[cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS

[Tom Sparks]

I believe that medianet plugin was discontinued by Cisco.   But if anyone
gets it working, please let me know.

Here's a seemingly good blog on the whole topic also

https://infrastructureland.wordpress.com/2015/02/07/jabber-12/

Tom Sparks
Taos Consulting
Sr. Voice | Video Engineer
tsparks at taosconsulting.com
+1 415.515.2391


On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 9:00 AM, <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: CUCM Patch Insight (NateCCIE)
>    2. Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Ben Amick)
>    3. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Lelio Fulgenzi)
>    4. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Ben Amick)
>    5. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Hodgeman, Samuel)
>    6. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (NateCCIE)
>    7. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Ryan Huff)
>    8. LiveData enhancements in UCCX 11.0 and 11.5
>       (Abhiram Kramadhati (akramadh))
>    9. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Ben Amick)
>   10. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Ryan Huff)
>   11. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Ben Amick)
>   12. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Ryan Huff)
>   13. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Evgeny Izetov)
>   14. 7921g-w-k9 -> 7921g-a-k9 (Tim Warnock)
>   15. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Ben Amick)
>   16. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Lelio Fulgenzi)
>   17. Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS (Ryan Huff)
>   18. Re: 7921g-w-k9 -> 7921g-a-k9 (Ben Amick)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 10:33:39 -0700
> From: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com>
> To: "'Jeffrey McHugh'" <jmchugh at fidelus.com>, "'Tim Franklin'"
>         <tim at tripplehelix.net>, <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM Patch Insight
> Message-ID: <062901d265e7$8652f4c0$92f8de40$@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I would wait for SU2 at this point.  It will be soon.
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Jeffrey McHugh
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:53 AM
> To: Tim Franklin <tim at tripplehelix.net>; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM Patch Insight
>
>
>
> Just did an SU1 upgrade, no issues reported but look into bug CSCux90747
> depending on your esxi versions
>
>
>
> I would expect SU2 soon as its named in the Expressway 8.9 release notes
> for some MRA feature preview
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Tim Franklin
> Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2017 10:44 AM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net <mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM Patch Insight
>
>
>
> Just curious if anyone on this list has any feedback as to the stability
> of CUCM 11.5(1)SU1. I'm planning my upgrades out and I'm a bit leery to
> deploy it given that it's been out since November. While that speaks to no
> large defects to cause a deferral notice I'm also wondering if another SU
> is on the horizon?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Jeffrey McHugh | Sr. Collaboration Consulting Engineer | VCP-DCV, CCNP
> Collaboration
>
>  <http://www.fidelus.com/>
>
> Fidelus Technologies, LLC
> Named  <http://www.fidelus.com/fidelus-technologies-named-
> best-unified-communications-provider-in-the-usa/> Best UC Provider in the
> USA
>
> 240 West 35th Street, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10001
>
> +1-212-616-7801 office | +1-212-616-7850 fax |  <http://www.fidelus.com/>
> www.fidelus.com
>
>  <http://www.linkedin.com/company/fidelus-technologies/products>  <
> http://www.twitter.com/FidelusUCC>  <http://www.facebook.com/FidelusUCC>
> <http://www.youtube.com/FidelusTraining>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170103/b7ece70c/attachment-0001.html>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image001.png
> Type: image/png
> Size: 1989 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170103/b7ece70c/attachment-0005.png>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image002.png
> Type: image/png
> Size: 1500 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170103/b7ece70c/attachment-0006.png>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image003.png
> Type: image/png
> Size: 1526 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170103/b7ece70c/attachment-0007.png>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image004.png
> Type: image/png
> Size: 1450 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170103/b7ece70c/attachment-0008.png>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: image005.png
> Type: image/png
> Size: 1632 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170103/b7ece70c/attachment-0009.png>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 21:25:20 +0000
> From: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> To: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <820C24BFE55F434C97807C60D4647ACE0F9D3DBB at E2k10-MB-HT1.
> humanarc.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> So, I know this is an age old question that's debated, but I've been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn't applicable with softphones.
>
> I've heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
>
> 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
>
> 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
>
> 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches
> to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> needing prime collab?)?
>
> Maybe I'm missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there's the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don't believe there's a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170103/4d9a63d8/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 21:35:41 +0000
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>, Cisco VoIP Group
>         <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <YTOPR01MB0251F94A8E59508021DD7D21AC6E0 at YTOPR01MB0251.
> CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> good question Ben. i look forward to reading this thread.
>
>
> i've been meaning to read up on mediaNet, and it seems it's more required
> than not, especially for QoS.
>
>
> are you suggesting (with option 3) that there is software you can install
> on desktops? what about mobile devices?
>
>
> QoS, both wired and wireless, will definitely be an interesting challenge.
>
>
>
> ---
> 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
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net> on behalf of Ben
> Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2017 4:25 PM
> To: Cisco VoIP Group
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
>
> So, I know this is an age old question that's debated, but I've been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn't applicable with softphones.
>
>
>
> I've heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
>
> 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
>
> 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
>
> 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches
> to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> needing prime collab?)?
>
>
>
> Maybe I'm missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there's the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don't believe there's a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
>
>
>
> Ben Amick
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170103/0a34315c/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 22:02:42 +0000
> From: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>, Cisco VoIP Group
>         <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <820C24BFE55F434C97807C60D4647ACE0F9D3E0F at E2k10-MB-HT1.
> humanarc.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> From what I understand, it's not so much as "software" as it is a plugin
> for jabber that enables Jabber to send the medianet signaling. I don't
> believe it's a function of iOS/android Jabber though, but I could be
> mistaken
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi [mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 4:36 PM
> To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>; Cisco VoIP Group <
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
>
>
>
> good question Ben. i look forward to reading this thread.
>
>
>
> i've been meaning to read up on mediaNet, and it seems it's more required
> than not, especially for QoS.
>
>
>
> are you suggesting (with option 3) that there is software you can install
> on desktops? what about mobile devices?
>
>
>
> QoS, both wired and wireless, will definitely be an interesting challenge.
>
>
>
>
> ---
> 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
>
> ________________________________
> From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-
> bounces at puck.nether.net>> on behalf of Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com
> <mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2017 4:25 PM
> To: Cisco VoIP Group
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
>
> So, I know this is an age old question that's debated, but I've been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn't applicable with softphones.
>
>
>
> I've heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
>
> 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
>
> 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
>
> 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches
> to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> needing prime collab?)?
>
>
>
> Maybe I'm missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there's the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don't believe there's a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
>
>
>
> Ben Amick
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170103/9591b6cd/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 22:13:15 +0000
> From: "Hodgeman, Samuel" <shodgeman at xo.com>
> To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>, Cisco VoIP Group
>         <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <94004f6f0f8646e7a51539636329908b at TXPLANEXCH101.corp.inthosts.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> For option 1, using Windows... this can be implemented with Group
> Policies, taking it out of the hands of end users, and can be associated
> with specific application executable and/or specific IP address
> source/destination.
>
>
> -          Sam H
>
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Ben Amick
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 3:25 PM
> To: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
> So, I know this is an age old question that's debated, but I've been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn't applicable with softphones.
>
> I've heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
>
> 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
>
> 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
>
> 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches
> to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> needing prime collab?)?
>
> Maybe I'm missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there's the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don't believe there's a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170103/3ef7729c/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 17:53:14 -0700
> From: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com>
> To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> Cc: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID: <05C8F1E2-B3DA-435C-BAB4-3C8278A0A726 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Or take the most approach of do nothing.
>
> My personal favorite is to use codecs where QoS matters less, like iLBC,
> OPUS, etc.
>
> So many business are getting rid of the QoS capable WAN and just doing
> VPNs, even if they have fancy names that make it sound better than public
> internet.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jan 3, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com> wrote:
> >
> > So, I know this is an age old question that?s debated, but I?ve been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn?t applicable with softphones.
> >
> > I?ve heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
> > 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
> > 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes
> the ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
> > 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure
> all switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer
> switches to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember
> possibly needing prime collab?)?
> >
> > Maybe I?m missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there?s the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don?t believe there?s a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
> >
> > Ben Amick
> > Telecom Analyst
> >
> >
> > Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20170103/0da1ffef/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 01:39:30 +0000
> From: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com>
> To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>, Cisco VoIP Group
>         <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <BLUPR18MB0482767CF5DE727DDEE526FEC5610 at BLUPR18MB0482.
> namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> It's a shame really ... MPLS is far superior IMO, for many reasons. Call
> it iWAN, DMVPN, AutoVPN .... whatever, it is still as Nate says, public
> Internet.
>
> Try getting a 30 or 60 minute SLA with escalation after 15 minutes from a
> public Comcast or Time Warner/Charter package.
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 7:53 PM, NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nat
> eccie at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Or take the most approach of do nothing.
>
> My personal favorite is to use codecs where QoS matters less, like iLBC,
> OPUS, etc.
>
> So many business are getting rid of the QoS capable WAN and just doing
> VPNs, even if they have fancy names that make it sound better than public
> internet.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
>
> So, I know this is an age old question that's debated, but I've been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn't applicable with softphones.
>
> I've heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
>
> 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
>
> 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
>
> 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches
> to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> needing prime collab?)?
>
> Maybe I'm missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there's the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don't believe there's a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170104/f9b9e92b/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 01:48:30 +0000
> From: "Abhiram Kramadhati (akramadh)" <akramadh at cisco.com>
> To: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] LiveData enhancements in UCCX 11.0 and 11.5
> Message-ID: <5C88B902-AED4-4603-8707-A2BAE18A1181 at cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi all,
>
> Happy 2017!
>
> We just published a Field Notice about LiveData stabilization enhancements
> done in 11.0(1)SU1 and 11.5(1)ES1.
> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/field-notices/642/fn64240.html
>
> So, if you are on 11.0 or 11.5, our recommendation is to move to the
> above-mentioned releases. You could be running on 11.0/11.5 with no LD
> issues ? this is just a proactive measure.
>
> [http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/assets/email-signature-tool/
> logo_07.png?ct=1421802598153]
>
> Abhiram Kramadhati
> Technical Solutions Manager
> Customer Solutions Success team, CCBU
> akramadh at cisco.com<mailto:akramadh at cisco.com>
> Phone: +61 2 8446 6257
>
> CCIE Collaboration  - 40065
>
> Cisco Systems Australia Pty Limited
> The Forum
> 201 Pacific Highway
> 2065
> St Leonards
> Australia
> Cisco.com<http://www.cisco.com/web/AU/>
>
> [http://www.cisco.com/assets/social_media_icons/linkedin-16x16.png]<
> http://wwwin.cisco.com/marketing/corporate/brand/intelbrand/brandstrat/
> signature/Insert%20your%20LinkedIn%20link>
>
>
>
>
> [http://www.cisco.com/assets/swa/img/thinkbeforeyouprint.gif]Think before
> you print.
>
> This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole
> use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure
> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or
> authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by
> reply email and delete all copies of this message.
> Please click here<http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/
> cri/index.html> for Company Registration Information.
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170104/fb4a3136/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 02:15:06 +0000
> From: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> To: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com>, NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com>
> Cc: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <820C24BFE55F434C97807C60D4647ACE0F9DE054 at E2k10-MB-HT1.
> humanarc.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Yeah, I have the luck of having MPLS right now, and I don't see us going
> iWAN for a while for various reasons. QoS on the WAN right now even isn't
> my issue, it's QoS on the LAN. Right now we have a relatively flat network,
> and certain segments of our troupe *cough*developers*cough* seems to have
> made our internal traffic ugly, to the point that I may have to do an
> analysis of it, as we're having just random periods here and there where
> calls just have horrible quality, of the type you normally see fixed by QoS
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
> From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
> To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>; Cisco VoIP Group <
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
> It's a shame really ... MPLS is far superior IMO, for many reasons. Call
> it iWAN, DMVPN, AutoVPN .... whatever, it is still as Nate says, public
> Internet.
>
> Try getting a 30 or 60 minute SLA with escalation after 15 minutes from a
> public Comcast or Time Warner/Charter package.
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 7:53 PM, NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nat
> eccie at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Or take the most approach of do nothing.
>
> My personal favorite is to use codecs where QoS matters less, like iLBC,
> OPUS, etc.
>
> So many business are getting rid of the QoS capable WAN and just doing
> VPNs, even if they have fancy names that make it sound better than public
> internet.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
> So, I know this is an age old question that's debated, but I've been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn't applicable with softphones.
>
> I've heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
>
> 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
>
> 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
>
> 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches
> to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> needing prime collab?)?
>
> Maybe I'm missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there's the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don't believe there's a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQk
> mnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzr
> BPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-
> F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2
> rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-
> e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpv
> pj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdK
> ndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5d
> qWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY
> 3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-
> Aq83iTqlblbCqOmdbFEw0zi13UU91Em4zh1I43h00ZhwSOUryKrT3IPkd-jE>
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170104/74ba53d8/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 02:18:06 +0000
> From: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com>
> To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> Cc: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com>, Cisco VoIP Group
>         <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <BLUPR18MB04820158AE92067D655F5A57C5610 at BLUPR18MB0482.
> namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Ben,
>
> By flat network; I am to assume that there is no layer 2 partition between
> rtp/signaling and general data traffic?
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:15 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
>
> Yeah, I have the luck of having MPLS right now, and I don't see us going
> iWAN for a while for various reasons. QoS on the WAN right now even isn't
> my issue, it's QoS on the LAN. Right now we have a relatively flat network,
> and certain segments of our troupe *cough*developers*cough* seems to have
> made our internal traffic ugly, to the point that I may have to do an
> analysis of it, as we're having just random periods here and there where
> calls just have horrible quality, of the type you normally see fixed by QoS
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
> From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
> To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>; Cisco
> VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
> It's a shame really ... MPLS is far superior IMO, for many reasons. Call
> it iWAN, DMVPN, AutoVPN .... whatever, it is still as Nate says, public
> Internet.
>
> Try getting a 30 or 60 minute SLA with escalation after 15 minutes from a
> public Comcast or Time Warner/Charter package.
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 7:53 PM, NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nat
> eccie at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Or take the most approach of do nothing.
>
> My personal favorite is to use codecs where QoS matters less, like iLBC,
> OPUS, etc.
>
> So many business are getting rid of the QoS capable WAN and just doing
> VPNs, even if they have fancy names that make it sound better than public
> internet.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
> So, I know this is an age old question that's debated, but I've been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn't applicable with softphones.
>
> I've heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
>
> 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
>
> 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
>
> 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches
> to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> needing prime collab?)?
>
> Maybe I'm missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there's the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don't believe there's a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQk
> mnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzr
> BPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-
> F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2
> rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-
> e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpv
> pj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdK
> ndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5d
> qWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY
> 3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-
> Aq83iTqlblbCqOmdbFEw0zi13UU91Em4zh1I43h00ZhwSOUryKrT3IPkd-jE>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170104/46eda1b1/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 02:30:35 +0000
> From: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> To: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com>
> Cc: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com>, Cisco VoIP Group
>         <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <820C24BFE55F434C97807C60D4647ACE0F9DE08E at E2k10-MB-HT1.
> humanarc.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Only for softphones. Currently most of our servers live on the same LAN as
> end users, so yeah. Hardphones have their own VLAN so its not as bad. In
> the future it won't be that way but for the time being it is.
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
> From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 9:18 PM
> To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> Cc: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com>; Cisco VoIP Group <
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
> Ben,
>
> By flat network; I am to assume that there is no layer 2 partition between
> rtp/signaling and general data traffic?
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:15 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
> Yeah, I have the luck of having MPLS right now, and I don't see us going
> iWAN for a while for various reasons. QoS on the WAN right now even isn't
> my issue, it's QoS on the LAN. Right now we have a relatively flat network,
> and certain segments of our troupe *cough*developers*cough* seems to have
> made our internal traffic ugly, to the point that I may have to do an
> analysis of it, as we're having just random periods here and there where
> calls just have horrible quality, of the type you normally see fixed by QoS
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
> From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
> To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>; Cisco
> VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
> It's a shame really ... MPLS is far superior IMO, for many reasons. Call
> it iWAN, DMVPN, AutoVPN .... whatever, it is still as Nate says, public
> Internet.
>
> Try getting a 30 or 60 minute SLA with escalation after 15 minutes from a
> public Comcast or Time Warner/Charter package.
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 7:53 PM, NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nat
> eccie at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Or take the most approach of do nothing.
>
> My personal favorite is to use codecs where QoS matters less, like iLBC,
> OPUS, etc.
>
> So many business are getting rid of the QoS capable WAN and just doing
> VPNs, even if they have fancy names that make it sound better than public
> internet.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
> So, I know this is an age old question that's debated, but I've been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn't applicable with softphones.
>
> I've heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
>
> 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
>
> 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
>
> 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches
> to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> needing prime collab?)?
>
> Maybe I'm missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there's the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don't believe there's a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQk
> mnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzr
> BPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-
> F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2
> rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-
> e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpv
> pj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdK
> ndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5d
> qWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY
> 3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-
> Aq83iTqlblbCqOmdbFEw0zi13UU91Em4zh1I43h00ZhwSOUryKrT3IPkd-jE>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170104/564a50a0/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 02:49:49 +0000
> From: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com>
> To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> Cc: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com>, Cisco VoIP Group
>         <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <BLUPR18MB048225F237E9FCEFAF1C726FC5610 at BLUPR18MB0482.
> namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> I see; while this is by no means a complete solution, it may help. I'm
> assuming Cisco based soft phones (CIPC, CSF, BOT, TAB ... etc).
>
> You may try Trusted Relay Points (set in the device level configuration).
> This does rely and depend on your media resource architecture and design;
> i.e. you'll need to have media resources that support TRP available.
>
> Using TRP on the device config for a soft phone will cause CUCM to
> dynamically insert an MTP in the call flow which will allow for adherence
> to QOS trust policies and offer a predetermined network path for call flows
> in an otherwise untrusted network (presumably, the data network).
>
> -Ryan
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:30 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
>
> Only for softphones. Currently most of our servers live on the same LAN as
> end users, so yeah. Hardphones have their own VLAN so its not as bad. In
> the future it won?t be that way but for the time being it is.
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
> From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 9:18 PM
> To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>
> Cc: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>; Cisco VoIP
> Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
> Ben,
>
> By flat network; I am to assume that there is no layer 2 partition between
> rtp/signaling and general data traffic?
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:15 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
> Yeah, I have the luck of having MPLS right now, and I don?t see us going
> iWAN for a while for various reasons. QoS on the WAN right now even isn?t
> my issue, it?s QoS on the LAN. Right now we have a relatively flat network,
> and certain segments of our troupe *cough*developers*cough* seems to have
> made our internal traffic ugly, to the point that I may have to do an
> analysis of it, as we?re having just random periods here and there where
> calls just have horrible quality, of the type you normally see fixed by QoS
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
> From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
> To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>; Cisco
> VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
> It's a shame really ... MPLS is far superior IMO, for many reasons. Call
> it iWAN, DMVPN, AutoVPN .... whatever, it is still as Nate says, public
> Internet.
>
> Try getting a 30 or 60 minute SLA with escalation after 15 minutes from a
> public Comcast or Time Warner/Charter package.
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 7:53 PM, NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nat
> eccie at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Or take the most approach of do nothing.
>
> My personal favorite is to use codecs where QoS matters less, like iLBC,
> OPUS, etc.
>
> So many business are getting rid of the QoS capable WAN and just doing
> VPNs, even if they have fancy names that make it sound better than public
> internet.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
> So, I know this is an age old question that?s debated, but I?ve been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn?t applicable with softphones.
>
> I?ve heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
>
> 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
>
> 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
>
> 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches
> to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> needing prime collab?)?
>
> Maybe I?m missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there?s the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don?t believe there?s a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQk
> mnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzr
> BPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-
> F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2
> rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-
> e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpv
> pj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdK
> ndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5d
> qWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY
> 3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-
> Aq83iTqlblbCqOmdbFEw0zi13UU91Em4zh1I43h00ZhwSOUryKrT3IPkd-jE>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170104/2463d078/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 22:14:31 -0500
> From: Evgeny Izetov <eizetov at gmail.com>
> To: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at humanarc.com>, Cisco VoIP Group
>         <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <CAKLHLoWZW6M62LgHccdQfzi12zfDwj+y8FoHJ07wjr5JOieMbQ at mail.
> gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> I saw a CiscoLive! session recently that seemed to recommend the ports and
> access-lists approach. The idea is that you can now specify separate port
> ranges for audio and video in SIP Profile. The session goes quite in depth
> and is worth the watch:
>
> BRKCOL-2616 - QoS Strategies and Smart Media Techniques for Collaboration
> Deployments (2016 Berlin) - 2 Hours
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com> wrote:
>
> > I see; while this is by no means a complete solution, it may help. I'm
> > assuming Cisco based soft phones (CIPC, CSF, BOT, TAB ... etc).
> >
> > You may try Trusted Relay Points (set in the device level configuration).
> > This does rely and depend on your media resource architecture and design;
> > i.e. you'll need to have media resources that support TRP available.
> >
> > Using TRP on the device config for a soft phone will cause CUCM to
> > dynamically insert an MTP in the call flow which will allow for adherence
> > to QOS trust policies and offer a predetermined network path for call
> flows
> > in an otherwise untrusted network (presumably, the data network).
> >
> > -Ryan
> >
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> > On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:30 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com> wrote:
> >
> > Only for softphones. Currently most of our servers live on the same LAN
> as
> > end users, so yeah. Hardphones have their own VLAN so its not as bad. In
> > the future it won?t be that way but for the time being it is.
> >
> >
> >
> > *Ben Amick*
> >
> > Telecom Analyst
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com <ryanhuff at outlook.com>]
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 03, 2017 9:18 PM
> > *To:* Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> > *Cc:* NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com>; Cisco VoIP Group <
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> > *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> >
> >
> >
> > Ben,
> >
> >
> >
> > By flat network; I am to assume that there is no layer 2 partition
> between
> > rtp/signaling and general data traffic?
> >
> >
> > On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:15 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, I have the luck of having MPLS right now, and I don?t see us going
> > iWAN for a while for various reasons. QoS on the WAN right now even isn?t
> > my issue, it?s QoS on the LAN. Right now we have a relatively flat
> network,
> > and certain segments of our troupe **cough**developers**cough** seems to
> > have made our internal traffic ugly, to the point that I may have to do
> an
> > analysis of it, as we?re having just random periods here and there where
> > calls just have horrible quality, of the type you normally see fixed by
> QoS
> >
> >
> >
> > *Ben Amick*
> >
> > Telecom Analyst
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com <ryanhuff at outlook.com>]
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
> > *To:* NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com>
> > *Cc:* Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>; Cisco VoIP Group <
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> > *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> >
> >
> >
> > It's a shame really ... MPLS is far superior IMO, for many reasons. Call
> > it iWAN, DMVPN, AutoVPN .... whatever, it is still as Nate says, public
> > Internet.
> >
> >
> >
> > Try getting a 30 or 60 minute SLA with escalation after 15 minutes from a
> > public Comcast or Time Warner/Charter package.
> >
> >
> > On Jan 3, 2017, at 7:53 PM, NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Or take the most approach of do nothing.
> >
> >
> >
> > My personal favorite is to use codecs where QoS matters less, like iLBC,
> > OPUS, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > So many business are getting rid of the QoS capable WAN and just doing
> > VPNs, even if they have fancy names that make it sound better than public
> > internet.
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >
> > On Jan 3, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com> wrote:
> >
> > So, I know this is an age old question that?s debated, but I?ve been
> > wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> > softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> > VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn?t applicable with softphones.
> >
> >
> >
> > I?ve heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> > to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
> >
> > 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> > the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> > Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and
> network
> > impact due to blind PC trust.
> >
> > 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> > ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> > programs could theoretically use those ports
> >
> > 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> > switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer
> switches
> > to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> > needing prime collab?)?
> >
> >
> >
> > Maybe I?m missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> > softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> > (I know there?s the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches,
> but
> > I don?t believe there?s a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
> >
> >
> >
> > *Ben Amick*
> >
> > Telecom Analyst
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> > individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> > that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> > applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient
> > or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> > intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> > distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> > you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic
> or
> > hard copy. Thank you
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> > <http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQk
> mnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzr
> BPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-
> F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2
> rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-
> e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> > <http://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpv
> pj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdK
> ndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5d
> qWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY
> 3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-
> Aq83iTqlblbCqOmdbFEw0zi13UU91Em4zh1I43h00ZhwSOUryKrT3IPkd-jE>
> >
> >
> > Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> > individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> > that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> > applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient
> > or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> > intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> > distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> > you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic
> or
> > hard copy. Thank you
> >
> >
> > Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> > individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> > that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> > applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient
> > or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> > intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> > distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> > you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic
> or
> > hard copy. Thank you
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20170103/3e0b8690/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 04:12:13 +0000
> From: Tim Warnock <timoid at timoid.org>
> To: "'cisco-voip at puck.nether.net'" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] 7921g-w-k9 -> 7921g-a-k9
> Message-ID:
>         <C978DD0EE401174299AA691E12A5025616A30C49 at hermes.timoid.lan>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone know how to either:
>
> A) Turn a 7921G-W-K9 -> 7291G-A-K9 or
> B) Disable the 7921G's reliance on country information being advertised
> via 802.11d
>
> It appears the World version needs 802.11d functioning in order to connect
> to the AP, and the AP in question doesn't support 802.11d
>
> Or suggest a suitable replacement (7921G is EOL)?
>
> Thanks
> -]Tim.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 16:18:28 +0000
> From: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> To: Evgeny Izetov <eizetov at gmail.com>, Ryan Huff
>         <ryanhuff at outlook.com>
> Cc: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <820C24BFE55F434C97807C60D4647ACE0F9DE1E2 at E2k10-MB-HT1.
> humanarc.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Evgeny,
> That?s great, and I was able to find the PDF from the session but I can?t
> seem to remember how to find the site that has the recordings of the
> sessions ? could you provide a link to that?
>
> Ryan,
> That sounds like a solid idea for when QoS is absolutely absolutely
> necessary, but I have nowhere near enough MTP resources to do that for all
> the softphones in my org.
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
> From: Evgeny Izetov [mailto:eizetov at gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 10:15 PM
> To: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>; Cisco VoIP Group <
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
> I saw a CiscoLive! session recently that seemed to recommend the ports and
> access-lists approach. The idea is that you can now specify separate port
> ranges for audio and video in SIP Profile. The session goes quite in depth
> and is worth the watch:
>
> BRKCOL-2616 - QoS Strategies and Smart Media Techniques for Collaboration
> Deployments (2016 Berlin) - 2 Hours
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto:r
> yanhuff at outlook.com>> wrote:
> I see; while this is by no means a complete solution, it may help. I'm
> assuming Cisco based soft phones (CIPC, CSF, BOT, TAB ... etc).
>
> You may try Trusted Relay Points (set in the device level configuration).
> This does rely and depend on your media resource architecture and design;
> i.e. you'll need to have media resources that support TRP available.
>
> Using TRP on the device config for a soft phone will cause CUCM to
> dynamically insert an MTP in the call flow which will allow for adherence
> to QOS trust policies and offer a predetermined network path for call flows
> in an otherwise untrusted network (presumably, the data network).
> -Ryan
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:30 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
> Only for softphones. Currently most of our servers live on the same LAN as
> end users, so yeah. Hardphones have their own VLAN so its not as bad. In
> the future it won?t be that way but for the time being it is.
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
> From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 9:18 PM
> To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>
> Cc: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>; Cisco VoIP
> Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
> Ben,
>
> By flat network; I am to assume that there is no layer 2 partition between
> rtp/signaling and general data traffic?
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:15 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
> Yeah, I have the luck of having MPLS right now, and I don?t see us going
> iWAN for a while for various reasons. QoS on the WAN right now even isn?t
> my issue, it?s QoS on the LAN. Right now we have a relatively flat network,
> and certain segments of our troupe *cough*developers*cough* seems to have
> made our internal traffic ugly, to the point that I may have to do an
> analysis of it, as we?re having just random periods here and there where
> calls just have horrible quality, of the type you normally see fixed by QoS
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
> From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
> To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>; Cisco
> VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
> It's a shame really ... MPLS is far superior IMO, for many reasons. Call
> it iWAN, DMVPN, AutoVPN .... whatever, it is still as Nate says, public
> Internet.
>
> Try getting a 30 or 60 minute SLA with escalation after 15 minutes from a
> public Comcast or Time Warner/Charter package.
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 7:53 PM, NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nat
> eccie at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Or take the most approach of do nothing.
>
> My personal favorite is to use codecs where QoS matters less, like iLBC,
> OPUS, etc.
>
> So many business are getting rid of the QoS capable WAN and just doing
> VPNs, even if they have fancy names that make it sound better than public
> internet.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
> So, I know this is an age old question that?s debated, but I?ve been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn?t applicable with softphones.
>
> I?ve heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
>
> 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
>
> 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
>
> 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches
> to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> needing prime collab?)?
>
> Maybe I?m missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there?s the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don?t believe there?s a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQk
> mnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzr
> BPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-
> F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2
> rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-
> e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpv
> pj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdK
> ndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5d
> qWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY
> 3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-
> Aq83iTqlblbCqOmdbFEw0zi13UU91Em4zh1I43h00ZhwSOUryKrT3IPkd-jE>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndy1J5xVBwQsCzBMsCrKrhhpvpj7
> 3AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndA
> SRtxIrsKrud7bPBD7D-LOryrPPXWvnKnjh7cYMed7aqbz0XG8
> FHnjlKOeVkffGhBrwqrhdICXYyevvjvuhjsdTdAVPmEBCbdSaY3ivNU6U9GX
> 33VkDa3JsJaBGBPdpb6_AaveFA54hfBPqrMVBAS2_id41FrJaBGBPdpb6BQQg0hF0xYs4wQ
> b2hEwS21Ew0uEMrpsdwmX6sqwk>
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170104/f48be809/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 16:27:26 +0000
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>, Evgeny Izetov
>         <eizetov at gmail.com>, "Ryan Huff" <ryanhuff at outlook.com>
> Cc: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <YTOPR01MB02513B7A153261166E291393AC610 at YTOPR01MB0251.
> CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> I would have loved to do MTP resources across the board... helps with
> security as well, less holes to open up. But I found a few features that
> wouldn't work, like desktop sharing, etc. If they supported all features
> with MTP, I'd would have likely been able to justify a couple of routers to
> do it.
>
>
> ---
> 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
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net> on behalf of Ben
> Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 11:18 AM
> To: Evgeny Izetov; Ryan Huff
> Cc: Cisco VoIP Group
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
>
> Evgeny,
>
> That?s great, and I was able to find the PDF from the session but I can?t
> seem to remember how to find the site that has the recordings of the
> sessions ? could you provide a link to that?
>
>
>
> Ryan,
>
> That sounds like a solid idea for when QoS is absolutely absolutely
> necessary, but I have nowhere near enough MTP resources to do that for all
> the softphones in my org.
>
>
>
> Ben Amick
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> From: Evgeny Izetov [mailto:eizetov at gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 10:15 PM
> To: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>; Cisco VoIP Group <
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
>
>
> I saw a CiscoLive! session recently that seemed to recommend the ports and
> access-lists approach. The idea is that you can now specify separate port
> ranges for audio and video in SIP Profile. The session goes quite in depth
> and is worth the watch:
>
> BRKCOL-2616 - QoS Strategies and Smart Media Techniques for Collaboration
> Deployments (2016 Berlin) - 2 Hours
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto:r
> yanhuff at outlook.com>> wrote:
>
> I see; while this is by no means a complete solution, it may help. I'm
> assuming Cisco based soft phones (CIPC, CSF, BOT, TAB ... etc).
>
>
>
> You may try Trusted Relay Points (set in the device level configuration).
> This does rely and depend on your media resource architecture and design;
> i.e. you'll need to have media resources that support TRP available.
>
>
>
> Using TRP on the device config for a soft phone will cause CUCM to
> dynamically insert an MTP in the call flow which will allow for adherence
> to QOS trust policies and offer a predetermined network path for call flows
> in an otherwise untrusted network (presumably, the data network).
>
> -Ryan
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:30 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
>
> Only for softphones. Currently most of our servers live on the same LAN as
> end users, so yeah. Hardphones have their own VLAN so its not as bad. In
> the future it won?t be that way but for the time being it is.
>
>
>
> Ben Amick
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 9:18 PM
> To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>
> Cc: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>; Cisco VoIP
> Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
>
>
> Ben,
>
>
>
> By flat network; I am to assume that there is no layer 2 partition between
> rtp/signaling and general data traffic?
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:15 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
>
> Yeah, I have the luck of having MPLS right now, and I don?t see us going
> iWAN for a while for various reasons. QoS on the WAN right now even isn?t
> my issue, it?s QoS on the LAN. Right now we have a relatively flat network,
> and certain segments of our troupe *cough*developers*cough* seems to have
> made our internal traffic ugly, to the point that I may have to do an
> analysis of it, as we?re having just random periods here and there where
> calls just have horrible quality, of the type you normally see fixed by QoS
>
>
>
> Ben Amick
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
> To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>; Cisco
> VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
>
>
> It's a shame really ... MPLS is far superior IMO, for many reasons. Call
> it iWAN, DMVPN, AutoVPN .... whatever, it is still as Nate says, public
> Internet.
>
>
>
> Try getting a 30 or 60 minute SLA with escalation after 15 minutes from a
> public Comcast or Time Warner/Charter package.
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 7:53 PM, NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nat
> eccie at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Or take the most approach of do nothing.
>
>
>
> My personal favorite is to use codecs where QoS matters less, like iLBC,
> OPUS, etc.
>
>
>
> So many business are getting rid of the QoS capable WAN and just doing
> VPNs, even if they have fancy names that make it sound better than public
> internet.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
>
> So, I know this is an age old question that?s debated, but I?ve been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn?t applicable with softphones.
>
>
>
> I?ve heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
>
> 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
>
> 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
>
> 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches
> to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> needing prime collab?)?
>
>
>
> Maybe I?m missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there?s the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don?t believe there?s a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
>
>
>
> Ben Amick
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQk
> mnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzr
> BPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-
> F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2
> rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-
> e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpv
> pj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdK
> ndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5d
> qWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY
> 3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-
> Aq83iTqlblbCqOmdbFEw0zi13UU91Em4zh1I43h00ZhwSOUryKrT3IPkd-jE>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndy1J5xVBwQsCzBMsCrKrhhpvpj7
> 3AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndA
> SRtxIrsKrud7bPBD7D-LOryrPPXWvnKnjh7cYMed7aqbz0XG8
> FHnjlKOeVkffGhBrwqrhdICXYyevvjvuhjsdTdAVPmEBCbdSaY3ivNU6U9GX
> 33VkDa3JsJaBGBPdpb6_AaveFA54hfBPqrMVBAS2_id41FrJaBGBPdpb6BQQg0hF0xYs4wQ
> b2hEwS21Ew0uEMrpsdwmX6sqwk>
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170104/2b838324/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 16:44:52 +0000
> From: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com>
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>, Evgeny Izetov
>         <eizetov at gmail.com>, "Cisco VoIP Group" <
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
> Message-ID:
>         <BLUPR18MB04820F67E5FD6398C9952F36C5610 at BLUPR18MB0482.
> namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> Yes, TRP does have some drawbacks; video, binary floor control BUT, works
> great for voice media. It's a heavy overhead and isn't a complete solution
> but works in a pinch if you're dealing with some C Level users that "just
> want the computer phone to work".
>
> I have also been known to swap out the network card in user pcs for dual
> interface cards, then use a persistent route in the PC to force the soft
> phone's traffic to its call control server out of one interface that is on
> the voice network (leaving the other interface on the data network).
>
> A crude solution, but it worked well in a situation where the networking
> gear wouldn't have supported what we would've needed to do with QOS. Dual
> port PC network cards, even in bulk, are a heck of a lot cheaper than new
> networking gear.
>
> Yikes, giving myself flashbacks from rehashing all these memories of being
> a network admin for a nonprofit .... need some coffee ....
>
> On Jan 4, 2017, at 11:27 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:leli
> o at uoguelph.ca>> wrote:
>
>
> I would have loved to do MTP resources across the board... helps with
> security as well, less holes to open up. But I found a few features that
> wouldn't work, like desktop sharing, etc. If they supported all features
> with MTP, I'd would have likely been able to justify a couple of routers to
> do it.
>
>
> ---
> 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
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-
> bounces at puck.nether.net>> on behalf of Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com
> <mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 11:18 AM
> To: Evgeny Izetov; Ryan Huff
> Cc: Cisco VoIP Group
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
>
> Evgeny,
>
> That?s great, and I was able to find the PDF from the session but I can?t
> seem to remember how to find the site that has the recordings of the
> sessions ? could you provide a link to that?
>
>
>
> Ryan,
>
> That sounds like a solid idea for when QoS is absolutely absolutely
> necessary, but I have nowhere near enough MTP resources to do that for all
> the softphones in my org.
>
>
>
> Ben Amick
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> From: Evgeny Izetov [mailto:eizetov at gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 10:15 PM
> To: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>; Cisco
> VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
>
>
> I saw a CiscoLive! session recently that seemed to recommend the ports and
> access-lists approach. The idea is that you can now specify separate port
> ranges for audio and video in SIP Profile. The session goes quite in depth
> and is worth the watch:
>
> BRKCOL-2616 - QoS Strategies and Smart Media Techniques for Collaboration
> Deployments (2016 Berlin) - 2 Hours
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto:r
> yanhuff at outlook.com>> wrote:
>
> I see; while this is by no means a complete solution, it may help. I'm
> assuming Cisco based soft phones (CIPC, CSF, BOT, TAB ... etc).
>
>
>
> You may try Trusted Relay Points (set in the device level configuration).
> This does rely and depend on your media resource architecture and design;
> i.e. you'll need to have media resources that support TRP available.
>
>
>
> Using TRP on the device config for a soft phone will cause CUCM to
> dynamically insert an MTP in the call flow which will allow for adherence
> to QOS trust policies and offer a predetermined network path for call flows
> in an otherwise untrusted network (presumably, the data network).
>
> -Ryan
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:30 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
>
> Only for softphones. Currently most of our servers live on the same LAN as
> end users, so yeah. Hardphones have their own VLAN so its not as bad. In
> the future it won?t be that way but for the time being it is.
>
>
>
> Ben Amick
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 9:18 PM
> To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>
> Cc: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>; Cisco VoIP
> Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
>
>
> Ben,
>
>
>
> By flat network; I am to assume that there is no layer 2 partition between
> rtp/signaling and general data traffic?
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:15 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
>
> Yeah, I have the luck of having MPLS right now, and I don?t see us going
> iWAN for a while for various reasons. QoS on the WAN right now even isn?t
> my issue, it?s QoS on the LAN. Right now we have a relatively flat network,
> and certain segments of our troupe *cough*developers*cough* seems to have
> made our internal traffic ugly, to the point that I may have to do an
> analysis of it, as we?re having just random periods here and there where
> calls just have horrible quality, of the type you normally see fixed by QoS
>
>
>
> Ben Amick
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
> To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>
> Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>; Cisco
> VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
>
>
>
> It's a shame really ... MPLS is far superior IMO, for many reasons. Call
> it iWAN, DMVPN, AutoVPN .... whatever, it is still as Nate says, public
> Internet.
>
>
>
> Try getting a 30 or 60 minute SLA with escalation after 15 minutes from a
> public Comcast or Time Warner/Charter package.
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 7:53 PM, NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nat
> eccie at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Or take the most approach of do nothing.
>
>
>
> My personal favorite is to use codecs where QoS matters less, like iLBC,
> OPUS, etc.
>
>
>
> So many business are getting rid of the QoS capable WAN and just doing
> VPNs, even if they have fancy names that make it sound better than public
> internet.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 3, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:ba
> mick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
>
> So, I know this is an age old question that?s debated, but I?ve been
> wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for
> softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate
> VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn?t applicable with softphones.
>
>
>
> I?ve heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem
> to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.
>
> 1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on
> the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device.
> Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network
> impact due to blind PC trust.
>
> 2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the
> ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other
> programs could theoretically use those ports
>
> 3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all
> switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches
> to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly
> needing prime collab?)?
>
>
>
> Maybe I?m missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for
> softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC
> (I know there?s the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but
> I don?t believe there?s a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?
>
>
>
> Ben Amick
>
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQk
> mnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzr
> BPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-
> F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2
> rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-
> e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpv
> pj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdK
> ndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5d
> qWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY
> 3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-
> Aq83iTqlblbCqOmdbFEw0zi13UU91Em4zh1I43h00ZhwSOUryKrT3IPkd-jE>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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<ht
> tp://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndy1J5xVBwQsCzBMsCrKrhhpvpj7
> 3AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndA
> SRtxIrsKrud7bPBD7D-LOryrPPXWvnKnjh7cYMed7aqbz0XG8
> FHnjlKOeVkffGhBrwqrhdICXYyevvjvuhjsdTdAVPmEBCbdSaY3ivNU6U9GX
> 33VkDa3JsJaBGBPdpb6_AaveFA54hfBPqrMVBAS2_id41FrJaBGBPdpb6BQQg0hF0xYs4wQ
> b2hEwS21Ew0uEMrpsdwmX6sqwk>
>
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/
> attachments/20170104/640d3962/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 13:31:15 +0000
> From: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
> To: Tim Warnock <timoid at timoid.org>, "'cisco-voip at puck.nether.net'"
>         <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 7921g-w-k9 -> 7921g-a-k9
> Message-ID:
>         <820C24BFE55F434C97807C60D4647ACE0F9DE0F3 at E2k10-MB-HT1.
> humanarc.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I don't know about the issue with 802.11d, but the 7925/7926(+barcode
> scanner) is not EoL and is the successor in the same series. However, the
> newest wireless phone that they want us all to move to is the 8821.
>
> Ben Amick
> Telecom Analyst
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Tim Warnock
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 11:12 PM
> To: 'cisco-voip at puck.nether.net' <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] 7921g-w-k9 -> 7921g-a-k9
>
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone know how to either:
>
> A) Turn a 7921G-W-K9 -> 7291G-A-K9 or
> B) Disable the 7921G's reliance on country information being advertised
> via 802.11d
>
> It appears the World version needs 802.11d functioning in order to connect
> to the AP, and the AP in question doesn't support 802.11d
>
> Or suggest a suitable replacement (7921G is EOL)?
>
> Thanks
> -]Tim.
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> http://cp.mcafee.com/d/1jWVIe4wUpdEIfcLTphsudTdEEILIF
> zxO9EVdEEILIFzDDSjqabbXPUVVZMSyyUqejhPuZQrCO6GOIl1hdJnor6TbC
> OrqKMSdKndKIK3HeffZvAm4rILfZuVtdBxDAS3hOC-UeWyaqRQRrCzB_BgY-
> F6lK1FJ4SyrLRQkhPz0WXVEVdTdAVPmEBCbdSaY3ivNU6U9GX33VkDa3JsJa
> BGBPdpb6XiFqFsPmiNsxlK5LE2BCX5u1FfUY3jqrPb1IQJSBiRiVCIBziWq8
> 1NEVjh8BP1sGqejh0nd7NEw76zBd4ynQKld79JAsr9cjU
>
>
> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the
> individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information
> that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under
> applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient
> or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or
> hard copy. Thank you
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> 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 159, Issue 4
> ******************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20170104/e694f330/attachment.html>