com<mailto:
> svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
> So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
>
> scott
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com<mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>> wrote:
> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of somebody
> picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting dialtone.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Scott,
>
> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the reliability
> of 911.
>
> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or limitations:
> Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the phones.
>
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com<mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>> wrote:
> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com<mailto:
> svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
>
> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines on
> all the phones
>
> Thanks
>
> scott
>
> CM 8.6.2
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141030/40de9555/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 32
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 09:08:52 -0600
> From: Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> To: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAK0wOsAD_kY-Q0_PV+pVAV2VYHcfd74HQge23mFR6Wu-ijgqtA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> You'd have to make the DNs longer and make sure to base the non-did on an
> available range to avoid overlap and inter-digit timeout.
>
> So, if you have 43xx available, make the non-did range 43xxxx.
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:03 AM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Use a partition that isn't accessible by anything except CER CTI ports.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> OK I get the picture.......
> >>
> >> So if I'm going to put a line on all phones, can I put a shared line on
> >> all 1300 phones? If so, how does CER work? will the PSAP call back the
> >> line or does it call back the phone?
> >>
> >> I have a dialing plan that doesn't allow for much in the way of non DID
> >> numbers so have a very limited amount to use.
> >>
> >> TIA
> >>
> >> Scott
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Wes Sisk (wsisk) <wsisk at cisco.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Agreed with Ryan, Anthony, and Erick.
> >>>
> >>> Give the phones DN?s, even just internal DN?s. It is ?burning a DN? in
> >>> the sense that number is allocated. That number does not have to be a
> DID.
> >>> Give the phones/lines a CSS that PLAR?s to a help desk. Or at least
> allow
> >>> them to invoke local emergency services - private or public.
> >>>
> >>> -Wes
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 29, 2014, at 3:13 PM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision
> >>> if someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the
> >>> nearest logged out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm
> not a
> >>> lawyer so take that for what you will.
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> >>> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default
> state
> >>>> of the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a
> CSS
> >>>> restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID
> in
> >>>> most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> >>>>> Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> scott
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >>>>> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> >>>>>> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of
> >>>>>> somebody picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not
> getting
> >>>>>> dialtone.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Ryan
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> >>>>>> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Scott,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want
> phones
> >>>>>> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the
> reliability
> >>>>>> of 911.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or
> >>>>>> limitations: Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the
> phones.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >>>>>> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -Ryan
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the
> lines
> >>>>>>> on all the phones
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> scott
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> CM 8.6.2
> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>> 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
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> 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/20141030/0c3b52e9/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 33
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:09:06 +0000
> From: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <rratliff at cisco.com>
> To: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID: <1FB056E3-59D4-4E83-8688-8CED8F0134D6 at cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> And no, you can't put a shared line on 1300 phones. Use a different DN
> range or something and let CER handle the translations for you just like it
> would any other phone.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 30, 2014, at 11:03 AM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com
> <mailto:ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Use a partition that isn't accessible by anything except CER CTI ports.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com<mailto:
> svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
> OK I get the picture.......
>
> So if I'm going to put a line on all phones, can I put a shared line on
> all 1300 phones? If so, how does CER work? will the PSAP call back the
> line or does it call back the phone?
>
> I have a dialing plan that doesn't allow for much in the way of non DID
> numbers so have a very limited amount to use.
>
> TIA
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Wes Sisk (wsisk) <wsisk at cisco.com<mailto:
> wsisk at cisco.com>> wrote:
> Agreed with Ryan, Anthony, and Erick.
>
> Give the phones DN?s, even just internal DN?s. It is ?burning a DN? in the
> sense that number is allocated. That number does not have to be a DID. Give
> the phones/lines a CSS that PLAR?s to a help desk. Or at least allow them
> to invoke local emergency services - private or public.
>
> -Wes
>
> On Oct 29, 2014, at 3:13 PM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com
> <mailto:ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision if
> someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the nearest logged
> out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm not a lawyer so take
> that for what you will.
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default state of
> the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a CSS
> restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID in
> most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com<mailto:
> svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
> So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
>
> scott
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com<mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>> wrote:
> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of somebody
> picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting dialtone.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Scott,
>
> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the reliability
> of 911.
>
> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or limitations:
> Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the phones.
>
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com<mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>> wrote:
> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com<mailto:
> svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
>
> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines on
> all the phones
>
> Thanks
>
> scott
>
> CM 8.6.2
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141030/56643c56/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 34
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 08:20:04 -0700
> From: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> To: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <rratliff at cisco.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAHgd+39DTEKMhyN6Az2gymVUGjqeoRrk9pv7en-VuKHHCJb3HQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> how about a shared line per floor?
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com
> > wrote:
>
> > And no, you can't put a shared line on 1300 phones. Use a different DN
> > range or something and let CER handle the translations for you just like
> it
> > would any other phone.
> >
> > -Ryan
> >
> > On Oct 30, 2014, at 11:03 AM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Use a partition that isn't accessible by anything except CER CTI ports.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> OK I get the picture.......
> >>
> >> So if I'm going to put a line on all phones, can I put a shared line on
> >> all 1300 phones? If so, how does CER work? will the PSAP call back the
> >> line or does it call back the phone?
> >>
> >> I have a dialing plan that doesn't allow for much in the way of non DID
> >> numbers so have a very limited amount to use.
> >>
> >> TIA
> >>
> >> Scott
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Wes Sisk (wsisk) <wsisk at cisco.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Agreed with Ryan, Anthony, and Erick.
> >>>
> >>> Give the phones DN?s, even just internal DN?s. It is ?burning a DN? in
> >>> the sense that number is allocated. That number does not have to be a
> DID.
> >>> Give the phones/lines a CSS that PLAR?s to a help desk. Or at least
> allow
> >>> them to invoke local emergency services - private or public.
> >>>
> >>> -Wes
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 29, 2014, at 3:13 PM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision
> >>> if someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the
> >>> nearest logged out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm
> not a
> >>> lawyer so take that for what you will.
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> >>> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default
> state
> >>>> of the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a
> CSS
> >>>> restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID
> in
> >>>> most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> >>>>> Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> scott
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >>>>> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> >>>>>> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of
> >>>>>> somebody picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not
> getting
> >>>>>> dialtone.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Ryan
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> >>>>>> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Scott,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want
> phones
> >>>>>> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the
> reliability
> >>>>>> of 911.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or
> >>>>>> limitations: Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the
> phones.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >>>>>> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -Ryan
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the
> lines
> >>>>>>> on all the phones
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> scott
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> CM 8.6.2
> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>> 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
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> 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/20141030/35e3f53c/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 35
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:24:49 +0000
> From: "Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)" <rratliff at cisco.com>
> To: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID: <A5FF31A3-C412-4D19-8777-BAE7653C707D at cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> If you are concerned about PSAP callback then this won't fly either unless
> getting to the right floor is all you are concerned about. You'll also
> have issues with held calls made from logged-out phones showing up on all
> phones on the floor.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 30, 2014, at 11:20 AM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com<mailto:
> svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> how about a shared line per floor?
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com<mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>> wrote:
> And no, you can't put a shared line on 1300 phones. Use a different DN
> range or something and let CER handle the translations for you just like it
> would any other phone.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 30, 2014, at 11:03 AM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com
> <mailto:ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Use a partition that isn't accessible by anything except CER CTI ports.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com<mailto:
> svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
> OK I get the picture.......
>
> So if I'm going to put a line on all phones, can I put a shared line on
> all 1300 phones? If so, how does CER work? will the PSAP call back the
> line or does it call back the phone?
>
> I have a dialing plan that doesn't allow for much in the way of non DID
> numbers so have a very limited amount to use.
>
> TIA
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Wes Sisk (wsisk) <wsisk at cisco.com<mailto:
> wsisk at cisco.com>> wrote:
> Agreed with Ryan, Anthony, and Erick.
>
> Give the phones DN?s, even just internal DN?s. It is ?burning a DN? in the
> sense that number is allocated. That number does not have to be a DID. Give
> the phones/lines a CSS that PLAR?s to a help desk. Or at least allow them
> to invoke local emergency services - private or public.
>
> -Wes
>
> On Oct 29, 2014, at 3:13 PM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com
> <mailto:ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision if
> someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the nearest logged
> out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm not a lawyer so take
> that for what you will.
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default state of
> the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a CSS
> restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID in
> most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com<mailto:
> svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
> So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
>
> scott
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com<mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>> wrote:
> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of somebody
> picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not getting dialtone.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Scott,
>
> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the reliability
> of 911.
>
> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or limitations:
> Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the phones.
>
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> rratliff at cisco.com<mailto:rratliff at cisco.com>> wrote:
> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com<mailto:
> svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
>
> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines on
> all the phones
>
> Thanks
>
> scott
>
> CM 8.6.2
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141030/75e01264/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 36
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 09:03:49 -0600
> From: Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> To: Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Remove lines on phones with BAT
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAK0wOsDYEmKCSgR-yFWHy50vpobJCoS98rZ6c_+uT2S4SF6BAw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Use a partition that isn't accessible by anything except CER CTI ports.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > OK I get the picture.......
> >
> > So if I'm going to put a line on all phones, can I put a shared line on
> > all 1300 phones? If so, how does CER work? will the PSAP call back the
> > line or does it call back the phone?
> >
> > I have a dialing plan that doesn't allow for much in the way of non DID
> > numbers so have a very limited amount to use.
> >
> > TIA
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Wes Sisk (wsisk) <wsisk at cisco.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Agreed with Ryan, Anthony, and Erick.
> >>
> >> Give the phones DN?s, even just internal DN?s. It is ?burning a DN? in
> >> the sense that number is allocated. That number does not have to be a
> DID.
> >> Give the phones/lines a CSS that PLAR?s to a help desk. Or at least
> allow
> >> them to invoke local emergency services - private or public.
> >>
> >> -Wes
> >>
> >> On Oct 29, 2014, at 3:13 PM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Not having lines on a physical phone can be a career altering decision
> >> if someone needs to dial emergency services and they grab the
> >> nearest logged out phone. There could also be legal issues but I'm not
> a
> >> lawyer so take that for what you will.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> >> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> That's a "Yes" for my experiences. The logout profile or default state
> >>> of the phone has a nonDID in most cases, DID in a few cases (with a CSS
> >>> restriction for Internal and EMS), and the UDP of the user has a DID in
> >>> most cases, nonDID in a few cases (with typical CSS).
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> So what are people doing in a Extension Mobility only environment?
> >>>> Burning two DN's? one for the user and one for every phone?
> >>>>
> >>>> scott
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >>>> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Auto-reg will provision lines as well, and I agree with Anthony.
> >>>>> I don't think anyone wants to deal with the potential issue of
> >>>>> somebody picking up a phone to dial emergency services and not
> getting
> >>>>> dialtone.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -Ryan
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Oct 29, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> >>>>> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Scott,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> SIP or SCCP, either way, for emergency reasons you don't want phones
> >>>>> laying about, unable to save a life when people depend on the
> reliability
> >>>>> of 911.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Here's one option without knowing your environment design or
> >>>>> limitations: Setup Auto Registration and then Bulk Delete all the
> phones.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <
> >>>>> rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> All phones? SIP phones won't register without a line.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Ryan
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Oct 28, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> is there a way to bulk delete all lines on all phones?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> we are moving to extension mobility and want to remove all the lines
> >>>>>> on all the phones
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> scott
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> CM 8.6.2
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> 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
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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/20141030/0df791b6/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 37
> Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:49:33 +0000
> From: "Jason Aarons (AM)" <jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>
> To: "cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)"
> <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] LDAP search in Jabber for Windows 10.5
> Message-ID:
>
> <2EB6888CFB98614EA7384BEB9AF8B38212085B at usispsvexdb03.na.didata.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> If you search for a contact, then View Profile and the Chat IM address is
> wrong on LDAP searches then it's because the msRTCSIP-PrimaryUserAddress is
> wrong in AD, correct?
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141030/d19c5987/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of cisco-voip Digest, Vol 132, Issue 27
> *******************************************
>
--
Regards,
Dharambir Kumar
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141031/211ef518/attachment.html>
More information about the cisco-voip
mailing list