[cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS

Mon Jan 9 23:29:09 EST 2017

FYI,

I’ve been working with a customer recently where we have utilised both the SIP Profile on CUCM to specify port ranges for voice /video and AD Group Policy to mark the traffic.
There are a few caveats to getting this working. It requires both a Windows registry value turned on, and some settings in the Windows QoS policy.

They had a mix of different switches. They configured the switches to “Trust DSCP”.

Hope this helps.

Cheers
Dana

From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net> on behalf of Tom Sparks <tsparks at taosconsulting.com>
Date: Thursday, 5 January 2017 at 11:31 am
To: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS

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<mailto:tsparks at taosconsulting.com>
+1 415.515.2391

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 9:00 AM, <cisco-voip-request at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-request at puck.nether.net>> wrote:
Send cisco-voip mailing list submissions to
        cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto: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<mailto:cisco-voip-request at puck.nether.net>

You can reach the person managing the list at
        cisco-voip-owner at puck.nether.net<mailto: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<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>
To: "'Jeffrey McHugh'" <jmchugh at fidelus.com<mailto:jmchugh at fidelus.com>>, "'Tim Franklin'"
        <tim at tripplehelix.net<mailto:tim at tripplehelix.net>>, <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM Patch Insight
Message-ID: <062901d265e7$8652f4c0$92f8de40$@gmail.com<http://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<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<mailto:tim at tripplehelix.net>>; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto: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<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> <mailto: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<tel:%2B1-212-616-7801> office | +1-212-616-7850<tel:%2B1-212-616-7850> fax |  <http://www.fidelus.com/> www.fidelus.com<http://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<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
Message-ID:
        <820C24BFE55F434C97807C60D4647ACE0F9D3DBB at E2k10-MB-HT1.humanarc.com<mailto: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<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>>
To: Ben Amick <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
Message-ID:
        <YTOPR01MB0251F94A8E59508021DD7D21AC6E0 at YTOPR01MB0251.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM<mailto: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<tel:519-824-4120%20Ext%2056354>
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>
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<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>>, Cisco VoIP Group
        <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
Message-ID:
        <820C24BFE55F434C97807C60D4647ACE0F9D3E0F at E2k10-MB-HT1.humanarc.com<mailto: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<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<mailto: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<tel:519-824-4120%20Ext%2056354>
lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca><mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>>
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://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><mailto: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<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<mailto:shodgeman at xo.com>>
To: Ben Amick <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
Message-ID:
        <94004f6f0f8646e7a51539636329908b at TXPLANEXCH101.corp.inthosts.net<mailto: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<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<mailto: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<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>
To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>
Cc: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
Message-ID: <05C8F1E2-B3DA-435C-BAB4-3C8278A0A726 at gmail.com<mailto: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<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/20170103/0da1ffef/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 01:39:30 +0000
From: Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>>
To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>
Cc: Ben Amick <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
Message-ID:
        <BLUPR18MB0482767CF5DE727DDEE526FEC5610 at BLUPR18MB0482.namprd18.prod.outlook.com<mailto: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:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto: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><mailto: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<mailto:akramadh at cisco.com>>
To: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto: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<mailto: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><mailto:akramadh at cisco.com<mailto:akramadh at cisco.com>>
Phone: +61 2 8446 6257<tel:%2B61%202%208446%206257>

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<http://www.cisco.com/assets/swa/img/thinkbeforeyouprint.gif%5dThink> 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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>>, NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>
Cc: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
Message-ID:
        <820C24BFE55F434C97807C60D4647ACE0F9DE054 at E2k10-MB-HT1.humanarc.com<mailto: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<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>; 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:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQkmnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzrBPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5dqWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>>
To: Ben Amick <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
Message-ID:
        <BLUPR18MB04820158AE92067D655F5A57C5610 at BLUPR18MB0482.namprd18.prod.outlook.com<mailto: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:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>>
Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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><mailto: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:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQkmnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzrBPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5dqWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.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
Message-ID:
        <820C24BFE55F434C97807C60D4647ACE0F9DE08E at E2k10-MB-HT1.humanarc.com<mailto: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<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<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:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>>
Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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><mailto: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:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQkmnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzrBPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5dqWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>>
To: Ben Amick <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
Message-ID:
        <BLUPR18MB048225F237E9FCEFAF1C726FC5610 at BLUPR18MB0482.namprd18.prod.outlook.com<mailto: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:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>>
Cc: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto: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><mailto: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:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>>
Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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><mailto: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:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQkmnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzrBPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5dqWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-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<mailto:eizetov at gmail.com>>
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
Message-ID:
        <CAKLHLoWZW6M62LgHccdQfzi12zfDwj+y8FoHJ07wjr5JOieMbQ at mail.gmail.com<mailto:CAKLHLoWZW6M62LgHccdQfzi12zfDwj%2By8FoHJ07wjr5JOieMbQ 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<mailto: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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com> <ryanhuff at outlook.com<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<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> 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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com> <ryanhuff at outlook.com<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>; 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: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<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> <http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQkmnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzrBPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2rrHEaGTc-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
> <http://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5dqWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-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
>
>
-------------- 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<mailto:timoid at timoid.org>>
To: "'cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>'" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto: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<mailto:eizetov at gmail.com>>, Ryan Huff
        <ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>>
Cc: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
Message-ID:
        <820C24BFE55F434C97807C60D4647ACE0F9DE1E2 at E2k10-MB-HT1.humanarc.com<mailto: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<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>; 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:ryanhuff at outlook.com><mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto: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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>>
Cc: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto: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><mailto: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:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>>
Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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><mailto: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:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQkmnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzrBPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5dqWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-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

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndy1J5xVBwQsCzBMsCrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndASRtxIrsKrud7bPBD7D-LOryrPPXWvnKnjh7cYMed7aqbz0XG8FHnjlKOeVkffGhBrwqrhdICXYyevvjvuhjsdTdAVPmEBCbdSaY3ivNU6U9GX33VkDa3JsJaBGBPdpb6_AaveFA54hfBPqrMVBAS2_id41FrJaBGBPdpb6BQQg0hF0xYs4wQb2hEwS21Ew0uEMrpsdwmX6sqwk>

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<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>>
To: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>, Evgeny Izetov
        <eizetov at gmail.com<mailto:eizetov at gmail.com>>, "Ryan Huff" <ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>>
Cc: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS
Message-ID:
        <YTOPR01MB02513B7A153261166E291393AC610 at YTOPR01MB0251.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM<mailto: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<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>
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<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>; 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:ryanhuff at outlook.com><mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto: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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>>
Cc: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto: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><mailto: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:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>>
Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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><mailto: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:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQkmnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzrBPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5dqWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-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

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndy1J5xVBwQsCzBMsCrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndASRtxIrsKrud7bPBD7D-LOryrPPXWvnKnjh7cYMed7aqbz0XG8FHnjlKOeVkffGhBrwqrhdICXYyevvjvuhjsdTdAVPmEBCbdSaY3ivNU6U9GX33VkDa3JsJaBGBPdpb6_AaveFA54hfBPqrMVBAS2_id41FrJaBGBPdpb6BQQg0hF0xYs4wQb2hEwS21Ew0uEMrpsdwmX6sqwk>

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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>>
To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>>
Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com>, Evgeny Izetov
        <eizetov at gmail.com<mailto:eizetov 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
Message-ID:
        <BLUPR18MB04820F67E5FD6398C9952F36C5610 at BLUPR18MB0482.namprd18.prod.outlook.com<mailto: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:lelio at uoguelph.ca><mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio 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><mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>>
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs<http://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><mailto: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<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<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><mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>>>
Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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><mailto: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:ryanhuff at outlook.com><mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com<mailto: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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>>
Cc: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto: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><mailto: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:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>>
Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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><mailto: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:nateccie at gmail.com><mailto:nateccie at gmail.com<mailto: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<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto: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<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQkmnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzrBPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5dqWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-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

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net><mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndy1J5xVBwQsCzBMsCrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndASRtxIrsKrud7bPBD7D-LOryrPPXWvnKnjh7cYMed7aqbz0XG8FHnjlKOeVkffGhBrwqrhdICXYyevvjvuhjsdTdAVPmEBCbdSaY3ivNU6U9GX33VkDa3JsJaBGBPdpb6_AaveFA54hfBPqrMVBAS2_id41FrJaBGBPdpb6BQQg0hF0xYs4wQb2hEwS21Ew0uEMrpsdwmX6sqwk>

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<mailto:timoid at timoid.org>>, "'cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>'"
        <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto: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<mailto: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<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<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>' <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto: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<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
http://cp.mcafee.com/d/1jWVIe4wUpdEIfcLTphsudTdEEILIFzxO9EVdEEILIFzDDSjqabbXPUVVZMSyyUqejhPuZQrCO6GOIl1hdJnor6TbCOrqKMSdKndKIK3HeffZvAm4rILfZuVtdBxDAS3hOC-UeWyaqRQRrCzB_BgY-F6lK1FJ4SyrLRQkhPz0WXVEVdTdAVPmEBCbdSaY3ivNU6U9GX33VkDa3JsJaBGBPdpb6XiFqFsPmiNsxlK5LE2BCX5u1FfUY3jqrPb1IQJSBiRiVCIBziWq81NEVjh8BP1sGqejh0nd7NEw76zBd4ynQKld79JAsr9cjU

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<mailto: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/20170110/add77f72/attachment.html>