[cisco-voip] [External] Re: CCX phone agent over MRA?

[Aman Chugh]

It should affect all clients which are registered over MRA with multiple
lines.

On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 2:06 PM Hunter Fuller <hf0002 at uah.edu> wrote:

> If you can do a tcpdump between expressway and call manager you will see a
> 404 and it would verify that. We didn’t see it on Jabber because we just
> hadn’t tried it - only needed multiple lines on hard phones.
>
> Or you can just change the setting on expressway, reregister Jabber, and
> hope for the best. Depends on what kind of lifestyle you subscribe to, I
> suppose.
>
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 13:01 Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca> wrote:
>
>> Um, ok. I just got a call from someone saying secondary lines are not
>> working on Jabber desktop via MRA.
>>
>>
>>
>> I was under the impression from our discussion below that this only
>> affects the 8800?
>>
>>
>>
>> But it affects Jabber too?
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
>> *Sent:* Monday, March 23, 2020 9:52 PM
>> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>; 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?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yeah. It exists! (on *8.*10)
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net> *On Behalf Of *Lelio
>> Fulgenzi
>> *Sent:* Monday, March 23, 2020 9:41 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?
>>
>>
>>
>> Wow. Interesting. Will have to read the X10.4 (*cough*) guide to see if a
>> similar feature exists.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for this.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Mar 23, 2020, at 9:29 PM, Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca> wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> *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> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip <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>
>> *Cc:* voyp list, cisco-voip <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>;tag=790972480^M
>> To: <sip:2000 at 10.1.75.44>^M
>> Call-ID: 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^M
>> Content-Id: <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>^M
>> Content-Length: 340^M
>> ^M
>>
>> <x-cisco-remotecc-request>
>>
>>  <answercallreq>
>>    <dialogid>
>>      <callid>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> 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> *On Behalf Of *Wakelin,
>> Frank
>> *Sent:* Monday, March 23, 2020 2:49 PM
>> *To:* 'Aman Chugh' <aman.chugh at gmail.com>
>> *Cc:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net) <
>> 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. L
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Frank Wakelin – Senior Network Analyst
>>
>> Information Technology | City of Richmond
>>
>>
>>
>> Office +16042764190
>>
>> Mobile +17788394693
>>
>> fwakelin at richmond.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Aman Chugh <aman.chugh at gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* March 23, 2020 1:43 PM
>> *To:* Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca>
>> *Cc:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net) <
>> 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>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* March 23, 2020 11:05 AM
>> *To:* James B <james.buchanan2 at gmail.com>
>> *Cc:* Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca>; voyp list, cisco-voip (
>> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net) <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>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Anthony,
>>
>>
>>
>> Do you attribute that to the change in web connectivity for Finesse with
>> 12.x?
>>
>>
>>
>> James
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
>> *Sent: *23 March 2020 17:44
>> *To: *Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca>
>> *Cc: *voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)
>> <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>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Aman Chugh <aman.chugh at gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* March 17, 2020 7:45 PM
>> *To:* Wakelin, Frank <FWakelin at richmond.ca>
>> *Cc:* Erick Bergquist <erickbee at gmail.com>; Lelio Fulgenzi <
>> lelio at uoguelph.ca>; voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net) <
>> 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>
>> 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
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cisco-voip <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>
>> Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net) <
>> 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> wrote:
>> >
>> > p.s. I just caught that bug description and your comment. Omg.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
>> > Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2020 3:30 PM
>> > To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
>> > Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net) <
>> 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>
>> 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
>> > 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>
> --
>
> --
> Hunter Fuller
> Router Jockey
> VBH Annex B-5
> +1 256 824 5331
>
> Office of Information Technology
> The University of Alabama in Huntsville
> Network Engineering
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200330/553ac965/attachment.htm>