Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Layer 2 QOS
agree. change threshold in order to limit it. once pq is enabled its always serviced first. shape doesnt apply. thats what vik said on the bootcamp. regards -- Sent from my mobile device. On Jul 30, 2010 4:02 AM, Daniel Berlinski dberlin...@gmail.com wrote: In my opinion this is done by adjusting the buffer size for queue 1 and applying it to a queue-set. srr shape statement in my opinion means nothing in relation to adjusting priority queue size. http://onlinestudylist.com/archives/ccie_voice/2010-July/069398.html On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Jeff Cotter jcot...@voxns.com wrote: How would you enable the priority queue AND make sure queue 1 has 10% of the bandwidth. The doc... ___ For more information regarding industry leading ... ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt
I don't buy that 0% theory that once they come to conclusion that you can't make it , they will start giving 0%...just a rumour I guess.. In my first attempt, I had few 0% spread across which means they graded my full lab otherwise they should have stopped at the beginning.. One more thing...If you get 0% in some section..it is all justified once you start looking into your solution from every angle.. Ash From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Berlinski Sent: 29 July 2010 23:15 To: CCIE Voice GMAIL Cc: OSL Group Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I've heard this from Cisco employees as well that when the proctors reach the conclusion that the candidate cannot make it up the 80% they just stop the correction. This is something I will definetely ask whenever there is another ask the expert forum. By the way has anyone ever looked for this info in the ask the expert archives? I know this forum is packed with Cisco staff. Can any of you clarify this for us? On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 7:29 AM, CCIE Voice GMAIL givemeccievoice2...@gmail.com wrote: I have heard this from a couple of people and even on this mailer. That is why I am bringing it up. I am not 100% sure if it is accurate or not. From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of Graham Hopkins Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 12:09 PM To: OSL Group Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I don't see how this can be correct, if it is it makes the report meaningless. You could screw up a few early sections, fail on 79% and still have most of the report as 0. Of course as the score report is subject to NDA we'll never know. Still Ohamien keep working on it and you will get there. Graham On 29 Jul 2010, at 19:59, CCIE Voice GMAIL wrote: It's also important to note, and correct me if I'm wrong, that the 0's don't necessarily mean you configured that section incorrectly. To my knowledge, once you lose more than 20 points, they simply stop grading your exam. So the later section may have 0's but you configured them correctly. I feel like this is a big problem with the already vague score reports. I wish they would change this. If you are paying $1400, you deserve a full report in my opinion. From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of Ashar Siddiqui Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:25 AM To: Ohamien Uhakheme Cc: OSL Group Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I am sure you will figure out what mistakes you made which resulted in 0%. I know its very hard to find out when you are sure your solution is 100% but believe me I have been through this and you will come to know how a tiny mistake in that particular section or may be in some other section resulted in 0% for this section :) I hope you pass in 2nd attempt. Don't forget to break down your scores and analyze exactly which question you lost points. That will help you to work out on specific areas. Ash Ohamien Uhakheme wrote: Hey guys -- I've been lurking for a while, so I figured that I'd chime in. I sat for my first attempt yesterday with less than passing results. Like other people have mentioned, it is heart breaking to see 0% in areas that you are sure that you nailed completely. It's cool though, I needed to get the psychological first attempt out of the way, and I will probably schedule again for early September. IPExpert is spot on with their training material, and I definitely appreciate the effort that has gone into it. Thanks guys, Ohamien _ ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com http://www.ipexpert.com/ ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com http://www.ipexpert.com/ ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt
Let my chip in and give my 2c. Disclaimer: This might have changed since last I wrote (Jan 2010) In my first attempt I failed the dial plan miserably and got 0, which in itself, is a section that if you get 0, getting 100% for the rest still isn't enough to pass. Yet I had sections marked throughout with some 0, some perfect and some in between all the way to the end. On my second attempt, I failed the OEQ section, which also if you can remember is a fail this and you fail the exam section. Still, the rest of my exam was scored all the way through. During lunch I realized that I made a mistake on my OEQ's and would fail, and asked the proctor what the policy was, and it was quite the reverse from what the perception is on this forum. He said. if you have earned enough points to pass you, they stop marking. You've passed. But they will keep marking all the way through if you have not. And after my first attempt, I couldn't believe getting 0 for dialplan, as I tested and tested everything, except for one question which I couldn't get working. So thought at the least, I should get a few marks for that section. But then spent a lot of time trying to figure out what I did wrong in dial-plan, and sure enough the error was with me. There was one small little thing that I did not include in any of my dialplan answers that bit me and got me a zero. Second time around, I just read the questions a lot more thoroughly and my dial plan score was great! Still didn't have enough to pass, but at least I had gained the belief that if a section was scored badly, I needed to pay attention to that area. HTH Paul On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Ashar Siddiqui siddas...@gmail.com wrote: I don’t buy that 0% theory that once they come to conclusion that you can’t make it , they will start giving 0%...just a rumour I guess.. In my first attempt, I had few 0% spread across which means they graded my full lab otherwise they should have stopped at the beginning.. One more thing...If you get 0% in some section..it is all justified once you start looking into your solution from every angle.. Ash *From:* ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] *On Behalf Of *Daniel Berlinski *Sent:* 29 July 2010 23:15 *To:* CCIE Voice GMAIL *Cc:* OSL Group *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I've heard this from Cisco employees as well that when the proctors reach the conclusion that the candidate cannot make it up the 80% they just stop the correction. This is something I will definetely ask whenever there is another ask the expert forum. By the way has anyone ever looked for this info in the ask the expert archives? I know this forum is packed with Cisco staff. Can any of you clarify this for us? On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 7:29 AM, CCIE Voice GMAIL givemeccievoice2...@gmail.com wrote: I have heard this from a couple of people and even on this mailer. That is why I am bringing it up. I am not 100% sure if it is accurate or not. *From:* ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] *On Behalf Of *Graham Hopkins *Sent:* Thursday, July 29, 2010 12:09 PM *To:* OSL Group *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I don't see how this can be correct, if it is it makes the report meaningless. You could screw up a few early sections, fail on 79% and still have most of the report as 0. Of course as the score report is subject to NDA we'll never know. Still Ohamien keep working on it and you will get there. Graham On 29 Jul 2010, at 19:59, CCIE Voice GMAIL wrote: It’s also important to note, and correct me if I’m wrong, that the 0’s don’t necessarily mean you configured that section incorrectly. To my knowledge, once you lose more than 20 points, they simply stop grading your exam. So the later section may have 0’s but you configured them correctly. I feel like this is a big problem with the already vague score reports. I wish they would change this. If you are paying $1400, you deserve a full report in my opinion. *From:* ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] *On Behalf Of *Ashar Siddiqui *Sent:* Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:25 AM *To:* Ohamien Uhakheme *Cc:* OSL Group *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I am sure you will figure out what mistakes you made which resulted in 0%. I know its very hard to find out when you are sure your solution is 100% but believe me I have been through this and you will come to know how a tiny mistake in that particular section or may be in some other section resulted in 0% for this section :) I hope you pass in 2nd attempt. Don't forget to break down your scores and analyze exactly which question you lost points. That will help you to work out on specific areas. Ash Ohamien Uhakheme wrote: Hey guys -- I've been lurking for a
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt
Thanks for sharing and clearing this up. I had just heard that before and it's good to know that it's not true. From: Paul Kruger [mailto:pauld.kru...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 6:49 AM To: Ashar Siddiqui Cc: Daniel Berlinski; CCIE Voice GMAIL; OSL Group Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt Let my chip in and give my 2c. Disclaimer: This might have changed since last I wrote (Jan 2010) In my first attempt I failed the dial plan miserably and got 0, which in itself, is a section that if you get 0, getting 100% for the rest still isn't enough to pass. Yet I had sections marked throughout with some 0, some perfect and some in between all the way to the end. On my second attempt, I failed the OEQ section, which also if you can remember is a fail this and you fail the exam section. Still, the rest of my exam was scored all the way through. During lunch I realized that I made a mistake on my OEQ's and would fail, and asked the proctor what the policy was, and it was quite the reverse from what the perception is on this forum. He said. if you have earned enough points to pass you, they stop marking. You've passed. But they will keep marking all the way through if you have not. And after my first attempt, I couldn't believe getting 0 for dialplan, as I tested and tested everything, except for one question which I couldn't get working. So thought at the least, I should get a few marks for that section. But then spent a lot of time trying to figure out what I did wrong in dial-plan, and sure enough the error was with me. There was one small little thing that I did not include in any of my dialplan answers that bit me and got me a zero. Second time around, I just read the questions a lot more thoroughly and my dial plan score was great! Still didn't have enough to pass, but at least I had gained the belief that if a section was scored badly, I needed to pay attention to that area. HTH Paul On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Ashar Siddiqui siddas...@gmail.com wrote: I don't buy that 0% theory that once they come to conclusion that you can't make it , they will start giving 0%...just a rumour I guess.. In my first attempt, I had few 0% spread across which means they graded my full lab otherwise they should have stopped at the beginning.. One more thing...If you get 0% in some section..it is all justified once you start looking into your solution from every angle.. Ash From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Berlinski Sent: 29 July 2010 23:15 To: CCIE Voice GMAIL Cc: OSL Group Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I've heard this from Cisco employees as well that when the proctors reach the conclusion that the candidate cannot make it up the 80% they just stop the correction. This is something I will definetely ask whenever there is another ask the expert forum. By the way has anyone ever looked for this info in the ask the expert archives? I know this forum is packed with Cisco staff. Can any of you clarify this for us? On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 7:29 AM, CCIE Voice GMAIL givemeccievoice2...@gmail.com wrote: I have heard this from a couple of people and even on this mailer. That is why I am bringing it up. I am not 100% sure if it is accurate or not. From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of Graham Hopkins Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 12:09 PM To: OSL Group Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I don't see how this can be correct, if it is it makes the report meaningless. You could screw up a few early sections, fail on 79% and still have most of the report as 0. Of course as the score report is subject to NDA we'll never know. Still Ohamien keep working on it and you will get there. Graham On 29 Jul 2010, at 19:59, CCIE Voice GMAIL wrote: It's also important to note, and correct me if I'm wrong, that the 0's don't necessarily mean you configured that section incorrectly. To my knowledge, once you lose more than 20 points, they simply stop grading your exam. So the later section may have 0's but you configured them correctly. I feel like this is a big problem with the already vague score reports. I wish they would change this. If you are paying $1400, you deserve a full report in my opinion. From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of Ashar Siddiqui Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:25 AM To: Ohamien Uhakheme Cc: OSL Group Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I am sure you will figure out what mistakes you made which resulted in 0%. I know its very hard to find out when you are sure your solution is 100% but believe me I have been through this and you will come to know how a tiny mistake in that particular section or may be in some other section resulted in
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt
Guys be careful. Score reports are subject to NDA. - Reply message - From: Daniel Berlinski dberlin...@gmail.com Date: Thu, Jul 29, 2010 6:14 pm Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt To: CCIE Voice GMAIL givemeccievoice2...@gmail.com Cc: OSL Group ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com I've heard this from Cisco employees as well that when the proctors reach the conclusion that the candidate cannot make it up the 80% they just stop the correction. This is something I will definetely ask whenever there is another ask the expert forum. By the way has anyone ever looked for this info in the ask the expert archives? I know this forum is packed with Cisco staff. Can any of you clarify this for us? On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 7:29 AM, CCIE Voice GMAIL givemeccievoice2...@gmail.com wrote: I have heard this from a couple of people and even on this mailer. That is why I am bringing it up. I am not 100% sure if it is accurate or not. *From:* ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] *On Behalf Of *Graham Hopkins *Sent:* Thursday, July 29, 2010 12:09 PM *To:* OSL Group *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I don't see how this can be correct, if it is it makes the report meaningless. You could screw up a few early sections, fail on 79% and still have most of the report as 0. Of course as the score report is subject to NDA we'll never know. Still Ohamien keep working on it and you will get there. Graham On 29 Jul 2010, at 19:59, CCIE Voice GMAIL wrote: It’s also important to note, and correct me if I’m wrong, that the 0’s don’t necessarily mean you configured that section incorrectly. To my knowledge, once you lose more than 20 points, they simply stop grading your exam. So the later section may have 0’s but you configured them correctly. I feel like this is a big problem with the already vague score reports. I wish they would change this. If you are paying $1400, you deserve a full report in my opinion. *From:* ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] *On Behalf Of *Ashar Siddiqui *Sent:* Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:25 AM *To:* Ohamien Uhakheme *Cc:* OSL Group *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I am sure you will figure out what mistakes you made which resulted in 0%. I know its very hard to find out when you are sure your solution is 100% but believe me I have been through this and you will come to know how a tiny mistake in that particular section or may be in some other section resulted in 0% for this section :) I hope you pass in 2nd attempt. Don't forget to break down your scores and analyze exactly which question you lost points. That will help you to work out on specific areas. Ash Ohamien Uhakheme wrote: Hey guys -- I've been lurking for a while, so I figured that I'd chime in. I sat for my first attempt yesterday with less than passing results. Like other people have mentioned, it is heart breaking to see 0% in areas that you are sure that you nailed completely. It's cool though, I needed to get the psychological first attempt out of the way, and I will probably schedule again for early September. IPExpert is spot on with their training material, and I definitely appreciate the effort that has gone into it. Thanks guys, Ohamien -- ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Cisco 7941 phones only showing two ring tones!!
Has anyone come across this? One of my customer is having few 7941s which is just showing two ringtones Chirp 1 and Chirps 2. A message on the phone says 'ring list unavailable' Could it be a firmware issue? CUCM 6.1.2.1000-13 Some details from the phone: Host Name SEP00215554 Phone DN 8482 App Load ID jar41sccp.8-3-3-17.sbn Boot Load ID 7941G-GE_64-02070631Amd64megRel.bin Version SCCP41.8-3-4SR1S Thanks Ash ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] CCIE_Voice Digest, Vol 53, Issue 54
mls qos srr-queue output cos-map queue 1 threshold 3 5 mls qos srr-queue output cos-map queue 2 threshold *1* 4 mls qos srr-queue output cos-map queue 2 threshold 3 6 7 mls qos srr-queue output cos-map queue 3 threshold 3 2 3 mls qos srr-queue output cos-map queue 4 threshold 3 0 *mls qos queue-set output 2 threshold 2 **60** 100 100 100* mls qos interface FastEthernet2/0/6 switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q switchport trunk allowed vlan 101,103,203 switchport mode trunk srr-queue bandwidth share 1 30 40 30 srr-queue bandwidth shape 4 0 0 0 queue-set 2 priority-queue out On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 5:50 AM, ghulam jilani jilani.ghu...@gmail.comwrote: hi , did u try to make another translation rule to strip 9 and it will be ok for CUCM mode and SRST mode. for example voice translation rule 9 rule 1 /^3033...$/ /\0/ [it means you are sending XXX calling mask from CUCM for Globalize] rule 2 /^3...$/ /303\0/ [it means you are sending only from CUCM for normal mode] rule 3 /9/ // type any subscriber plan any isdn rule 4 /^.*/ /\0/ type any subscriber plan any isdn voice translation-profile SUBSCRIBER translate calling 9 translate called 9 dial-peer voice 9 pots destination-pattern 9[2-9].. translation-profile outgoing SUBSCRIBER port X/Y/Z:23 i did it this way. can u please check. On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 5:04 PM, ccie_voice-requ...@onlinestudylist.comwrote: Send CCIE_Voice mailing list submissions to ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_voice or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ccie_voice-requ...@onlinestudylist.com You can reach the person managing the list at ccie_voice-ow...@onlinestudylist.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of CCIE_Voice digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: Globalisation/Localisation Issue (Mark Holloway) 2. Re: Globalisation/Localisation Issue (Graham Hopkins) 3. RTMT on Mac (Mark Holloway) 4. Re: RTMT on Mac (Tanner Ezell) -- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 11:21:46 -0700 From: Mark Holloway m...@markholloway.com To: Joaquim Fernandes joa_...@yahoo.com Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Globalisation/Localisation Issue Message-ID: 56c5648a-48b3-46f1-98f1-38ecc6a08...@markholloway.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sounds like you have the PSTN to CUCM part working ok. This is what I have been doing. On the H323 router create the following dial-peer dial-peer voice 10 pots destination-pattern [2-9]..$ port 0/0/0:23 On CUCM have a Route Pattern that handles \+1414.[2-9]XX for calls originated by BR1 phones and strip the predot. This way you can assign the call type as Subscriber within the Route Pattern and if local calls are supposed to send a 7 digit calling number you can set the calling party transformation mask within the Route Pattern to XXX. You could have a second dial-peer on your H323 router for SRST dial-peer voice 910 pots destination-pattern 9[2-9]..$ port 0/0/0:23 translation-profile outgoing LOCAL There are really two different ways to handle H323 gateway dial-peers. You can strip the 9 in CUCM then add it back on the H323 gateway through a translation-profile and only have one set of dial-peers. Or, build your dial-peers for local, LD, international, and 911 without the 9, copy/paste in notepad and put a 9 in front of the dial-peer number and the destination-pattern then paste it into your router. You will have two sets of dial-peers for SRST and normal operation. On Jul 9, 2010, at 10:28 AM, Joaquim Fernandes wrote: HI Team, I have an issue with this question. Question === when pstn number 414363 call phones at site b they should display 7 digits on the phone display. For example when pstn calling ph 1 or ph 2 at branch B it should display 363 on the screen. My solution = I have added +1 in Device pool of Branch B to make it globalised when the call comes in the H323 Branch B router. I have created \+1414.363 calling party transformation mask. I have created \+1414.363 route pattern with Branch B as the gateway. (branch b is the H323 gateway). So on the Route pattern i have just done predot and in the branch b route list i have done NANP-Predot and prefix 9. I have done vice versa as well but things doesnt work. IN the branch B router i have a dial-peer for the local calls. dial-peer voice 1 pots destination-pattern 9[2-9].. port 0/0/0:23 translation-profile outgoing local translation-rule 1 rule 1 /^8.../ /363\0/ translation-rule 2 rule 1 // // type any sub plan any isdn
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] interface GigabitEthernet1/0/2
www.ipexpert.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /archives/ccie_voice/attachments/20100729/754404ed/attachment-0001.html -- Message: 3 Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 08:07:40 +0200 From: Miron Kobelski findko...@gmail.com To: Daniel Berlinski dberlin...@gmail.com Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com, Jeff Cotter jcot...@voxns.com Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Layer 2 QOS Message-ID: aanlktindyfzz+xsschyf2x2n93knvekykjoooj9vp...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 agree. change threshold in order to limit it. once pq is enabled its always serviced first. shape doesnt apply. thats what vik said on the bootcamp. regards -- Sent from my mobile device. On Jul 30, 2010 4:02 AM, Daniel Berlinski dberlin...@gmail.com wrote: In my opinion this is done by adjusting the buffer size for queue 1 and applying it to a queue-set. srr shape statement in my opinion means nothing in relation to adjusting priority queue size. http://onlinestudylist.com/archives/ccie_voice/2010-July/069398.html On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Jeff Cotter jcot...@voxns.com wrote: How would you enable the priority queue AND make sure queue 1 has 10% of the bandwidth. The doc... ___ For more information regarding industry leading ... ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /archives/ccie_voice/attachments/20100730/c969b420/attachment-0001.html -- Message: 4 Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:47:59 +0100 From: Ashar Siddiqui siddas...@gmail.com To: 'Daniel Berlinski' dberlin...@gmail.com,'CCIE Voice GMAIL' givemeccievoice2...@gmail.com Cc: 'OSL Group' ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt Message-ID: 01cb2fe5$71899790$549cc6...@com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I don't buy that 0% theory that once they come to conclusion that you can't make it , they will start giving 0%...just a rumour I guess.. In my first attempt, I had few 0% spread across which means they graded my full lab otherwise they should have stopped at the beginning.. One more thing...If you get 0% in some section..it is all justified once you start looking into your solution from every angle.. Ash From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Berlinski Sent: 29 July 2010 23:15 To: CCIE Voice GMAIL Cc: OSL Group Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I've heard this from Cisco employees as well that when the proctors reach the conclusion that the candidate cannot make it up the 80% they just stop the correction. This is something I will definetely ask whenever there is another ask the expert forum. By the way has anyone ever looked for this info in the ask the expert archives? I know this forum is packed with Cisco staff. Can any of you clarify this for us? On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 7:29 AM, CCIE Voice GMAIL givemeccievoice2...@gmail.com wrote: I have heard this from a couple of people and even on this mailer. That is why I am bringing it up. I am not 100% sure if it is accurate or not. From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of Graham Hopkins Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 12:09 PM To: OSL Group Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I don't see how this can be correct, if it is it makes the report meaningless. You could screw up a few early sections, fail on 79% and still have most of the report as 0. Of course as the score report is subject to NDA we'll never know. Still Ohamien keep working on it and you will get there. Graham On 29 Jul 2010, at 19:59, CCIE Voice GMAIL wrote: It's also important to note, and correct me if I'm wrong, that the 0's don't necessarily mean you configured that section incorrectly. To my knowledge, once you lose more than 20 points, they simply stop grading your exam. So the later section may have 0's but you configured them correctly. I feel like this is a big problem with the already vague score reports. I wish they would change this. If you are paying $1400, you deserve a full report in my opinion. From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of Ashar Siddiqui Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2010 11:25 AM To: Ohamien Uhakheme Cc: OSL Group Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] First attempt I am sure you will figure out what mistakes you made which resulted in 0%. I know
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Cisco 7941 phones only showing two ring tones!!
I have had a customer in the past with a similar issue. The problem was that a firewall was blocking a portion of the port range from the phones to the TFTP server. So, when the phone would negotiate the transfer port, sometimes it was blocked and other times it wasn't. This is why it was not affecting everyone. HTH -Adam On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Ashar Siddiqui siddas...@gmail.comwrote: Has anyone come across this? One of my customer is having few 7941s which is just showing two ringtones Chirp 1 and Chirps 2. A message on the phone says ‘ring list unavailable’ Could it be a firmware issue? *CUCM 6.1.2.1000-13* Some details from the phone: Host Name SEP00215554 Phone DN 8482 App Load ID jar41sccp.8-3-3-17.sbn Boot Load ID 7941G-GE_64-02070631Amd64megRel.bin Version SCCP41.8-3-4SR1S Thanks Ash ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] SRST dial-peer behaviour
hi Dan, yes, appreciate ur help I solve it using Mark Holow suggestion yesterday. Flow : Dial 98883434 from Phone, UCM strip 9 in RP, accpet by h323 , and add back 9. Reason use RP not in h323 dial peer, cause my phone still show TO 9883434 when I do not strip in RP. And why I not strips in RG, cause I use RL-STD (if do it here will affect my ohers RP that use RL-STD) UCM 9.[2-9]xx RL-STD pt-br1 predot 9 in RP. BR1 - voice translation-rule 3 rule 1 /^3...$/ /303\0/ type any subscriber plan any isdn ! voice translation-rule 33 rule 1 /9/ // type any subscriber plan any isdn ! voice translation-profile LOCAL translate calling 3 translate called 33 ! voice translation-rule 81 rule 1 /.*/ /9\0/ ! voice translation-profile ADD9 translate called 81 ! dial-peer voice 81 voip translation-profile incoming ADD9 incoming called-number [2-9]..$ ! dial-peer voice 9 pots translation-profile outgoing LOCAL destination-pattern 9[2-9]..$ port 0/0/0:23 forward-digits 7 ! It work great in SRST and normal mode ( when call 9883434, my phone will show TO 8884343 ) rgds --- On Fri, 7/30/10, Daniel Berlinski dberlin...@gmail.com wrote: From: Daniel Berlinski dberlin...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] SRST dial-peer behaviour To: Erwan Erwan e_er...@yahoo.com Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Date: Friday, July 30, 2010, 6:10 AM I hate to post things without having access to equipment to try it myself as it spams everyone's mailboxes. I acknowledge that and apologize for that to everyone. I wont have access to anything until tomorrow and the temptation to reply is stronger than me. Are you an IP expert customer? Did you watch Vik's classes? He teached that the cosmetic effect on your calling device when you place a call through a H323 gateway is achieved by manipulating anywhere as per list below: RPRLRGIn peerNum-Exp of h323 gateway. Any manipulation done at the outbound dial-peer will not trigger the cosmetic effect you are after. I am still of the opinion that you are complicating things. If I was in your shoes I would do the following: 1- Send the 9+7 digits to CME and don't do any manipulation in CUCM at all. Then you could try these different options that I will try as soon as I get my hands on my rack! a) translation-profile on inbound voip dial-peer to strip the 9 b) num-expansion globally configured in h323 gateway to strip the 9 c) do not do any manipulation at all on the outbound dial-peer with destination-p 9[2-9]+7 as the 9 will get stripped for you anyway On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 3:52 AM, Erwan Erwan e_er...@yahoo.com wrote: hi Daniel, tks, here is the reason: 1. If I send all digit, with 9 (Phone always display To 98884343) What I want is 8884343 2. put T at the end of dial-peer 7, i tried to avoid that , as it will capture my other call. I like to use precise one for each call. 3. do a predot in route-pattern and put the 9 back on the route list as last resort === this is work and I used it , however you can not do it for RL-Standard , as it will affect other RP which use RL-Standard Any idea how to achieve this? --- On Thu, 7/29/10, Daniel Berlinski dberlin...@gmail.com wrote: From: Daniel Berlinski dberlin...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] SRST dial-peer behaviour To: Erwan Erwan e_er...@yahoo.com Cc: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Date: Thursday, July 29, 2010, 3:02 PM Why aren't you sending all digits to the IOS gateway and doing your manipulations there? It seems to me a simpler solution to have. Your dial-peer 7 is matching the dialed numbers first because dial-peer matching behaves like that- just like a route-pattern with urgent priority checked. as soon as it matches it sends the call -. You could remove $ from dial-peer 7 and put a T in the end of it to get the matching process to wait a bit but I personally find it better to send all digits from CUCM and have all manipulations done there. If you need to change your calling device display as well then you can try by just sending the digits as they hit the outbound dial-peer without any manipulations there because the 9 will get stripped anyway as it is an explicit match. If that does not tweak the caller display then plug a translation-profile or num-expansion then if that does not work either you could always do a predot in route-pattern and put the 9 back on the route list as last resort. I will try this as soon as I can. It sounds like a hot topic this one! On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Erwan Erwan e_er...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi Experts, I am trying to configure so that calling phone will show 7 digit To 8884343 in SRST and Normal mode. I use dial-peer 7 pots in normal mode (send 8884343 from Route Pattern to BR-1 GW) RP Local : 9.[2-9]xx , predot , send to BR-1 (H323) , hit dial-peer 7 pots And it did show 7
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Switch QoS
OK folks, I REALLY do not understand the following command. Cisco's explanation states that it configures the drop thresholds for queue 2 to 40 and 60 percent of the allocated memory, guarantees 100% of the allocated memory, and configures 200% as the maximum memory that this queue can have before packets are dropped. My question is: what the hell does that even mean? Does it mean that queue 2 threshold 1 is set to drop at 40%, queue 2 threshold 2 is set to drop at 60%, queue 2 threshold 3 can have 100%? That's how I understood it, but apparently it is NOT the correct way to interpret it. Can anyone explain this to me in plain English? Switch(config)# mls qos queue-set output 2 threshold 2 40 60 100 200 Link to Cisco's explanation: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3750/software/release/1 2.2_25_see/configuration/guide/swqos.html#wp1179728 ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Cisco 7941 phones only showing two ring tones!!
Thanks Adam. I will have a look at it. Ash Adam Thompson wrote: I have had a customer in the past with a similar issue. The problem was that a firewall was blocking a portion of the port range from the phones to the TFTP server. So, when the phone would negotiate the transfer port, sometimes it was blocked and other times it wasn't. This is why it was not affecting everyone. HTH -Adam On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Ashar Siddiqui siddas...@gmail.com wrote: Has anyone come across this? One of my customer is having few 7941s which is just showing two ringtones Chirp 1 and Chirps 2. A message on the phone says ‘ring list unavailable’ Could it be a firmware issue? CUCM 6.1.2.1000-13 Some details from the phone: Host Name SEP00215554 Phone DN 8482 App Load ID jar41sccp.8-3-3-17.sbn Boot Load ID 7941G-GE_64-02070631Amd64megRel.bin Version SCCP41.8-3-4SR1S Thanks Ash ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Switch QoS
I think, if you read the explanation as, it configures the drop thresholds for queue set 2 to 40 and 60 percent of the allocated memory, guarantees 100% of the allocated memory, and configures 200% as the maximum memory that this queue set can have before packets are dropped. , it would make more sense. Better explanation of the command is given here, http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps5023/products_tech_not e09186a0080883f9e.shtml hope that helps, Tapan From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of CCIE Voice Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 3:17 PM To: 'ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com' Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Switch QoS OK folks, I REALLY do not understand the following command. Cisco's explanation states that it configures the drop thresholds for queue 2 to 40 and 60 percent of the allocated memory, guarantees 100% of the allocated memory, and configures 200% as the maximum memory that this queue can have before packets are dropped. My question is: what the hell does that even mean? Does it mean that queue 2 threshold 1 is set to drop at 40%, queue 2 threshold 2 is set to drop at 60%, queue 2 threshold 3 can have 100%? That's how I understood it, but apparently it is NOT the correct way to interpret it. Can anyone explain this to me in plain English? Switch(config)# mls qos queue-set output 2 threshold 2 40 60 100 200 Link to Cisco's explanation: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3750/software/relea se/12.2_25_see/configuration/guide/swqos.html#wp1179728 ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
