[cisco-voip] 8865s and MRA CUCM registration failover issue
Erick Bergquist
erickbee at gmail.com
Wed Oct 30 19:47:28 EDT 2019
Anthony,
Meant 12.5.5. Looks like you’ll be doing similar setup as this one.
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 5:35 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> Erick,
>
> It doesn't look like there was an X8.12.5. Did you mean X12.5? Or was
> that a version they pulled?
>
>
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/unified-communications/expressway-series/products-release-notes-list.html
>
>
> What is "this" in the context of your question? The Jabber IM only, or the
> TC/CE endpoints?
>
> Also, I'm going to be doing a clustered X8.11.4 deployment here shortly
> and will have three CUCM CPEs, and so I'll be doing some testing and
> whatnot.
>
> If I run into issues, I'll let you know, but I will also be filing a
> defect, should one need be created at that time. Possibly even a
> documentation defect, since the guides don't specify quantity of CUCM
> servers; it's left at simply: CUCM fail over.
>
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 5:09 PM Erick Bergquist <erickbee at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Is there a 8.12.5 enhancement to help with this specifically? On
>> 8.11.4 at moment.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 2:58 PM Benjamin Turner <benmturner at hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > This will work with jabber since you are not testing the failover of
>> presence. And phone models TC/CE would would work regardless of a clustered
>> C and E. 12.5 should have fixed these issues but......
>> >
>> > Get Outlook for Android
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net> on behalf of
>> Erick Bergquist <erickbee at gmail.com>
>> > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 4:05:06 PM
>> > To: Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <rratliff at cisco.com>
>> > Cc: voip puck <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
>> > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] 8865s and MRA CUCM registration failover issue
>> >
>> > Understood, will keep pushing that angle and try to get some answers
>> > on the differences and 88xx MRA capabilities.
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 1:57 PM Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)
>> > <rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > The implementation is different for TC/CE, phones, and Jabber (Teams
>> I would expect to mirror Jabber).
>> > >
>> > > I still think a bug is warranted, if nothing else to track the
>> expectation. Back in the x8.11 days we had to get the docs updated to
>> reflect that fact that phones weren't redundant without clustered
>> Expressways, this seems to be a variant of that.
>> > >
>> > > -Ryan
>> > >
>> > > On 10/30/19, 3:54 PM, "Erick Bergquist" <erickbee at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Pair of expressways, clustered. DX 70/80s happen to work fine
>> with
>> > > all 3 over MRA.
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 1:13 PM Ryan Ratliff (rratliff)
>> > > <rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > IIRC (it's been a looong time since I looked into this)
>> failover with RMA was based on device->Expressway-E redundancy, not so much
>> Expressway->CUCM.
>> > > > This is why you don't get any redundancy without a clustered
>> Expressway.
>> > > >
>> > > > I'd recommend treating it as a bug and pushing for one to be
>> created. If you have two Expressway-Es in the cluster (and the phone knows
>> this via DNS lookups) then it should maintain connections to an active and
>> standby CUCM.
>> > > >
>> > > > If anyone happens to have a cluster of 3 Expressways to test
>> with, I wonder how that would look.
>> > > >
>> > > > - Ryan
>> > > >
>> > > > On 10/30/19, 2:57 PM, "cisco-voip on behalf of Erick Bergquist"
>> <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net on behalf of erickbee at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Following up on this, still working to figure this out and
>> have been
>> > > > working with TAC.
>> > > >
>> > > > Does anyone know if the 8865s when using MRA use only the
>> first 2
>> > > > servers in UCM group or will also the third server if
>> present?
>> > > >
>> > > > On the 8865 phone web page it shows all 3 servers from UCM
>> group.
>> > > >
>> > > > On the phone information page on phone itself, it shows the
>> Active
>> > > > Server and Stand-by Server only.
>> > > >
>> > > > When we make the first server unreachable (CCM1) the 8865
>> over MRA
>> > > > fails to second server CCM2 fine and the phone information
>> screen
>> > > > shows CCM1 as Active Server and the Stand-by Server field
>> is empty.
>> > > > The web page of phone shows all 3 servers still with CCM2
>> as Active.
>> > > > When we make CCM2 unreachable the phone just spins and
>> never goes to
>> > > > the third server over MRA. Phones on-premise use the third
>> server
>> > > > fine.
>> > > >
>> > > > I can not find any documentation on this and so far no one
>> seems to
>> > > > really have an answer if 88xx phones over MRA will use the
>> third
>> > > > server in UCM group.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks.
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 12:25 PM Erick Bergquist <
>> erickbee at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Thanks, I've seen that bug before (and another cisco doc)
>> and that bug
>> > > > > says fixed in 8.11.x which we are on.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > All 3 CUCMs are in our SRV records and show active on the
>> Expressway side.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 12:04 PM Brian Meade <
>> bmeade90 at vt.edu> wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > You're may be hitting this limitation-
>> https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvj49486
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > If not, are all 3 CUCM servers in the _cisco-uds SRV
>> record and resolvable by the Expressway-C?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 11:47 AM Erick Bergquist <
>> erickbee at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> Has anyone seen where 8865 model phones don't register
>> over MRA in
>> > > > > >> the UCM group if the some servers are not reachable?
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> 8865s with 12.5.1 SR3 firmware
>> > > > > >> 12.5.1 SU1 CUCM
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> 2 expressway pairs
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> UCM group order (same as service group),
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> CCM1
>> > > > > >> CCM2
>> > > > > >> CCM3
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> When CCM1 and CCM2 are unreachable the MRA 8865 phone
>> just spins at registering.
>> > > > > >> Once CCM1 or CCM2 become reachable, the phone comes
>> backs up.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> DX 70's and DX 80's register fine when CCM3 is only
>> available over MRA.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> Thanks,
>> > > > > >> Erick
>> > > > > >> _______________________________________________
>> > > > > >> cisco-voip mailing list
>> > > > > >> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>> > > > > >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > cisco-voip mailing list
>> > > > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>> > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > cisco-voip mailing list
>> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20191030/53f44af7/attachment.htm>
More information about the cisco-voip
mailing list