[cisco-voip] CCX phone agent over MRA?

Mon Mar 23 21:29:23 EDT 2020

Absolutely, here’s what Aman sent me:

Anther thing of note is use of SIP Path header on Expressway C. This may be needed to turned on if you multiple lines on 88xx phone. I have seen an issue when were we not able to ring second line on the phone when this was turned off on Expressway C.

You will need that turned up on Expressway C under unified communication - configuration.

I ran into this in testing in my environment few days back.

There are certain version requirements to have this turned on with CUCM.  Page 33

https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/expressway/config_guide/X8-11/Mobile-Remote-Access-via-Expressway-Deployment-Guide-X8-11-4.pdf

---
Frank Wakelin – Senior Network Analyst
Information Technology | City of Richmond

Office +16042764190
Mobile +17788394693
fwakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:fwakelin at richmond.ca>

From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
Sent: March 23, 2020 6:23 PM
To: Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca>
Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CCX phone agent over MRA?

Um, so, outside of ccx, getting multiline 8800s working over MRA requires extra config?

Can you share any tech notes ?

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 23, 2020, at 8:53 PM, Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:FWakelin at richmond.ca>> wrote:
Yeah, once again as it turns out it was the Cisco TAC engineer not really knowing the product they are apparently supporting – which is fine, but they also never escalated the call to someone who does when the question was over their head either. – heavy sigh –

As it turns out we generally configure all of our agents contact centre lines as their second line.  After my post Aman reached out to me with a note about the use of the SIP Path header on Expressway C as this is needed to support multiple lines on 88xx phone. The lack of multiline support was what was killing the call to the agent extension (on the second line of the phone) when it was presented by CCX.  I had a chance to enable the SIP path header today and successfully tested CCX.

So thanks all for your assistance and more so your insistence that this is supported/working in your environments.  Thanks Aman for the mention of the SIP path header!

---
Frank Wakelin – Senior Network Analyst
Information Technology | City of Richmond

Office +16042764190
Mobile +17788394693
fwakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:fwakelin at richmond.ca>

From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>> On Behalf Of Anthony Holloway
Sent: March 23, 2020 5:02 PM
To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>
Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CCX phone agent over MRA?

Yep, remote control via SIP from CUCM.

I just tried this again but on a CUCM 11.5, UCCX 12.0 and Expressway X12.5.5.

I pulled the traces off of two phones: one on-prem, one MRA, and the messages were the same.

This was Finesse telling the phone (Agent ext 2000) to answer a call, and thus CUCM using out of dialog REFER containing remote call control commands to answer the call.

REFER sip:e367249a-d9c8-4fbc-8f79-33b3e1be127f at 10.1.75.44:50868;transport=tcp SIP/2.0^M
Via: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.1.70.110:5060;branch=z9hG4bKec56650110b79^M
From: <sip:2000 at 10.1.70.110<mailto:sip%3A2000 at 10.1.70.110>>;tag=790972480^M
To: <sip:2000 at 10.1.75.44<mailto:sip%3A2000 at 10.1.75.44>>^M
Call-ID: 4412b800-e7914b99-de968-6e46010a at 10.1.70.110<mailto:4412b800-e7914b99-de968-6e46010a at 10.1.70.110>^M
CSeq: 101 REFER^M
Max-Forwards: 70^M
Contact: <sip:2000 at 10.1.70.110:5060;transport=tcp>^M
User-Agent: Cisco-CUCM11.5^M
Require: norefersub^M
Expires: 0^M
Refer-To: cid:1234567890 at 10.1.70.110<mailto:cid%3A1234567890 at 10.1.70.110>^M
Content-Id: <1234567890 at 10.1.70.110<mailto:1234567890 at 10.1.70.110>>^M
Content-Type: application/x-cisco-remotecc-request+xml^M
Referred-By: <sip:2000 at 10.1.70.110<mailto:sip%3A2000 at 10.1.70.110>>^M
Content-Length: 340^M
^M

<x-cisco-remotecc-request>

 <answercallreq>
   <dialogid>
     <callid>42e18b00-e7914b97-de965-6e46010a at 10.1.70.110<mailto:42e18b00-e7914b97-de965-6e46010a at 10.1.70.110></callid>
     <localtag>2490017~9e5ce725-d89d-4564-a3be-db63e3605d34-42471213</localtag>
     <remotetag>ec1d8bbaebe266b0246fba9d-5a3ccd67</remotetag>
   </dialogid>
 </answercallreq>

</x-cisco-remotecc-request>

Or if you're interested, here's what the XML looks like when the user makes an outgoing call with Finesse's dial pad to extension 2500.

<x-cisco-remotecc-request>

  <initiatecallreq>
     <dialstring>2500</dialstring>
     <linenumber>1</linenumber>
     <globalcallid>1-812082</globalcallid>
  </initiatecallreq>

</x-cisco-remotecc-request>

On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 4:23 PM NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>> wrote:
I could be confused but I don’t think the phones talk CTI or CTI-QBE, they just talk SIP/SCCP.  UCCX talks CTI to CUCM’s CTI manager which then tells the phone to do something.  I know CTI isn’t supported over MRA, but that is for deskphone control from Jabber, not the jabber softclient.

I have people using CCE via thin client talking to a MRA registered jabber.  Now that I think of it, they said you can’t use Jabber for mobile because as an agent device, but I would think that is some other limitation.

From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>> On Behalf Of Wakelin, Frank
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2020 2:49 PM
To: 'Aman Chugh' <aman.chugh at gmail.com<mailto:aman.chugh at gmail.com>>
Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (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] CCX phone agent over MRA?

I’m not really sure – I have my doubts as well.  They sited the lack of CTI-QBE support as to why the CCX servers could not use CTI to control the phones connected over MRA.  The more folks that tell me they had it working with CCX, the more I think they just latched on to the phrase in the feature configuration guide and went with that.  It certainly wouldn’t be the first time TAC has given me a pat answer and been unwilling to escalate/troubleshoot with me. ☹

---
Frank Wakelin – Senior Network Analyst
Information Technology | City of Richmond

Office +16042764190
Mobile +17788394693
fwakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:fwakelin at richmond.ca>

From: Aman Chugh <aman.chugh at gmail.com<mailto:aman.chugh at gmail.com>>
Sent: March 23, 2020 1:43 PM
To: Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:FWakelin at richmond.ca>>
Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (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] CCX phone agent over MRA?

Just curious as to what makes it unsupported with 11.5 or what is added in 12 which makes it supported.

Does SIP phone doing MRA require support for certain sip headers which are only supported with CSR 12 or later.

I did have it working with CUCM 10.5 , UCCE 11.6 and Expressway 8.11.2

On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 4:32 PM Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:FWakelin at richmond.ca>> wrote:
Thanks all – I did get confirmation from TAC that this is not supported – at least not with 11.5.  Not sure I’m ready to upgrade everything to 12.x at the moment to test but will eat-mark it for later this year.

---
Frank Wakelin – Senior Network Analyst
Information Technology | City of Richmond

Office +16042764190
Mobile +17788394693
fwakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:fwakelin at richmond.ca>

From: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway%2Bcisco-voip at gmail.com>>
Sent: March 23, 2020 11:05 AM
To: James B <james.buchanan2 at gmail.com<mailto:james.buchanan2 at gmail.com>>
Cc: Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:FWakelin at richmond.ca>>; voyp list, cisco-voip (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: Re: [cisco-voip] CCX phone agent over MRA?

No, I wouldn't think it has anything to do with finesse.  Again the user had direct access to Finesse, no VPN or Internet exposure, just simply the user was on the network with the PC while the phone was on a public internet circuit.  I'd guess it has worked in previous versions, as it's been in the UCCX SRND for a while now, but perhaps there's some issues with it.  I just wanted to add a story of success to this otherwise long thread of failures.

On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 12:46 PM James B <james.buchanan2 at gmail.com<mailto:james.buchanan2 at gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Anthony,

Do you attribute that to the change in web connectivity for Finesse with 12.x?

James

From: Anthony Holloway<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
Sent: 23 March 2020 17:44
To: Wakelin, Frank<mailto:FWakelin at richmond.ca>
Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CCX phone agent over MRA?

For whatever it's worth, I just upgraded a customer from CSR 11 to CSR 12.5 (including UCCX), and testing of an Agent phone registered over MRA with the Finesse client directly accessing Finesse server worked.  Clicking call control buttons in Finesse was successful in controlling the phone.  So, while the documentation and field experiences maybe fuzzy, here's one empirical case of evidence that it does work on the latest versions.

Frank, what did TAC respond to you with?

On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 1:07 PM Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:FWakelin at richmond.ca>> wrote:
Thanks for the reply.    Finesse is using VPN, but the physical desk phone is not – it is connected via MRA.  Standard inbound/outbound calling to the phone itself works flawlessly over MRA.  What isn’t working are CCX calls to the agent phone; CCX uses CTI to control/monitor the desk phone.

I did read the CCX/expressway design guide which generally states that CCX over MRA is supported, but features that rely on CTI-QBE are not.  The documentation isn’t clear as to what CCX features rely on that.  It does say CCX is supported however and in my mind the base feature required in order to say that “CCX is supported” would be routing calls to agents.  I’ve asked TAC to confirm what CCX features/functions are available/supported and which are not?

This is not critical as we do have the ability to use Jabber softphones via VPN, but we do wish to use 8800 series phones connected via MRA if possible.

---
Frank Wakelin – Senior Network Analyst
Information Technology | City of Richmond

Office +16042764190
Mobile +17788394693
fwakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:fwakelin at richmond.ca>

From: Aman Chugh <aman.chugh at gmail.com<mailto:aman.chugh at gmail.com>>
Sent: March 17, 2020 7:45 PM
To: Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:FWakelin at richmond.ca>>
Cc: Erick Bergquist <erickbee at gmail.com<mailto:erickbee at gmail.com>>; Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>>; voyp list, cisco-voip (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] CCX phone agent over MRA?

It should work if CTI from Finesse is using VPN.

Are you able to make inbound and outbound call to the MRA phone without Finesse.

For the inbound call Cucm sends an invite over to Expressway C with which the mra phone is registered. I would pull CUCM and CTI trace for the inbound call.

Aman

On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 3:04 PM Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:FWakelin at richmond.ca>> wrote:
Did anyone get this to work?  I'm currently testing with a remote 88xx phone registered via MRA.  Finesse is logged in on PC connected over VPN.  Finesse desktop works fine, but once agent goes ready, the call is never presented to the phone; the agent immediately goes from reserved to not ready again.

I use Jabber as a softphone on the laptop the call is presented no problem.  Any ideas?

---
Frank Wakelin - Senior Network Analyst
Information Technology | City of Richmond

Office +16042764190
Mobile +17788394693
fwakelin at richmond.ca<mailto:fwakelin at richmond.ca>

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>> On Behalf Of Erick Bergquist
Sent: January 30, 2020 10:44 AM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>>
Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (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] CCX phone agent over MRA?

Has anyone done a Agent with a hard phone over MRA (8865)?   Finding
the documents don't really come out and say if it is supported or not.
See the notes about expressway versions and that is about it.

How about extension mobility login on MRA hard phone for agent use?

Erick

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 1:38 PM Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>> wrote:
>
> p.s. I just caught that bug description and your comment. Omg.
>
>
>
> From: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway%2Bcisco-voip at gmail.com>>
> Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2020 3:30 PM
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>>
> Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (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] CCX phone agent over MRA?
>
>
>
> Are you talking Finesse IP Phone Agent (FIPPA)?
>
>
>
> If so, the below enhancement defect requesting that these types of details be documented (I mean should we even have to request that?) states that they tested FIPPA via MRA and it worked.
>
>
>
> https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvi51697
>
>
>
> Just know that you'll have to add your UCCX server addresses to the HTTP Allow list on Expressway-C.
>
>
>
> And this makes sense to me, since FIPPA is stateless and all needed information is included in the URL to perform the actions like Login, Logout, Reason Codes, Ready, Not Ready, etc.   The actual ringing of the phone and answering etc., are just phone functions, which we know works over MRA.  That's kind of the point.  ;)
>
>
>
> What I am not sure of is whether the FIPPA push to phone works, if you're even using that; wherein, upon a new call, UCCX attempts to push content to the Agent's phone using the Phone API, but I would think, though I cannot confirm, that this would fail, since the phone IP is actually like 192.168.1.1 or something, and UCCX wont know to contact Expressway-C about it, nor would Expressway-C forward the API call on to the phone, etc.
>
>
>
> Finesse itself, the web app on port 8445, would not be available over MRA, as the document states, and would require a VPN or other networking solution to be available to the Agent.  Brian Meade commented on a previous conversation to a similar topic that a reverse proxy would help in this scenario.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 2:07 PM Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>> wrote:
>
>
> Can anyone say whether or not a CCX phone agent (or finesse agent in the future) is supported over MRA?
>
> The MRA guides say:
>
> The Expressway does not support some Cisco Unified Contact Center Express (Unified CCX) features for contact center agents or other users who connect over MRA. Jabber for Mac and Jabber for Windows cannot provide deskphone control over MRA, because the Expressway pair does not traverse the CTI-QBE protocol. However, if these Jabber applications, or other CTI applications, can connect to Unified CM CTIManager (directly or through the VPN) they can provide deskphone control of MRA-connected clients.
>
> We're looking at a simple phone agent setup, no desktop agent/control, etc.
>
> Thoughts?
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20200324/5cf4349a/attachment.htm>