We just upgraded to 8.5 CUCM about 2 weeks ago. <div><br></div><div>Part of that upgrade was taking all of our gateways up to Version 15.1(4)M1. Same for our VG224's</div><div><br></div><div>So far no wheels have fallen off, but I haven't gone looking for faxing issues. (Cause you know you'll ALWAYS find them)</div>
<div><br></div><div>We usually downspeed our faxes to 9600 ECM off.</div><div><br></div><div>I'm really hoping to have a t.38 fax server onsite very soon, and not really have to worry about this anymore. (Seriously, we could get rid of all but 3 ports for postage machines if we did this. I should calculate the ROI on smartnet on the VG224's we've got for the "absolutely vital" fax machines we have. I mean, is it normal have 4 fax machines sitting next to each other?)</div>
<div><br></div><div>Mike<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lelio@uoguelph.ca">lelio@uoguelph.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div><div style="font-family:Verdana;font-size:10pt;color:#000000">We've had pretty good luck setting our fax machines to 14.4 ECM off when using SCCP passthrough.<span> Or was it pass through? Or pass-through? (Anyone remember that thread? ;)<br>
<br>We're currently using 15.0(1)M3 on our VG224s and 15.1(3)T on our gateways. Probably look at upgrading to 15.1(3)T as well if we find some time to test SG3 speeds using passthrough which is apparently supported now.<br>
<br><span name="x"></span>---<br>Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<br>Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<br>(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)<br>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it. <br> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)<br><span name="x"></span><br></span><br><hr><b>From: </b>"Erick A. Wellnitz" <<a href="mailto:erick.wellnitz@kattenlaw.com" target="_blank">erick.wellnitz@kattenlaw.com</a>><br>
<b>To: </b>"Jason Aarons (AM)" <<a href="mailto:jason.aarons@dimensiondata.com" target="_blank">jason.aarons@dimensiondata.com</a>><br><b>Cc: </b>"cisco-voip (<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a>)" <<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a>><br>
<b>Sent: </b>Thursday, October 27, 2011 10:40:03 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [cisco-voip] VG224 and vg224-i6k9s-mz.151-3.T2.bin<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br><br>We're doing the same but haven't added any analog devices yet.<br>
<br>On Oct 27, 2011, at 9:35 AM, "Jason Aarons (AM)" <<a href="mailto:jason.aarons@dimensiondata.com" target="_blank">jason.aarons@dimensiondata.com</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:jason.aarons@dimensiondata.com" target="_blank">jason.aarons@dimensiondata.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>My VG22/SCCP experience is your either have good luck or your faxing situation turns out really bad. In 2009 I went thru 6 different IOSs for VG224 before getting becoming caveat free with 12-4.15T6 and hate to repeat that situation.<br>
<br><br>Combination of Faxing/Modems/Postage/Polycoms, Last very large rollout of VG224s with SCCP (for Supplementary Features) I used IOS 12.4.15T6 with very good luck, however I’m researching 151-3.T2 and wanted to know if anyone had any feedback, issues or tried this code.<br>
<br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>cisco-voip mailing list<br><a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a>><br>
<a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a><br><br>===========================================================<br>CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to Regulations Governing Practice Before the Internal Revenue<br>
Service, any tax advice contained herein is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used<br>by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer.<br>===========================================================<br>
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:<br>This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the exclusive<br>use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is<br>
proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you<br>are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or <br>distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. Please notify<br>
the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the original <br>message without making any copies.<br>===========================================================<br>NOTIFICATION: Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited liability partnership that has<br>
elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997).<br>===========================================================<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>cisco-voip mailing list<br><a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br>
<a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a><br></div></div></div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
cisco-voip mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br>
<a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>