Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Is the CCIE voice worth anymore?
Right and who said we need to do away with physical phones? We will also be able to use physical phones to browser the web. On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Martin Sloan martinsloa...@gmail.comwrote: I definitely prefer a physical phone to a soft phone! Kind of a bit off topic, have you guys seen this: http://www.shoretel.com/about/newsroom/press_releases/New_ShoreTel_Dock_Transforms_iPad_and_iPhone_Into_Desk_Phone_.html I was just telling my buddy how Cisco had such a great idea with the Cius but missed out by trying to create their own tablet, and then I see an advertisement for this. If Cisco had only provided the dock for and already super competitive tablet/smartphone market, it would have been brilliant! I'm surprised Shoretel seems to be the only company that sees the opportunity here. Vendors can keep making money on hardware but provide a unified client experience across all platforms (Jabber). It's the best of both worlds! On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Michael Davis michaeldavis1...@yahoo.com wrote: No matter what, there will ALWAYS been a need for large scale Enterprise voice systems. I am one of those people, and I am sure I am not alone, I will always want a physical phone. I am also one of these engineers who will always recommned a system that is directly under your own site's controll. Clouds are great, but they have their place. I don't think telecom will ever be a total cloud based solution. *From:* Bill Lake whl...@gmail.com *To:* Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com *Cc:* ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com *Sent:* Thursday, August 29, 2013 8:12 AM *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Is the CCIE voice worth anymore? As a former big Telco employee, they want three things: Stability Scalability Profitability At this time these applications are not there. On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 6:45 AM, Bill Lake whl...@gmail.com wrote: As a former big Telco employee, they want three things: Stability Scalability On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com wrote: hi Laksh, Thanks for your inputs here.This was a good discussion. It is always good for us to all know about things that happen outside . Talking about Telco OTTs we can already see few of the Telcos have come out with Webrtc solutions for enterprise and service providers . Check this video out too depicting their solution... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nz-BQZMp3sk Most of these applications written on software are supposed to open source and left for the users to customize . No real networking staff expertise required just download the SDK/API and customize and no more complex network topologies in future. Also no licensing fee too . Hence a real killer of techology in the future most likely we will see a wide spread of this starting 2014 if all predictions are to be believed. Hope someone from any of the TELCOs on this alias can add a few comments as well. Thanks once again for your inputs everyone. On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 11:05 PM, Lakshmish NS lakshmish...@gmail.comwrote: Hi Drake, I totally understand your concern, I'd be worried too. Having said that, we should always update ourselves with the latest technology. However, in future I believe Asterisk might be able to give tough run to Cisco UC. Not sure though, I hear stories that it is unstable and featureless compared to CUCM. I hope if someone aware of Asterisk would help us out here. Regard, Laksh On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Guys, Thanks for your responses I see u guys have empathized on call routing and and UC hardware for backend deployments. However Telco OTTs are coming up with directly provide these services over the cloud . Here is a disruptive analysis : http://www.slideshare.net/deanb/disruptive-analysis-web-rtc-overview-april-2013 Anyways, this might be not be so serious afterall . Just thought of brainstorming . Thanks guys for your responses again. On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Lakshmish NS lakshmish...@gmail.comwrote: Didn't have time to go through the video, I believe WebRTC is nothing but a Protocol, similar to SIP, H.323. Moreover, this protocol would only appeal to the Web audience, just like Skype, or Google talk. You still need to use UC hardware and their design for enterprise deployments. I mean we don't use Google talk and Skype in companies right? SIP is open source, but still Cisco uses it. As FAQ's suggest WebRTC is an open framework for the web that enables Real Time Communications in the browser. If only UC was that easy that could be implemented through browser, we didn't have to work this hard for CCIE numbers. You might want to go through this... http://www.webrtc.org/faq You've clearly misinterpreted WebRTC here.. On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Is the CCIE voice worth anymore?
hi Laksh, Thanks for your inputs here.This was a good discussion. It is always good for us to all know about things that happen outside . Talking about Telco OTTs we can already see few of the Telcos have come out with Webrtc solutions for enterprise and service providers . Check this video out too depicting their solution... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nz-BQZMp3sk Most of these applications written on software are supposed to open source and left for the users to customize . No real networking staff expertise required just download the SDK/API and customize and no more complex network topologies in future. Also no licensing fee too . Hence a real killer of techology in the future most likely we will see a wide spread of this starting 2014 if all predictions are to be believed. Hope someone from any of the TELCOs on this alias can add a few comments as well. Thanks once again for your inputs everyone. On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 11:05 PM, Lakshmish NS lakshmish...@gmail.comwrote: Hi Drake, I totally understand your concern, I'd be worried too. Having said that, we should always update ourselves with the latest technology. However, in future I believe Asterisk might be able to give tough run to Cisco UC. Not sure though, I hear stories that it is unstable and featureless compared to CUCM. I hope if someone aware of Asterisk would help us out here. Regard, Laksh On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Guys, Thanks for your responses I see u guys have empathized on call routing and and UC hardware for backend deployments. However Telco OTTs are coming up with directly provide these services over the cloud . Here is a disruptive analysis : http://www.slideshare.net/deanb/disruptive-analysis-web-rtc-overview-april-2013 Anyways, this might be not be so serious afterall . Just thought of brainstorming . Thanks guys for your responses again. On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Lakshmish NS lakshmish...@gmail.comwrote: Didn't have time to go through the video, I believe WebRTC is nothing but a Protocol, similar to SIP, H.323. Moreover, this protocol would only appeal to the Web audience, just like Skype, or Google talk. You still need to use UC hardware and their design for enterprise deployments. I mean we don't use Google talk and Skype in companies right? SIP is open source, but still Cisco uses it. As FAQ's suggest WebRTC is an open framework for the web that enables Real Time Communications in the browser. If only UC was that easy that could be implemented through browser, we didn't have to work this hard for CCIE numbers. You might want to go through this... http://www.webrtc.org/faq You've clearly misinterpreted WebRTC here.. On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com wrote: hi All, Had a troubling question hence thought of putting it out .Looking at the UC and networking trends worldwide it appears that the future of UC and collaboration is web based. Webrtc is the protocol that the world will use and individuals and organizations just need to code their requirement based on the WEBRTC. Here is the presentation that Google recently made http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8C8ouiXHHk Clearly many of the UC vendors are already losing out and will be losing out in year 2014. Most of the customers are already looking at reducing the cost involved in maintaining costly UC vendor networks and their networking staff . Therefore that brings me to my question is the CCIE voice worth anymore? -Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Is the CCIE voice worth anymore?
Hello Martin, Thanks for your inputs. Food for thought - the UC vendors otherwise rivals when it comes to competition seem to team up against Open source projects in the World Wide Web Consortium ( W3C) and keep causing roadblocks in the standardization of Webrtc. Why? it seems like it threatens their own products . However open source communities such as Mozilla are fighting hard to push this through. The Future definitely has a lot in store for IP Telephony. On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Martin Sloan martinsloa...@gmail.comwrote: Let me just say that I love this thread! @Laksh about Asterisk, from my experience you'll be hard pressed to find anything (non-proprietary) that Cisco UC can do that Asterisk cannot. Complex dial plans, feature rich VM, native call recording, mobility, etc - Asterisk can do it all straight out of the box. That being said I only use Asterisk to fill in gaps when there is something that Cisco UC can't do easily or without costing a small fortune, since Asterisk can do it for free. Being an open source platform, if the feature doesn't exist you can code it yourself. I've never deployed it as an overall solution but just as a tool to fix a problem. I know there are some large(ish) SP's using Asterisk like SIP-UA, so I believe it has the ability to scale although I can't attest to that myself. In comparing reliability, there have been some kludge versions of CUCM out there as well so depending on who you talk to about Asterisk, you might get mixed results. I have never had a problem with it's reliability, outside of problems I've caused myself :-) If you're interested in a nice introduction to Asterisk without having to use the somewhat cryptic config files, download Elastix and deploy as a VM. It runs on CentOS with a GUI and it's really straight forward to setup. Use 'Elastix without tears' as a guide, although it's a little dated 95% of the info is accurate. You can get a free SIP trunk to the cloud using SIP-UA. I think Asterisk and it's soft-switch cousin FreeSwitch are going to become more and more popular. I've personally spoken with 3 tech start-up companies that are providing web-based telephony services using FreeSwitch ( https://www.speek.com http://anymeeting.com http://www.voysee.com) and I'm sure there are many more out there on the rise. Just like moving from a CO where an operator was physically plugging in cables to connect calls all the way up to our current IP infrastructure, the industry continues to change and advance so it's up to us to stay relevant. That's the thing I like most about Telephony/VoIP/UC/Collaboration is that even though it continues to evolve and update, until humans start using ESP to communicate it's going to remain absolutely necessary, which means (hopefully) a job for us! Marty On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 7:30 AM, Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com wrote: hi Laksh, Thanks for your inputs here.This was a good discussion. It is always good for us to all know about things that happen outside . Talking about Telco OTTs we can already see few of the Telcos have come out with Webrtc solutions for enterprise and service providers . Check this video out too depicting their solution... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nz-BQZMp3sk Most of these applications written on software are supposed to open source and left for the users to customize . No real networking staff expertise required just download the SDK/API and customize and no more complex network topologies in future. Also no licensing fee too . Hence a real killer of techology in the future most likely we will see a wide spread of this starting 2014 if all predictions are to be believed. Hope someone from any of the TELCOs on this alias can add a few comments as well. Thanks once again for your inputs everyone. On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 11:05 PM, Lakshmish NS lakshmish...@gmail.comwrote: Hi Drake, I totally understand your concern, I'd be worried too. Having said that, we should always update ourselves with the latest technology. However, in future I believe Asterisk might be able to give tough run to Cisco UC. Not sure though, I hear stories that it is unstable and featureless compared to CUCM. I hope if someone aware of Asterisk would help us out here. Regard, Laksh On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Guys, Thanks for your responses I see u guys have empathized on call routing and and UC hardware for backend deployments. However Telco OTTs are coming up with directly provide these services over the cloud . Here is a disruptive analysis : http://www.slideshare.net/deanb/disruptive-analysis-web-rtc-overview-april-2013 Anyways, this might be not be so serious afterall . Just thought of brainstorming . Thanks guys for your responses again. On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Lakshmish NS lakshmish
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Is the CCIE voice worth anymore?
Hi Guys, Thanks for your responses I see u guys have empathized on call routing and and UC hardware for backend deployments. However Telco OTTs are coming up with directly provide these services over the cloud . Here is a disruptive analysis : http://www.slideshare.net/deanb/disruptive-analysis-web-rtc-overview-april-2013 Anyways, this might be not be so serious afterall . Just thought of brainstorming . Thanks guys for your responses again. On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Lakshmish NS lakshmish...@gmail.comwrote: Didn't have time to go through the video, I believe WebRTC is nothing but a Protocol, similar to SIP, H.323. Moreover, this protocol would only appeal to the Web audience, just like Skype, or Google talk. You still need to use UC hardware and their design for enterprise deployments. I mean we don't use Google talk and Skype in companies right? SIP is open source, but still Cisco uses it. As FAQ's suggest WebRTC is an open framework for the web that enables Real Time Communications in the browser. If only UC was that easy that could be implemented through browser, we didn't have to work this hard for CCIE numbers. You might want to go through this... http://www.webrtc.org/faq You've clearly misinterpreted WebRTC here.. On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com wrote: hi All, Had a troubling question hence thought of putting it out .Looking at the UC and networking trends worldwide it appears that the future of UC and collaboration is web based. Webrtc is the protocol that the world will use and individuals and organizations just need to code their requirement based on the WEBRTC. Here is the presentation that Google recently made http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8C8ouiXHHk Clearly many of the UC vendors are already losing out and will be losing out in year 2014. Most of the customers are already looking at reducing the cost involved in maintaining costly UC vendor networks and their networking staff . Therefore that brings me to my question is the CCIE voice worth anymore? -Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Is the CCIE voice worth anymore?
hi All, Had a troubling question hence thought of putting it out .Looking at the UC and networking trends worldwide it appears that the future of UC and collaboration is web based. Webrtc is the protocol that the world will use and individuals and organizations just need to code their requirement based on the WEBRTC. Here is the presentation that Google recently made http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8C8ouiXHHk Clearly many of the UC vendors are already losing out and will be losing out in year 2014. Most of the customers are already looking at reducing the cost involved in maintaining costly UC vendor networks and their networking staff . Therefore that brings me to my question is the CCIE voice worth anymore? -Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] !!End users permissions and groups!!
Hello All, In the callmanger If the end users are already created such as HQ1, HQ2., HQ3, SB1 and so on ... and if we add all roles and and groups to them under permissions then will this be wrong or should not be done ? Could someone comment on this? Are we allowed to do this? -Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Unity connection - directory handler- first and last name
Hi Guys, I n unity connection when using directory handler has the option for first and last name. However when I select the button for h or s for by HQ and SB phones . It says no matching name found . What else do I do? -Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] default device pool and css of already integrated devices!!
Hello Piyush, Thanks for your response. As far as I thought the Default settings ( default device pool) are not be changed on the callmanger . Yes / No? On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 8:50 AM, jainpiyush2...@ymail.com wrote: Use default device pool for HQ phones and application servers like uccx, uc and presence.. this is the best way to do in lab. Thanks and regards, Piyush Jain Sent from my android device. -Original Message- From: Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com To: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Sent: Sun, 07 Jul 2013 6:19 AM Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] default device pool and css of already integrated devices!! Hi Guys, 1) Could you clarify if we need to change the default device pool CSS of the devices already integrated such as unity connection , uccx , CUPS? 2)What would be the implications if we did make the above change? 3) If we were to retain the default device pool of the above devices then do we need to have all other sites setup to have a region relation with the default region as g711ulaw? -Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] CUPC client to play voicemail
hi Guys, How do we get our CUPC client to play voicemail and display it on the client as a red Icon? I tried many times but not see this icon. -Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] default device pool and css of already integrated devices!!
Hi Guys, 1) Could you clarify if we need to change the default device pool CSS of the devices already integrated such as unity connection , uccx , CUPS? 2)What would be the implications if we did make the above change? 3) If we were to retain the default device pool of the above devices then do we need to have all other sites setup to have a region relation with the default region as g711ulaw? -Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] CCIE_Voice Digest, Vol 88, Issue 98
hi Guys, Does callmanger 7.0.1.11000-2 support BAT? I checked the CM admin page and the BULK ADMINISTRATION tab is not available on the CM admin page -Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] BAT and cucm
hi Guys, Does callmanger 7.0.1.11000-2 support BAT? I checked the CM admin page and the BULK ADMINISTRATION tab is not available on the CM admin page -Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] UCCX prompt recording.
hi All, Any update guys? Hoping to get an update on this. Regards, Drake Thanks Guy On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 5:51 AM, Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com wrote: hi Gurpreet, It is version 7.x . Also C:\Program Files\wfavvid\temp is for recording prompts correct? What about my 2nd question? -Drake On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 2:22 AM, Gurpreet Singh Kukreja tycoononway1...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Drake, What is the version of CCX? It's C:\Program Files\wfavvid\temp in 7.x by default and usually en_US using an upload prompt step in 8.x. - Gurpreet On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Guys, I have a few questions on UCCX script for recording a prompt 1) How do I find out where my recorded prompt is being stored for a recording script I create? 2) If I am using spoken name upload and then using the Upload prompt ( step) just before the terminate step in the script then how do find where my recording has been stored? Many times in question ( 2) I can hear my recorded prompt . But when I search for it I don't find it. I checked the wfavvid folder as well and prompts section. Can someone help me out with the above 2 questions? Regards, Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] UCCX prompt recording.
Hello Guys, I have a few questions on UCCX script for recording a prompt 1) How do I find out where my recorded prompt is being stored for a recording script I create? 2) If I am using spoken name upload and then using the Upload prompt ( step) just before the terminate step in the script then how do find where my recording has been stored? Many times in question ( 2) I can hear my recorded prompt . But when I search for it I don't find it. I checked the wfavvid folder as well and prompts section. Can someone help me out with the above 2 questions? Regards, Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] UCCX prompt recording.
hi Gurpreet, It is version 7.x . Also C:\Program Files\wfavvid\temp is for recording prompts correct? What about my 2nd question? -Drake On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 2:22 AM, Gurpreet Singh Kukreja tycoononway1...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Drake, What is the version of CCX? It's C:\Program Files\wfavvid\temp in 7.x by default and usually en_US using an upload prompt step in 8.x. - Gurpreet On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Guys, I have a few questions on UCCX script for recording a prompt 1) How do I find out where my recorded prompt is being stored for a recording script I create? 2) If I am using spoken name upload and then using the Upload prompt ( step) just before the terminate step in the script then how do find where my recording has been stored? Many times in question ( 2) I can hear my recorded prompt . But when I search for it I don't find it. I checked the wfavvid folder as well and prompts section. Can someone help me out with the above 2 questions? Regards, Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] ringlist questions
hi Jason, Thanks for your email. Is there a detailed procedure available to get this done? On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 8:47 PM, nielsenj niels...@gmail.com wrote: You will want to change the DistinctiveRingList.xml for the Line Level. Regard, Jason Nielsen On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 3:14 AM, Drake J jdrake...@gmail.com wrote: hi Guys, I need to set the following at phone level ... i)Chirp 1 ii) Chirp 2 iii) Cisco Techno iv) Classic Ring 1 Line level (2001)... i)Cisco Techno ii)Classic Ring 1 Now when I make the Ringlist.xml file with - #13eccd1207b5689c_13ecb6788aa717a7_ CiscoIPPhoneRingList - #13eccd1207b5689c_13ecb6788aa717a7_ Ring DisplayNameCisco Techno/DisplayName FileNameCiscoTechno.raw/FileName /Ring - #13eccd1207b5689c_13ecb6788aa717a7_ Ring DisplayNameClassic Ring 1/DisplayName FileNameClassic1.raw/FileName /Ring /CiscoIPPhoneRingList and upload it on the phones I see the following on the phone level ( this is correct) ... i) Chirp 1 ii) Chirp 2 iii) Cisco Techno iv)Classic Ring 1 But at the line level 2001... I see 2001 ( chirp 1) with following ringlist... Ring 1 Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] ringlist questions
hi Guys, I need to set the following at phone level ... i)Chirp 1 ii) Chirp 2 iii) Cisco Techno iv) Classic Ring 1 Line level (2001)... i)Cisco Techno ii)Classic Ring 1 Now when I make the Ringlist.xml file with - # CiscoIPPhoneRingList - # Ring DisplayNameCisco Techno/DisplayName FileNameCiscoTechno.raw/FileName /Ring - # Ring DisplayNameClassic Ring 1/DisplayName FileNameClassic1.raw/FileName /Ring /CiscoIPPhoneRingList and upload it on the phones I see the following on the phone level ( this is correct) ... i) Chirp 1 ii) Chirp 2 iii) Cisco Techno iv)Classic Ring 1 But at the line level 2001... I see 2001 ( chirp 1) with following ringlist... Ring 1 Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Ringlist setup
hi Guys, How do we set the following ringlist at phone level and line level Phone level: 1) Chirp 1 2) Chirp 2 3) Cisco Techno 4) Classic Ring 1 Line level(2001): == 1) Cisco Techno 2) Classic Ring 1 Here is the Ringlist.xml I have created... - # CiscoIPPhoneRingList - # Ring DisplayNameCisco Techno/DisplayName FileNameCiscoTechno.raw/FileName /Ring - # Ring DisplayNameClassic Ring 1/DisplayName FileNameClassic1.raw/FileName /Ring /CiscoIPPhoneRingList I get the correct ringlist order at phone level... Phone level: 1) Chirp 1 2) Chirp 2 3) Cisco Techno 4) Classic Ring 1 However at line level see the following... = line level ( 2001 - Chirp 1) == Ring 1 Ring 2 Ring 3 Ring 4 Ring 5 Ring 6 Ring 7 How do I correct the list at the line level? Regards, Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] UCCX questions / G729 / ringback
hi All, I have 2 questions here... 1) If UCCX was supposed to use g729 codec . Then if we are using unity connection or uccx to record prompts it would record this prompts in g711ulaw. Therefore the prompts played from the script will be in g711ulaw when the uccx is setup for g729 .What is the way around? 2) How do we make callers hear ringback with they wait in a UCCX queue for their call to be answered by agents? Please assist. Regards, Drake ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
