Gotcha, thanks for the explanation Wes, that's what I was looking for and can explain it to the customer. I'll let the customer know of the risks and let them make the decision to upgrade or wait for a minor patch.
Thanks! On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Wes Sisk (wsisk) <ws...@cisco.com> wrote: > I’ll lead off with: UCCX does a fair amount of work to customize the VOS > platform to their needs. As such they don’t pull in updates and fixes as > fast as UCM, UC, and CUP. > > I bet if you check the kernel or RHEL version you will find significant > difference and that contributes to the complexity of the fix. > admin:show packages active kernel > Active Side Package(s): for kernel package(s) > kernel-firmware-2.6.32-431.20.3.el6.noarch > kernel-2.6.32-431.20.3.el6.x86_64 > platform-kernel-tunable-1.0.0.0-1.i386 > dracut-kernel-004-336.el6_5.1.noarch > > RyanL may weigh in with better details. > > -w > > On Jul 10, 2015, at 11:41 AM, Charles Goldsmith <wo...@justfamily.org> > wrote: > > I understand that CUCM and UCCX are both VOS, and that it's probably not > the same version, but I don't understand why the platform team for CUCM can > give us a minor patch but we can't get the same out of UCCX. > > I'm sure most of you are like me, and steer clear of .0 releases. There > is an old saying, dot Oh, oh no. > > I'm not comfortable advising a customer to upgrade to the 11.0 release. > > Would like thoughts on this, and some explanation of the differences of > the VOS between CUCM/CUC and UCCX. > >
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
