<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">They just are spending the time to go back and test it. Do you really need to re-test MGCP with each new version of CallManager? What changed with the MGCP
Draft 0.1 , or are they re-writing MGCP with each new version of Callmanager?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Hughes, Scott GRE-MG<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 09, 2014 2:02 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Anthony Holloway<br>
<b>Cc:</b> cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [cisco-voip] cucm 10.5(1) vs 10.0(1)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
I would love for some clarification on this-- specifically VG224, 7925, and 7937 support.<br>
<br>
<br>
On Jul 8, 2014, at 3:26 PM, "Anthony Holloway" <<a href="mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip@gmail.com%3cmailto:avholloway+cisco-voip@gmail.com">avholloway+cisco-voip@gmail.com<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip@gmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
It appears as though CUCM 10.5 drops official support for some phone and gateway models. E.g., 7925, 7937, 1861 and VG224. Or at least, the compatibility matrix is no longer being maintained for these products.<br>
<br>
Check here:<br>
<a href="http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/uc_system/unified/communications/system/versions/IPTMtrix.html#wp1016708" target="_blank">http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/uc_system/unified/communications/system/versions/IPTMtrix.html#wp1016708</a><br>
<br>
<br>
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 7:23 AM, GR <<a href="mailto:grccie@gmail.com%3cmailto:grccie@gmail.com">grccie@gmail.com<mailto:grccie@gmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
Hi Guys,<br>
<br>
Was just about to do a fresh installation of ucm/cuc/im&p on a Cisco BE6k. Is 10.5 mature enough to go ahead?<br>
<br>
Anyone has anything to share on whether to go for a 10.0 or 10.5?<br>
<br>
Googling didnot yield sufficient results - if anyone can share there first hand experience or thoughts would be great.<br>
<br>
-gr<br>
<br>
Sent from my iPhone<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
cisco-voip mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net%3cmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto: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>
cisco-voip mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net%3cmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto: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>
NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: The information contained in this message from<br>
Great River Energy and any attachments are confidential and intended<br>
only for the named recipient(s). If you have received this message in <br>
error, you are prohibited from copying, distributing or using the<br>
information. Please contact the sender immediately by return email and<br>
delete the original message.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<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>
<br>
<span style="color:white">itevomcid</span> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>