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 fwake...@richmond.ca<mailto:fwake...@richmond.ca> From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net> On Behalf Of Anthony Holloway Sent: March 23, 2020 5:02 PM To: NateCCIE <natec...@gmail.com> Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip <cisco-voip@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@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@10.1.70.110<mailto:sip%3A2000@10.1.70.110>>;tag=790972480^M To: <sip:2000@10.1.75.44<mailto:sip%3A2000@10.1.75.44>>^M Call-ID: 4412b800-e7914b99-de968-6e46010a@10.1.70.110<mailto:4412b800-e7914b99-de968-6e46010a@10.1.70.110>^M CSeq: 101 REFER^M Max-Forwards: 70^M Contact: <sip:2000@10.1.70.110:5060;transport=tcp>^M User-Agent: Cisco-CUCM11.5^M Require: norefersub^M Expires: 0^M Refer-To: cid:1234567890@10.1.70.110<mailto:cid%3A1234567890@10.1.70.110>^M Content-Id: <1234567890@10.1.70.110<mailto:1234567890@10.1.70.110>>^M Content-Type: application/x-cisco-remotecc-request+xml^M Referred-By: <sip:2000@10.1.70.110<mailto:sip%3A2000@10.1.70.110>>^M Content-Length: 340^M ^M <x-cisco-remotecc-request> <answercallreq> <dialogid> <callid>42e18b00-e7914b97-de965-6e46010a@10.1.70.110<mailto:42e18b00-e7914b97-de965-6e46010a@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 <natec...@gmail.com<mailto:natec...@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-boun...@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>> On Behalf Of Wakelin, Frank Sent: Monday, March 23, 2020 2:49 PM To: 'Aman Chugh' <aman.ch...@gmail.com<mailto:aman.ch...@gmail.com>> Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>) <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@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. ☹ --- Frank Wakelin – Senior Network Analyst Information Technology | City of Richmond Office +16042764190 Mobile +17788394693 fwake...@richmond.ca<mailto:fwake...@richmond.ca> From: Aman Chugh <aman.ch...@gmail.com<mailto:aman.ch...@gmail.com>> Sent: March 23, 2020 1:43 PM To: Wakelin, Frank <fwake...@richmond.ca<mailto:fwake...@richmond.ca>> Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>) <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@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 <fwake...@richmond.ca<mailto:fwake...@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 fwake...@richmond.ca<mailto:fwake...@richmond.ca> From: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com<mailto:avholloway%2bcisco-v...@gmail.com>> Sent: March 23, 2020 11:05 AM To: James B <james.buchan...@gmail.com<mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com>> Cc: Wakelin, Frank <fwake...@richmond.ca<mailto:fwake...@richmond.ca>>; voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>) <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@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.buchan...@gmail.com<mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Anthony, Do you attribute that to the change in web connectivity for Finesse with 12.x? James From: Anthony Holloway<mailto:avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> Sent: 23 March 2020 17:44 To: Wakelin, Frank<mailto:fwake...@richmond.ca> Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)<mailto:cisco-voip@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 <fwake...@richmond.ca<mailto:fwake...@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 fwake...@richmond.ca<mailto:fwake...@richmond.ca> From: Aman Chugh <aman.ch...@gmail.com<mailto:aman.ch...@gmail.com>> Sent: March 17, 2020 7:45 PM To: Wakelin, Frank <fwake...@richmond.ca<mailto:fwake...@richmond.ca>> Cc: Erick Bergquist <erick...@gmail.com<mailto:erick...@gmail.com>>; Lelio Fulgenzi <le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>>; voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>) <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@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 <fwake...@richmond.ca<mailto:fwake...@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 fwake...@richmond.ca<mailto:fwake...@richmond.ca> -----Original Message----- From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>> On Behalf Of Erick Bergquist Sent: January 30, 2020 10:44 AM To: Lelio Fulgenzi <le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>> Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>) <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@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 <le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>> wrote: > > p.s. I just caught that bug description and your comment. Omg. > > > > From: Anthony Holloway > <avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com<mailto:avholloway%2bcisco-v...@gmail.com>> > Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2020 3:30 PM > To: Lelio Fulgenzi <le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>> > Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip > (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>) > <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@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 > <le...@uoguelph.ca<mailto:le...@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@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-voip mailing list > cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip _______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip _______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip _______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip _______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip _______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
