<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; ">yes, migration to 2000.4.2 will be mandatory. there will be no more releases for the 2000.4.1 or 2000.2.7 OS versions. There are already some fixes in 2000.4.2 that are not in 2000.4.1 or 2000.2.7.<DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>/Wes<BR><DIV><DIV>On Dec 22, 2005, at 3:00 PM, Ortiz, Carlos wrote:</DIV><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PersonName"> <DIV class="Section1"><P class="MsoNormal"><FONT size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy">That’s not good news. Is it mandatory to move to this train?<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoNormal"><FONT size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoNormal"><FONT size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy">Carlos<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoNormal"><FONT size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P> <DIV> <DIV class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><FONT size="3" face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="font-size:12.0pt"> <HR size="2" width="100%" align="center" tabindex="-1"> </SPAN></FONT></DIV><P class="MsoNormal"><B><FONT size="2" face="Tahoma"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold">From:</SPAN></FONT></B><FONT size="2" face="Tahoma"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma"> <ST1:PERSONNAME w:st="on"><A href="mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net</A></ST1:PERSONNAME> [mailto:<ST1:PERSONNAME w:st="on"><A href="mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net</A></ST1:PERSONNAME>] <B><SPAN style="font-weight:bold">On Behalf Of </SPAN></B>VoIP Forum<BR> <B><SPAN style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Thursday, December 22, 2005 2:46 PM<BR> <B><SPAN style="font-weight:bold">To:</SPAN></B> <A href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A><BR> <B><SPAN style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> [cisco-voip] VM Pilot or FwdNoAns Issue</SPAN></FONT><O:P></O:P></P> </DIV><P class="MsoNormal"><FONT size="3" face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="font-size: 12.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoNormal"><FONT size="2" face="Arial"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial">Has anyone recently upgraded OS from the 2000.2.7 train to 2000.4.2?<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoNormal"><FONT size="2" face="Arial"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoNormal"><FONT size="2" face="Arial"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial">After an upgrade from 2000.2.7sr8 to 2000.4.2sr2 we have been getting dispersed reports that calls are not rolling to VM after the NoAns timeout. Does this sound familiar to anyone?<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoNormal"><FONT size="2" face="Arial"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial">Do we need an ES to resolve this?<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P> </DIV> </O:SMARTTAGTYPE><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">_______________________________________________</DIV><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">cisco-voip mailing list</DIV><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><A href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A></DIV><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><A href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</A></DIV> </DIV><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>