Re: [cisco-voip] Any known issues with Unity Connection 10.5.1.11900-13 and database SBR?

[Jason Aarons (AM)]

Logs show lots of SBR (spit brain recovery) messages, lost heartbeat, etc.  
Time for TAC.

From: Jason Aarons (AM)
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 8:40 PM
To: cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)
Subject: Any known issues with Unity Connection 10.5.1.11900-13 and database 
SBR?

I have two Connection 10.5.1.11900-13 server on same subnet, RTMT has some lost 
connection to peer errors from middle of afternoon.

Any known issues others have seen?





___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Any known issues with Unity Connection 10.5.1.11900-13 and database SBR?

[Jason Aarons (AM)]

The good news is that per Cisco there are ZERO bugs with Unity Connection 10.5.

Defect free software!


[cid:image002.jpg@01D05204.FE3000D0]

From: Jason Aarons (AM)
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 8:40 PM
To: cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)
Subject: Any known issues with Unity Connection 10.5.1.11900-13 and database 
SBR?

I have two Connection 10.5.1.11900-13 server on same subnet, RTMT has some lost 
connection to peer errors from middle of afternoon.

Any known issues others have seen?





___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[cisco-voip] Any known issues with Unity Connection 10.5.1.11900-13 and database SBR?

[Jason Aarons (AM)]

I have two Connection 10.5.1.11900-13 server on same subnet, RTMT has some lost 
connection to peer errors from middle of afternoon.

Any known issues others have seen?





___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Unity Connection Voice Enabled Directory Handler Alternatives

[Pawlowski, Adam]

Parlance has a product, Operator Assistant, to do this as well. They changed 
their pricing model so you just pay a fee for the service which includes 
everything. They indicated they can do individualized greetings for auto 
attendants, custom directories, the works. If this is something you want to 
employ, it seems like that or Nuance offer reasonable products.

For me, I found the speech recognition to be pretty bad on Unity Connection, 
for anything other than "Bob Jones" and "Mike Smith" kind of easy. And when it 
fails, there's nothing to be done. These other two products would have pro 
staff from their company take care of processing that on the back end. 

The old product for Unity I believe was a Nuance product. Their current engine, 
I don't know.

Adam


___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] to "dspfarm" or not?

[Jose Colon II]

I use it on a secondary router just for DSP resources as my main gateway
did not have room to add more. I have never had problems with it

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Jason Aarons (AM) <
jason.aar...@dimensiondata.com> wrote:

>  I’ve never removed it, and never had an issue with it J
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
> Of *Lelio Fulgenzi
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 26, 2015 1:17 PM
> *To:* Cisco VOIP
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] to "dspfarm" or not?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> My voice gateways currently have the following setup:
>
>
>
> !
>
> voice-card 0
>
>  dspfarm
>
>  dsp services dspfarm
>
> !
>
>
>
> Now, from what I've read, the "dspfarm" command is used to invoke/enable
> DSP Sharing, which is strongly discouraged. And is typically used when
> sharing DSPs across voice cards and only for TDM ports.
>
>
>
> In my case, I have only VWIC3s along with an ISM running CUE installed in
> slot 0, the same as the DSPs (see below).
>
>
>
> From what I gather, I don't need and should remove the "dspfarm" command
> from my "voice-card 0" config.
>
>
>
> Is this correct?
>
>
>   --
>
> NAME: "VWIC3-4MFT-T1/E1 - 4-Port RJ-48 Multiflex Trunk - T1/E1 on Slot 0
> SubSlot 0", DESCR: "VWIC3-4MFT-T1/E1 - 4-Port RJ-48 Multiflex Trunk - T1/E1"
>
> PID: VWIC3-4MFT-T1/E1  , VID: V01 , SN: 
>
>
>
> NAME: "PVDM3 DSP DIMM with 64 Channels on Slot 0 SubSlot 4", DESCR: "PVDM3
> DSP DIMM with 64 Channels"
>
> PID: PVDM3-64  , VID: V01 , SN: 
>
>
>
> NAME: "Internal Services Module with Services Ready Engine on Slot 0",
> DESCR: "Internal Services Module with Services Ready Engine"
>
> PID: ISM-SRE-300-K9, VID: V02 , SN: 
>   --
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
> Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
> University of Guelph
>
> 519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
> le...@uoguelph.ca
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
> Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
> Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1
>
>
>
>
>
> itevomcid
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points

[Jason Aarons (AM)]

I create a group name “DO-NOT-USE-SOFTWARE-MTP” and put them in that.

I recall under Service Parameters you can also set them to not run.

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio 
Fulgenzi
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 1:13 PM
To: Dennis Heim
Cc: Cisco VOIP
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points


I'm hoping to group my software (CUCM) MTPs into a media resource group that is 
not assigned to any list or device. As far as I know, as long as a media 
resource is in a group, it's removed from the default group that anyone can 
access.

Now, that being said, as far as I understand, an IOS MTP configured without 
DSPs is still considered a software MTP is it not?

Could just be semantics, but I'd like to understand when people mention it.

LElio

---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
University of Guelph

519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
le...@uoguelph.ca
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1


From: "Dennis Heim" mailto:dennis.h...@wwt.com>>
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>>
Cc: "Cisco VOIP" mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 1:07:07 PM
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points
Don’t forget to add codec passthrough on all your MTP’s. otherwise it will pick 
software ones over the hardware ones.

Dennis Heim | Emerging Technology Architect (Collaboration)
World Wide Technology, Inc. | +1 314-212-1814
[twitter]
[chat][Phone][video]
"Innovation happens on project squared" -- 
http://www.projectsquared.com

Click here to join me in my Collaboration Meeting 
Room



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio 
Fulgenzi
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 12:01 PM
Cc: Cisco VOIP
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points


Just following up on this thread.

I've read through a number of documents, and I'm beginning to really like the 
idea of trusted relay points.

I'm hoping to set up a IOS software based MTP and configure that as TRP (using 
the firewall traversal command). I'd also set it up as codec passthrough since 
that's primarily what we'd use it for.

That being said, as far as I can tell, if I ever do need a XCODER, it would 
simply call that on top of the MTP/TRP, since I don't think I want to be 
marking my XCODERs as TRPs since there's no real way to not use them as such 
and waste resources.

An alternative would be to modify my MRGLists to contain multiple MRGroups, and 
order them appropriately, i.e. MTP/TRPs first, then XCODER/TRPs next.

Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated.

Lelio


---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
University of Guelph

519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
le...@uoguelph.ca
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1


From: "Lelio Fulgenzi" mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>>
Cc: "Cisco VOIP" mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 1:33:05 PM
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points
Thanks Eric.

Transcoders are another question I'm trying to clear up as well. I might spin 
that off into another thread after I read up some more.

It's good to know that if we don't need transcoding, that we won't need 
additional DSPs.
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
University of Guelph

519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
le...@uoguelph.ca
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1


From: "Eric Pedersen" 
mailto:peders...@bennettjones.com>>
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>>, "Brian 
Meade" mailto:bmead...@vt.edu>>
Cc: "Cisco VOIP" mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 12:22:54 PM
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points
I believe you can configure your router to be a software MTP with “codec 
pass-through” as long as you don’t need transcoding. Then you won’t need DSPs.

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio 
Fulgenzi
Sent: 17 February 2015 9:55 AM
To: Brian Meade
Cc: Cisco VOIP
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points


Thanks Brian.

I'm guessing the only things I would have to do is ensure that I have enough 
MTP resources on the trusted device. I could use the DSP calculator for that.
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
University of Guelph

519‐824‐41

Re: [cisco-voip] to "dspfarm" or not?

[Jason Aarons (AM)]

I’ve never removed it, and never had an issue with it ☺

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio 
Fulgenzi
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 1:17 PM
To: Cisco VOIP
Subject: [cisco-voip] to "dspfarm" or not?



My voice gateways currently have the following setup:

!
voice-card 0
 dspfarm
 dsp services dspfarm
!

Now, from what I've read, the "dspfarm" command is used to invoke/enable DSP 
Sharing, which is strongly discouraged. And is typically used when sharing DSPs 
across voice cards and only for TDM ports.

In my case, I have only VWIC3s along with an ISM running CUE installed in slot 
0, the same as the DSPs (see below).

From what I gather, I don't need and should remove the "dspfarm" command from 
my "voice-card 0" config.

Is this correct?


NAME: "VWIC3-4MFT-T1/E1 - 4-Port RJ-48 Multiflex Trunk - T1/E1 on Slot 0 
SubSlot 0", DESCR: "VWIC3-4MFT-T1/E1 - 4-Port RJ-48 Multiflex Trunk - T1/E1"
PID: VWIC3-4MFT-T1/E1  , VID: V01 , SN: 

NAME: "PVDM3 DSP DIMM with 64 Channels on Slot 0 SubSlot 4", DESCR: "PVDM3 DSP 
DIMM with 64 Channels"
PID: PVDM3-64  , VID: V01 , SN: 

NAME: "Internal Services Module with Services Ready Engine on Slot 0", DESCR: 
"Internal Services Module with Services Ready Engine"
PID: ISM-SRE-300-K9, VID: V02 , SN: 



---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
University of Guelph

519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
le...@uoguelph.ca
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1



itevomcid
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[cisco-voip] to "dspfarm" or not?

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

My voice gateways currently have the following setup: 


! 
voice-card 0 
dspfarm 
dsp services dspfarm 
! 


Now, from what I've read, the "dspfarm" command is used to invoke/enable DSP 
Sharing, which is strongly discouraged. And is typically used when sharing DSPs 
across voice cards and only for TDM ports. 


In my case, I have only VWIC3s along with an ISM running CUE installed in slot 
0, the same as the DSPs (see below). 


>From what I gather, I don't need and should remove the "dspfarm" command from 
>my "voice-card 0" config. 


Is this correct? 






NAME: "VWIC3-4MFT-T1/E1 - 4-Port RJ-48 Multiflex Trunk - T1/E1 on Slot 0 
SubSlot 0", DESCR: "VWIC3-4MFT-T1/E1 - 4-Port RJ-48 Multiflex Trunk - T1/E1" 
PID: VWIC3-4MFT-T1/E1 , VID: V01 , SN:  



NAME: "PVDM3 DSP DIMM with 64 Channels on Slot 0 SubSlot 4", DESCR: "PVDM3 DSP 
DIMM with 64 Channels" 
PID: PVDM3-64 , VID: V01 , SN:  



NAME: "Internal Services Module with Services Ready Engine on Slot 0", DESCR: 
"Internal Services Module with Services Ready Engine" 
PID: ISM-SRE-300-K9 , VID: V02 , SN:  





--- 
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. 
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure 
Computing and Communications Services (CCS) 
University of Guelph 

519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354 
le...@uoguelph.ca 
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs 
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building 
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 

___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

I'm hoping to group my software (CUCM) MTPs into a media resource group that is 
not assigned to any list or device. As far as I know, as long as a media 
resource is in a group, it's removed from the default group that anyone can 
access. 


Now, that being said, as far as I understand, an IOS MTP configured without 
DSPs is still considered a software MTP is it not? 


Could just be semantics, but I'd like to understand when people mention it. 


LElio 



--- 
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. 
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure 
Computing and Communications Services (CCS) 
University of Guelph 

519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354 
le...@uoguelph.ca 
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs 
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building 
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 

- Original Message -

From: "Dennis Heim"  
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi"  
Cc: "Cisco VOIP"  
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 1:07:07 PM 
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points 



Don’t forget to add codec passthrough on all your MTP’s. otherwise it will pick 
software ones over the hardware ones. 


Dennis Heim | Emerging Technology Architect (Collaboration) 
World Wide Technology, Inc. | +1 314-212-1814 
twitter
chatPhonevideo
"Innovation happens on project squared" -- http://www.projectsquared.com 

Click here to join me in my Collaboration Meeting Room 





From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio 
Fulgenzi 
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 12:01 PM 
Cc: Cisco VOIP 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points 



Just following up on this thread. 



I've read through a number of documents, and I'm beginning to really like the 
idea of trusted relay points. 



I'm hoping to set up a IOS software based MTP and configure that as TRP (using 
the firewall traversal command). I'd also set it up as codec passthrough since 
that's primarily what we'd use it for. 



That being said, as far as I can tell, if I ever do need a XCODER, it would 
simply call that on top of the MTP/TRP, since I don't think I want to be 
marking my XCODERs as TRPs since there's no real way to not use them as such 
and waste resources. 



An alternative would be to modify my MRGLists to contain multiple MRGroups, and 
order them appropriately, i.e. MTP/TRPs first, then XCODER/TRPs next. 



Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated. 



Lelio 





--- 
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. 
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure 
Computing and Communications Services (CCS) 
University of Guelph 

519 ‐ 824 ‐ 4120 Ext 56354 
le...@uoguelph.ca 
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs 
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building 
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 

- Original Message -


From: "Lelio Fulgenzi" < le...@uoguelph.ca > 
Cc: "Cisco VOIP" < cisco-voip@puck.nether.net > 
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 1:33:05 PM 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points 

Thanks Eric. 

Transcoders are another question I'm trying to clear up as well. I might spin 
that off into another thread after I read up some more. 

It's good to know that if we don't need transcoding, that we won't need 
additional DSPs. 

--- 
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. 
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure 
Computing and Communications Services (CCS) 
University of Guelph 

519 ‐ 824 ‐ 4120 Ext 56354 
le...@uoguelph.ca 
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs 
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building 
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 

- Original Message -


From: "Eric Pedersen" < peders...@bennettjones.com > 
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" < le...@uoguelph.ca >, "Brian Meade" < bmead...@vt.edu > 
Cc: "Cisco VOIP" < cisco-voip@puck.nether.net > 
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 12:22:54 PM 
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points 
I believe you can configure your router to be a software MTP with “codec 
pass-through” as long as you don’t need transcoding. Then you won’t need DSPs. 



From: cisco-voip [ mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net ] On Behalf Of 
Lelio Fulgenzi 
Sent: 17 February 2015 9:55 AM 
To: Brian Meade 
Cc: Cisco VOIP 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points 



Thanks Brian. 

I'm guessing the only things I would have to do is ensure that I have enough 
MTP resources on the trusted device. I could use the DSP calculator for that. 



--- 
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. 
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure 
Computing and Communications Services (CCS) 
University of Guelph 

519 ‐ 824 ‐ 4120 Ext 56354 
le...@uoguelph.ca 
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs 
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building 
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 




From: "Brian Meade" < bmead...@vt.edu > 
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" < le...@uoguelph.ca > 
Cc: "Cisco VOIP" < cisco-voip@puck.nether.net > 
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 11:34:22 AM 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points 

They're basically just MTPs you deem to be "trusted". A lot of people use them 
for switching between IPv4 and IPv6. Really not anything different than just 
forcing MTP Required other than maybe just narrowing down the MTP list. Some 
people use the same setup for V

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX Agent Status

[Anthony Holloway]

Thinking off the top of my head, the simplest solution would probably be to
add a new primary line to their phones, and bump the ACD line down to line
two.  This way, when they make the outbound call, their ACD line stays idle
and they stay Ready.

A more complex option is to use some advanced scripting and DB access, to
query the agent state detail table to see if the agents are not ready due
to going off hook (reason code 32762).

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:41 AM Ben Story  wrote:

> 10.6 Finesse, just making call from the agent phone (following up on VM
> generally)
>
> --
> Ben Story
> CCNP, CCNA, CCNA Wireless, CCDA
> ben.st...@gmail.com
> 
> @ntwrk80
> http://showbrain.blogspot.com
> http://rand0mw0rds.blogspot.com
>
>
> "From sour-faced saints and silly devotions, good Lord, preserve us!". -- St.
> Teresa of Avila
>
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> What version of UCCX?  CAD or Finesse?  Outbound subsystem or just making
>> calls from Agent phone?
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 10:50 AM Ben Story  wrote:
>>
>>> We have a UCCX queue that has the logic that if all agents are Not
>>> Ready, it will send the call to voicemail.  This particular CSQ has a small
>>> number of agents so we're running into the problem where all agents are Not
>>> Ready because one or two agents are making outbound calls.  Any suggestions
>>> of how to distinguish between Not Ready and Not Ready due to outbound
>>> calls?  If it's an outbound call we know the agent will be able to take the
>>> inbound call relatively soon so we'd rather not have it go to voicemail.
>>> --
>>> Ben Story
>>> CCNP, CCNA, CCNA Wireless, CCDA
>>> ben.st...@gmail.com
>>> 
>>> @ntwrk80
>>> http://showbrain.blogspot.com
>>> http://rand0mw0rds.blogspot.com
>>>
>>>
>>> "From sour-faced saints and silly devotions, good Lord, preserve us!".
>>> -- St. Teresa of Avila
>>>  ___
>>> cisco-voip mailing list
>>> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points

[Heim, Dennis]

Don’t forget to add codec passthrough on all your MTP’s. otherwise it will pick 
software ones over the hardware ones.

Dennis Heim | Emerging Technology Architect (Collaboration)
World Wide Technology, Inc. | +1 314-212-1814
[twitter]
[chat][Phone][video]
"Innovation happens on project squared" -- 
http://www.projectsquared.com

Click here to join me in my Collaboration Meeting 
Room



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio 
Fulgenzi
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 12:01 PM
Cc: Cisco VOIP
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points


Just following up on this thread.

I've read through a number of documents, and I'm beginning to really like the 
idea of trusted relay points.

I'm hoping to set up a IOS software based MTP and configure that as TRP (using 
the firewall traversal command). I'd also set it up as codec passthrough since 
that's primarily what we'd use it for.

That being said, as far as I can tell, if I ever do need a XCODER, it would 
simply call that on top of the MTP/TRP, since I don't think I want to be 
marking my XCODERs as TRPs since there's no real way to not use them as such 
and waste resources.

An alternative would be to modify my MRGLists to contain multiple MRGroups, and 
order them appropriately, i.e. MTP/TRPs first, then XCODER/TRPs next.

Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated.

Lelio


---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
University of Guelph

519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
le...@uoguelph.ca
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1


From: "Lelio Fulgenzi" mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>>
Cc: "Cisco VOIP" mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 1:33:05 PM
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points
Thanks Eric.

Transcoders are another question I'm trying to clear up as well. I might spin 
that off into another thread after I read up some more.

It's good to know that if we don't need transcoding, that we won't need 
additional DSPs.
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
University of Guelph

519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
le...@uoguelph.ca
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1


From: "Eric Pedersen" 
mailto:peders...@bennettjones.com>>
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>>, "Brian 
Meade" mailto:bmead...@vt.edu>>
Cc: "Cisco VOIP" mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 12:22:54 PM
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points
I believe you can configure your router to be a software MTP with “codec 
pass-through” as long as you don’t need transcoding. Then you won’t need DSPs.

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio 
Fulgenzi
Sent: 17 February 2015 9:55 AM
To: Brian Meade
Cc: Cisco VOIP
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points


Thanks Brian.

I'm guessing the only things I would have to do is ensure that I have enough 
MTP resources on the trusted device. I could use the DSP calculator for that.

---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
University of Guelph

519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
le...@uoguelph.ca
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1


From: "Brian Meade" mailto:bmead...@vt.edu>>
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>>
Cc: "Cisco VOIP" mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 11:34:22 AM
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points
They're basically just MTPs you deem to be "trusted".  A lot of people use them 
for switching between IPv4 and IPv6.  Really not anything different than just 
forcing MTP Required other than maybe just narrowing down the MTP list.  Some 
people use the same setup for VPN phones/IP Communicators over VPN so VPN 
clients don't have to be able to talk directly to each other.

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi 
mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>> wrote:

We had a security discussion with our account team, and one thing that was 
brought up was the concept/feature of trusted relay points.

There's not much on the subject in the guides, other than saying some MTPs are 
trusted relay points.

Our thought was, rather than opening up the voice VLANs to allow media from the 
data VLANs, we could simply set up the Jabber clients with "trusted relay 
points" enabled and modify the voice VLAN ACLs to allow access from these 
trusted relay po

Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

Just following up on this thread. 


I've read through a number of documents, and I'm beginning to really like the 
idea of trusted relay points. 


I'm hoping to set up a IOS software based MTP and configure that as TRP (using 
the firewall traversal command). I'd also set it up as codec passthrough since 
that's primarily what we'd use it for. 


That being said, as far as I can tell, if I ever do need a XCODER, it would 
simply call that on top of the MTP/TRP, since I don't think I want to be 
marking my XCODERs as TRPs since there's no real way to not use them as such 
and waste resources. 


An alternative would be to modify my MRGLists to contain multiple MRGroups, and 
order them appropriately, i.e. MTP/TRPs first, then XCODER/TRPs next. 


Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated. 


Lelio 




--- 
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. 
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure 
Computing and Communications Services (CCS) 
University of Guelph 

519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354 
le...@uoguelph.ca 
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs 
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building 
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 

- Original Message -

From: "Lelio Fulgenzi"  
Cc: "Cisco VOIP"  
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 1:33:05 PM 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points 


Thanks Eric. 

Transcoders are another question I'm trying to clear up as well. I might spin 
that off into another thread after I read up some more. 

It's good to know that if we don't need transcoding, that we won't need 
additional DSPs. 


--- 
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. 
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure 
Computing and Communications Services (CCS) 
University of Guelph 

519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354 
le...@uoguelph.ca 
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs 
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building 
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 

- Original Message -

From: "Eric Pedersen"  
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" , "Brian Meade"  
Cc: "Cisco VOIP"  
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 12:22:54 PM 
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points 



I believe you can configure your router to be a software MTP with “codec 
pass-through” as long as you don’t need transcoding. Then you won’t need DSPs. 



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio 
Fulgenzi 
Sent: 17 February 2015 9:55 AM 
To: Brian Meade 
Cc: Cisco VOIP 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points 



Thanks Brian. 

I'm guessing the only things I would have to do is ensure that I have enough 
MTP resources on the trusted device. I could use the DSP calculator for that. 




--- 
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. 
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure 
Computing and Communications Services (CCS) 
University of Guelph 

519 ‐ 824 ‐ 4120 Ext 56354 
le...@uoguelph.ca 
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs 
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building 
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 

- Original Message -


From: "Brian Meade" < bmead...@vt.edu > 
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" < le...@uoguelph.ca > 
Cc: "Cisco VOIP" < cisco-voip@puck.nether.net > 
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 11:34:22 AM 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] trusted relay points 

They're basically just MTPs you deem to be "trusted". A lot of people use them 
for switching between IPv4 and IPv6. Really not anything different than just 
forcing MTP Required other than maybe just narrowing down the MTP list. Some 
people use the same setup for VPN phones/IP Communicators over VPN so VPN 
clients don't have to be able to talk directly to each other. 



On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi < le...@uoguelph.ca > wrote: 



We had a security discussion with our account team, and one thing that was 
brought up was the concept/feature of trusted relay points. 

There's not much on the subject in the guides, other than saying some MTPs are 
trusted relay points. 

Our thought was, rather than opening up the voice VLANs to allow media from the 
data VLANs, we could simply set up the Jabber clients with "trusted relay 
points" enabled and modify the voice VLAN ACLs to allow access from these 
trusted relay points. We could either use our PSTN gateways or deploy another 
set of 2900s for this purpose. 

This would also help us in the short term, I believe, by not having to enable 
"peer to peer" communications on our wiLAN. 

Any thoughts or pointers to some documents would be fantastic. 

Lelio 



--- 
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. 
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure 
Computing and Communications Services (CCS) 
University of Guelph 

519 ‐ 824 ‐ 4120 Ext 56354 
le...@uoguelph.ca 
www.uoguelph.ca/ccs 
Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building 
Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1 


___ 
cisco-voip mailing list 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net 
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip 

The contents of this message may contain confidential and/or privileged 
subject matter. If this message has been received in error, please contact 
the sender and delete all copies. Like other forms of communication, 
e-mail communications m

[cisco-voip] Smart Call Home

[Eric Pedersen]

Is smart call home worth turning on in the UC 10.5 versions? I'm having a hard 
time seeing from the documentation if there is a lot of value to it. It's not 
clear to me either how much system information it sends to Cisco on a regular 
basis and whether we should have any privacy concerns with that.

Thanks,
Eric

The contents of this message may contain confidential and/or privileged 
subject matter. If this message has been received in error, please contact 
the sender and delete all copies. Like other forms of communication, 
e-mail communications may be vulnerable to interception by unauthorized 
parties. If you do not wish us to communicate with you by e-mail, please 
notify us at your earliest convenience. In the absence of such 
notification, your consent is assumed. Should you choose to allow us to 
communicate by e-mail, we will not take any additional security measures 
(such as encryption) unless specifically requested. 

If you no longer wish to receive commercial messages, you can unsubscribe 
by accessing this link:  http://www.bennettjones.com/unsubscribe

___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX Agent Status

[Ben Story]

10.6 Finesse, just making call from the agent phone (following up on VM
generally)

--
Ben Story
CCNP, CCNA, CCNA Wireless, CCDA
ben.st...@gmail.com

@ntwrk80
http://showbrain.blogspot.com
http://rand0mw0rds.blogspot.com


"From sour-faced saints and silly devotions, good Lord, preserve us!". -- St.
Teresa of Avila

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> What version of UCCX?  CAD or Finesse?  Outbound subsystem or just making
> calls from Agent phone?
>
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 10:50 AM Ben Story  wrote:
>
>> We have a UCCX queue that has the logic that if all agents are Not Ready,
>> it will send the call to voicemail.  This particular CSQ has a small number
>> of agents so we're running into the problem where all agents are Not Ready
>> because one or two agents are making outbound calls.  Any suggestions of
>> how to distinguish between Not Ready and Not Ready due to outbound calls?
>> If it's an outbound call we know the agent will be able to take the inbound
>> call relatively soon so we'd rather not have it go to voicemail.
>> --
>> Ben Story
>> CCNP, CCNA, CCNA Wireless, CCDA
>> ben.st...@gmail.com
>> 
>> @ntwrk80
>> http://showbrain.blogspot.com
>> http://rand0mw0rds.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>> "From sour-faced saints and silly devotions, good Lord, preserve us!".
>> -- St. Teresa of Avila
>>  ___
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX Agent Status

[Anthony Holloway]

What version of UCCX?  CAD or Finesse?  Outbound subsystem or just making
calls from Agent phone?

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 10:50 AM Ben Story  wrote:

> We have a UCCX queue that has the logic that if all agents are Not Ready,
> it will send the call to voicemail.  This particular CSQ has a small number
> of agents so we're running into the problem where all agents are Not Ready
> because one or two agents are making outbound calls.  Any suggestions of
> how to distinguish between Not Ready and Not Ready due to outbound calls?
> If it's an outbound call we know the agent will be able to take the inbound
> call relatively soon so we'd rather not have it go to voicemail.
> --
> Ben Story
> CCNP, CCNA, CCNA Wireless, CCDA
> ben.st...@gmail.com
> 
> @ntwrk80
> http://showbrain.blogspot.com
> http://rand0mw0rds.blogspot.com
>
>
> "From sour-faced saints and silly devotions, good Lord, preserve us!". -- St.
> Teresa of Avila
>  ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> 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

Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

[Anthony Holloway]

CSR 15 will read your mind and pick the route group(s) you meant to add to
your route list(s).

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:22 AM Matthew Loraditch <
mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:

>  I figured it out… you kinda need to add your route group to your route
> list….
>
>
>
> Doh!
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
> Network Engineer
> Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
>
>  Facebook  | Twitter
>  | LinkedIn
>  |
> G+ 
>
>
>
> *From:* Chris Ward (chrward) [mailto:chrw...@cisco.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 26, 2015 11:54 AM
> *To:* Bill Talley; Matthew Loraditch
> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* RE: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration
>
>
>
> What happens when you call the number you put in the recording profile? It
> should answer and record. You won’t see or hear anything. If you get a busy
> or reorder tone, your routing is not setup correctly.
>
>
>
> +Chris
>
> TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection
>
>
>
> *From:* Bill Talley [mailto:btal...@gmail.com ]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2015 6:29 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch
> *Cc:* Chris Ward (chrward); cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration
>
>
>
> It should answer.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Matthew Loraditch <
> mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:
>
>  It is forced on, on my test phone, albeit we have it on system wide as
> well. I've just been trying to eliminate things.
>
> Should the route pattern I have for the mediasense server ring busy if I
> dial it? I have another recording solution where the number answers in a
> similar setup.
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-V, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
> Network Engineer
>
>
>
> We *understand *and *solve *your
>
> technology challenges so
>
> you can sell and service cars.
>
>
>
> Facebook  | Twitter
>  | LinkedIn
>  |
> G+ 
> --
>
> *From:* Chris Ward (chrward) [chrw...@cisco.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2015 5:48 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch; Bill Talley
> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* RE: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration
>
> Also, make sure the BiB on the phones are enabled. Its disabled by
> default. You need to do it per device or in the CCM service parameter.
>
>
>
> +Chris
>
> TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
> Of *Matthew Loraditch
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2015 3:54 PM
> *To:* Bill Talley
> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration
>
>
>
> Ok that’s what I did and what I thought. Time to dig!
>
>
>
> Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
> Network Engineer
> Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
>
> Facebook  | Twitter
>  | LinkedIn
>  |
> G+ 
>
>
>
> *From:* Bill Talley [mailto:btal...@gmail.com ]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2015 3:46 PM
> *To:* Matthew Loraditch
> *Cc:* cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration
>
>
>
> doh...
>
> "Make you set the source to phone preferred AND NOT gateway preferred
> (assuming you are using the BIB)."
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Bill Talley  wrote:
>
>  Correct on licensing.  Just went through this myself and it was really
> easy to setup to record forked audio.  The only issue we ran into relates
> to securing of the recording files.  With stand alone MediaSense, users who
> need access to the recordings are added as API users in MS and have access
> to ALL recordings, not just the recordings they are a party in.
>
> In CUCM you'll create a SIP trunk to MediaSense, create route pattern
> pointing to the trunk, create a recording profile with a DN to match the
> route pattern.  Then enable the BIB on the phone device and under the DN
> set the recording profile, recordig option and recording source on the
> phone.  Make you set the source to phone preferred gateway preferred
> (assuming you are using the BIB).
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Matthew Loraditch <
> mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:
>
>   Trying to setup a PoC for media sense internally to validate I can
> deploy at a client for recording purposes… from what I can tell licensing
> is honor based?
>
> Secondly from what I am reading this section of the documentation is all I
> have to do:
> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/

Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

[Chris Ward (chrward)]

Ah! And yes, route lists require route groups. ☺

+Chris
TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection

From: Matthew Loraditch [mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 12:15 PM
To: Chris Ward (chrward); Bill Talley
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

I figured it out… you kinda need to add your route group to your route list….

Doh!

Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
Network Engineer
Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
Facebook | 
Twitter | 
LinkedIn 
| G+

From: Chris Ward (chrward) [mailto:chrw...@cisco.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 11:54 AM
To: Bill Talley; Matthew Loraditch
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

What happens when you call the number you put in the recording profile? It 
should answer and record. You won’t see or hear anything. If you get a busy or 
reorder tone, your routing is not setup correctly.

+Chris
TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection

From: Bill Talley [mailto:btal...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 6:29 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch
Cc: Chris Ward (chrward); 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

It should answer.

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>> 
wrote:

It is forced on, on my test phone, albeit we have it on system wide as well. 
I've just been trying to eliminate things.

Should the route pattern I have for the mediasense server ring busy if I dial 
it? I have another recording solution where the number answers in a similar 
setup.


Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-V, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
Network Engineer

We understand and solve your
technology challenges so
you can sell and service cars.

Facebook | 
Twitter | 
LinkedIn 
| G+

From: Chris Ward (chrward) [chrw...@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 5:48 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch; Bill Talley
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration
Also, make sure the BiB on the phones are enabled. Its disabled by default. You 
need to do it per device or in the CCM service parameter.

+Chris
TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection

From: cisco-voip 
[mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net]
 On Behalf Of Matthew Loraditch
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 3:54 PM
To: Bill Talley
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

Ok that’s what I did and what I thought. Time to dig!

Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
Network Engineer
Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
Facebook | 
Twitter | 
LinkedIn 
| G+

From: Bill Talley [mailto:btal...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 3:46 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

doh...

"Make you set the source to phone preferred AND NOT gateway preferred (assuming 
you are using the BIB)."

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Bill Talley 
mailto:btal...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Correct on licensing.  Just went through this myself and it was really easy to 
setup to record forked audio.  The only issue we ran into relates to securing 
of the recording files.  With stand alone MediaSense, users who need access to 
the recordings are added as API users in MS and have access to ALL recordings, 
not just the recordings they are a party in.
In CUCM you'll create a SIP trunk to MediaSense, create route pattern pointing 
to the trunk, create a recording profile with a DN to match the route pattern.  
Then enable the BIB on the phone device and under the DN set the recording 
profile, recordig option and recording source on the phone.  Make you set the 
source to phone preferred gateway preferred (assuming you are using the BIB).

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>> 
wrote:
Trying to setup a PoC for media sense internally to validate I can deploy at a 
client for recording purposes… from what I can tell licensing is honor based?
Secondly from what I am reading this section of the documentation is all I 

Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

[Matthew Loraditch]

I figured it out… you kinda need to add your route group to your route list….

Doh!

Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
Network Engineer
Direct Voice: 443.541.1518

Facebook | 
Twitter | 
LinkedIn 
| G+

From: Chris Ward (chrward) [mailto:chrw...@cisco.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 11:54 AM
To: Bill Talley; Matthew Loraditch
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

What happens when you call the number you put in the recording profile? It 
should answer and record. You won’t see or hear anything. If you get a busy or 
reorder tone, your routing is not setup correctly.

+Chris
TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection

From: Bill Talley [mailto:btal...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 6:29 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch
Cc: Chris Ward (chrward); 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

It should answer.

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>> 
wrote:

It is forced on, on my test phone, albeit we have it on system wide as well. 
I've just been trying to eliminate things.

Should the route pattern I have for the mediasense server ring busy if I dial 
it? I have another recording solution where the number answers in a similar 
setup.


Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-V, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
Network Engineer

We understand and solve your
technology challenges so
you can sell and service cars.

Facebook | 
Twitter | 
LinkedIn 
| G+

From: Chris Ward (chrward) [chrw...@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 5:48 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch; Bill Talley
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration
Also, make sure the BiB on the phones are enabled. Its disabled by default. You 
need to do it per device or in the CCM service parameter.

+Chris
TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection

From: cisco-voip 
[mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net]
 On Behalf Of Matthew Loraditch
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 3:54 PM
To: Bill Talley
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

Ok that’s what I did and what I thought. Time to dig!

Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
Network Engineer
Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
Facebook | 
Twitter | 
LinkedIn 
| G+

From: Bill Talley [mailto:btal...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 3:46 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

doh...

"Make you set the source to phone preferred AND NOT gateway preferred (assuming 
you are using the BIB)."

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Bill Talley 
mailto:btal...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Correct on licensing.  Just went through this myself and it was really easy to 
setup to record forked audio.  The only issue we ran into relates to securing 
of the recording files.  With stand alone MediaSense, users who need access to 
the recordings are added as API users in MS and have access to ALL recordings, 
not just the recordings they are a party in.
In CUCM you'll create a SIP trunk to MediaSense, create route pattern pointing 
to the trunk, create a recording profile with a DN to match the route pattern.  
Then enable the BIB on the phone device and under the DN set the recording 
profile, recordig option and recording source on the phone.  Make you set the 
source to phone preferred gateway preferred (assuming you are using the BIB).

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>> 
wrote:
Trying to setup a PoC for media sense internally to validate I can deploy at a 
client for recording purposes… from what I can tell licensing is honor based?
Secondly from what I am reading this section of the documentation is all I have 
to do: 
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/mediasense/105_SU1/User_Guide/CUMS_BK_M5B01864_00_ms-user-guide-105-SU1/CUMS_BK_M5B01864_00_ms-user-guide-105_chapter_010.html#CUMS_TP_M28EF01E_00
Fork calls into media sense? The default rule in MS says record all audio

Is there anything else I need to do? Trying no

Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

[Chris Ward (chrward)]

What happens when you call the number you put in the recording profile? It 
should answer and record. You won’t see or hear anything. If you get a busy or 
reorder tone, your routing is not setup correctly.

+Chris
TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection

From: Bill Talley [mailto:btal...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 6:29 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch
Cc: Chris Ward (chrward); cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

It should answer.

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>> 
wrote:

It is forced on, on my test phone, albeit we have it on system wide as well. 
I've just been trying to eliminate things.

Should the route pattern I have for the mediasense server ring busy if I dial 
it? I have another recording solution where the number answers in a similar 
setup.


Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-V, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
Network Engineer

We understand and solve your
technology challenges so
you can sell and service cars.

Facebook | 
Twitter | 
LinkedIn 
| G+

From: Chris Ward (chrward) [chrw...@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 5:48 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch; Bill Talley
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration
Also, make sure the BiB on the phones are enabled. Its disabled by default. You 
need to do it per device or in the CCM service parameter.

+Chris
TME - MediaSense and Unity Connection

From: cisco-voip 
[mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net]
 On Behalf Of Matthew Loraditch
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 3:54 PM
To: Bill Talley
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

Ok that’s what I did and what I thought. Time to dig!

Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
Network Engineer
Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
Facebook | 
Twitter | 
LinkedIn 
| G+

From: Bill Talley [mailto:btal...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 3:46 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MediaSense Configuration

doh...

"Make you set the source to phone preferred AND NOT gateway preferred (assuming 
you are using the BIB)."

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Bill Talley 
mailto:btal...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Correct on licensing.  Just went through this myself and it was really easy to 
setup to record forked audio.  The only issue we ran into relates to securing 
of the recording files.  With stand alone MediaSense, users who need access to 
the recordings are added as API users in MS and have access to ALL recordings, 
not just the recordings they are a party in.
In CUCM you'll create a SIP trunk to MediaSense, create route pattern pointing 
to the trunk, create a recording profile with a DN to match the route pattern.  
Then enable the BIB on the phone device and under the DN set the recording 
profile, recordig option and recording source on the phone.  Make you set the 
source to phone preferred gateway preferred (assuming you are using the BIB).

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>> 
wrote:
Trying to setup a PoC for media sense internally to validate I can deploy at a 
client for recording purposes… from what I can tell licensing is honor based?
Secondly from what I am reading this section of the documentation is all I have 
to do: 
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/mediasense/105_SU1/User_Guide/CUMS_BK_M5B01864_00_ms-user-guide-105-SU1/CUMS_BK_M5B01864_00_ms-user-guide-105_chapter_010.html#CUMS_TP_M28EF01E_00
Fork calls into media sense? The default rule in MS says record all audio

Is there anything else I need to do? Trying now to figure out what logs to look 
at to see if it’s actually seeing anything or not, because nothing shows up on 
the system.


Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-R&S, CCDA
Network Engineer
Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
Facebook | 
Twitter | 
LinkedIn 
| G+


___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip



__

[cisco-voip] UCCX Agent Status

[Ben Story]

We have a UCCX queue that has the logic that if all agents are Not Ready,
it will send the call to voicemail.  This particular CSQ has a small number
of agents so we're running into the problem where all agents are Not Ready
because one or two agents are making outbound calls.  Any suggestions of
how to distinguish between Not Ready and Not Ready due to outbound calls?
If it's an outbound call we know the agent will be able to take the inbound
call relatively soon so we'd rather not have it go to voicemail.
--
Ben Story
CCNP, CCNA, CCNA Wireless, CCDA
ben.st...@gmail.com

@ntwrk80
http://showbrain.blogspot.com
http://rand0mw0rds.blogspot.com


"From sour-faced saints and silly devotions, good Lord, preserve us!". -- St.
Teresa of Avila
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 10.5(2) Bug - Presence Integration

[Kevin Przybylowski]

I’ve been going with 10.6(1) and has been solid so far.

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ryan 
LaFountain (rlafount)
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 7:58 AM
To: Andrew Grech; Cisco VoIP Group
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 10.5(2) Bug - Presence Integration

Hi Andrew,

It looks like we did indeed make a change in UCCX 10.6(1) where CAD sends less 
requests to CUPS. The bug you cited is a severity 6 on CUPS to handle the 
situation better, but the real bug on CAD is CSCur99802 which is resolved in 
10.6(1) and is a severity 3 bug.

HTH.

Thank you,

Ryan LaFountain
Unified Contact Center
Cisco Services
Direct: +1 919 392 9898
Hours: M - F 9:00am - 5:00pm Eastern Time

From: Andrew Grech
Date: Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 1:32 PM
To: Cisco VoIP Group
Subject: [cisco-voip] UCCX 10.5(2) Bug - Presence Integration

Word of warning,

I have just upgraded from UCCX 10.5(2) integrated with IM and Presence 10.0(1) 
and I'm hitting bug CSCur84150

Soon as UCCX came online IM and Presence CPU spiked to 99%. Now during the day 
jabber will go offline and presence status will not update.

I hope that Cisco confirm its fixed in UCCX 10.6X... At the time I couldn't 
jump straight to 10.6 as version 9 required a service pack to be a supported 
upgrade path.

This bug is currently serverity 6 Enhancement, I believe it needs to be 
critical and this why I have sent the info around.
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX 10.5(2) Bug - Presence Integration

[Ryan LaFountain (rlafount)]

Hi Andrew,

It looks like we did indeed make a change in UCCX 10.6(1) where CAD sends less 
requests to CUPS. The bug you cited is a severity 6 on CUPS to handle the 
situation better, but the real bug on CAD is CSCur99802 which is resolved in 
10.6(1) and is a severity 3 bug.

HTH.

Thank you,

Ryan LaFountain
Unified Contact Center
Cisco Services
Direct: +1 919 392 9898
Hours: M - F 9:00am - 5:00pm Eastern Time

From: Andrew Grech
Date: Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 1:32 PM
To: Cisco VoIP Group
Subject: [cisco-voip] UCCX 10.5(2) Bug - Presence Integration

Word of warning,

I have just upgraded from UCCX 10.5(2) integrated with IM and Presence 10.0(1) 
and I'm hitting bug CSCur84150

Soon as UCCX came online IM and Presence CPU spiked to 99%. Now during the day 
jabber will go offline and presence status will not update.

I hope that Cisco confirm its fixed in UCCX 10.6X... At the time I couldn't 
jump straight to 10.6 as version 9 required a service pack to be a supported 
upgrade path.

This bug is currently serverity 6 Enhancement, I believe it needs to be 
critical and this why I have sent the info around.
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[cisco-voip] UCCX 10.5(2) Bug - Presence Integration

[Andrew Grech]

Word of warning,

I have just upgraded from UCCX 10.5(2) integrated with IM and Presence
10.0(1) and I'm hitting bug CSCur84150

Soon as UCCX came online IM and Presence CPU spiked to 99%. Now during the
day jabber will go offline and presence status will not update.

I hope that Cisco confirm its fixed in UCCX 10.6X... At the time I couldn't
jump straight to 10.6 as version 9 required a service pack to be a
supported upgrade path.

This bug is currently serverity 6 Enhancement, I believe it needs to be
critical and this why I have sent the info around.
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip