[cisco-voip] cucm 10.5 version

[Ryan Huff]

That's what I get for not reading more closely ;)

Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 12, 2016, at 11:45 AM, Ovidiu Popa <ovi.popa at gmail.com<mailto:ovi.popa at gmail.com>> wrote:

For it to be an SU it should have the last three digits in the range 900-999.
It's an ES :
(zzz) FCS:000, ES: 001-899, SU: 900-999

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>> wrote:
So I imagine it is SU4 ... I was just wondering why it is not listed on CCO. There have been times, where a new release is listed but then removed due to deferment.

On Sep 12, 2016, at 11:18 AM, Ovidiu Popa <ovi.popa at gmail.com<mailto:ovi.popa at gmail.com>> wrote:

Hello

I found this in an old Cisco live presentation. HTH

Numbering Convention Example
(A.B.C.XYzzz-x)
(A) Major version (License)
8.6.2.20000-2
(B) Minor version (Long Life Release)
8.6.2.20000-2
(C) Maintenance release(Patch and/or Features)
8.6.2.20000-2
(X) Build (Patch)
8.6.2.10000-2
8.6.2.20000-2
(Y) FCS:0, ESor SU: 1-9
8.6.2.10000-30 (FCS)
8.6.2.22900-1 (ESor SU look at last three digits)
(zzz) FCS:000, ES: 001-899, SU: 900-999
8.6.2.20000-2 (FCS)
8.6.2.21001-1 (ES)
8.6.2.22900-1 (SU)


Best regards,
Ovidiu

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>> wrote:

Just spotted 10.5.2.14060-1 on a cluster ... CCO only shows up to 10.5.2.13901-2 ( 10.5(2)SU3a ). Anyone know if 10.5.2.14060-1 is a deferment or an engineering special ... etc?


Thanks,


Ryan

_______________________________________________
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/20160912/d44fa5b1/attachment.html>