[cisco-voip] CUC 6 Second Intervals of Silence

[Anthony Holloway]

There's post on the ciscoUC subreddit about CUC greetings sounding
"garbled" and it turns out there is a small bit of silence being inserted
on the wire by CUC.  Has anyone here experienced this before?  This has
been confirmed on 11.0, 11.5, 12.0 and 12.5 so far.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ciscoUC/comments/f3xi5m/unity_connection_inserts_silence_every_6_seconds/
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Field Notice from Cisco making Secure LDAP mandatory

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

Oh yes. I remember that. Actually, what I remember is the fact they stopped 
doing that about 6 months before I wanted to request that. I mean, better 
decision in the long term to move to FQDN, but still.

-Original Message-
From: NateCCIE  
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2020 11:53 AM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi 
Cc: Anthony Holloway ; Brian Meade 
; voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 

Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Field Notice from Cisco making Secure LDAP mandatory

Or the good old days when you could list an IP Address as a SAN. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 14, 2020, at 9:48 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
> 
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Field Notice from Cisco making Secure LDAP mandatory

[NateCCIE]

Or the good old days when you could list an IP Address as a SAN. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 14, 2020, at 9:48 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
> 
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Field Notice from Cisco making Secure LDAP mandatory

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

Hey Sally,

I agree. Using IP address seems like circumventing the certificate.

From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Anthony 
Holloway
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2020 10:17 AM
To: Brian Meade 
Cc: voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 

Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Field Notice from Cisco making Secure LDAP mandatory

Well, slap my ass and call me Sally.  I change an existing secure LDAP setup 
from FQDN to IP Address and it still works.

I'd be curious to know why it functions this way.  Seems like an opportunity to 
exploit the Authentication facet of SSL.

"In addition to encryption, a proper SSL certificate also provides 
authentication. This means you can be sure that you are sending information to 
the right server and not to an imposter trying to steal your information."

Source: Why SSL? The Purpose of using SSL 
Certificates

On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 1:32 PM Anthony Holloway 
mailto:avholloway%2bcisco-v...@gmail.com>> 
wrote:
That's interesting to know.  How did you learn that?

On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 12:30 PM Brian Meade 
mailto:bmead...@vt.edu>> wrote:
CUCM doesn't check the names, just that the chain is trusted.

On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 5:23 PM Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>> 
wrote:
Interesting. Our root cert is and has been loaded, but I’m still using just the 
IPs so normally that would make the handshake fail.

Get Outlook for iOS

Matthew Loraditch​
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com
 |
e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com
[Helion Technologies]
[Facebook]
[Twitter]
[LinkedIn]
[cid:image005.jpg@01D5E32C.7BF4BAC0]

From: Lelio Fulgenzi mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>>
Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2020 5:15:40 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>>
Cc: James Buchanan 
mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com>>; voyp list, 
cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Field Notice from Cisco making Secure LDAP mandatory

[EXTERNAL]


I couldn’t get secure ldap to work without loading the certificates from the AD 
servers. I also had more luck using the global catalog ports.
Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 9, 2020, at 5:05 PM, Matthew Loraditch 
mailto:mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com>> 
wrote:
I was wondering if they were going to post anything as it’s very unclear if 
ldap over tls was the fix.

Apparently (and amen) it is. Did it on our office system last week to see if it 
would work without any certificate needs. It just worked and during a save it 
will instantly tell you if it worked or not.

Outside of the most regimented environments you should be able to just make the 
change. If it fails talk to your AD team as they would likely have something 
blocked or disabled.

Get Outlook for iOS

Matthew Loraditch​
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com
 |
e: mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com






From: cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>> 
on behalf of James Buchanan 
mailto:james.buchan...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2020 4:57:40 PM
To: voyp list, cisco-voip 
(cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Field Notice from Cisco making Secure LDAP mandatory

[EXTERNAL]

Hello folks,

I know you all needed some more work. I sure did! So here you are!

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/trouble/12_5_1/fieldNotice/cucm_b_fn-secure-ldap-mandatory-ad.html

I'm interested in any early thoughts on other integrations--vCenter, ISE, VPN, 
TACACS, etc. I assume it applies across the board.

Thanks,

James

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

Re: [cisco-voip] Field Notice from Cisco making Secure LDAP mandatory

[Anthony Holloway]

Well, slap my ass and call me Sally.  I change an existing secure LDAP
setup from FQDN to IP Address and it still works.

I'd be curious to know why it functions this way.  Seems like an
opportunity to exploit the Authentication facet of SSL.

*"In addition to encryption, a proper SSL certificate also provides
authentication. This means you can be sure that you are sending information
to the right server and not to an imposter trying to steal your
information."*

Source: Why SSL? The Purpose of using SSL Certificates


On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 1:32 PM Anthony Holloway <
avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That's interesting to know.  How did you learn that?
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 12:30 PM Brian Meade  wrote:
>
>> CUCM doesn't check the names, just that the chain is trusted.
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 5:23 PM Matthew Loraditch <
>> mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Interesting. Our root cert is and has been loaded, but I’m still using
>>> just the IPs so normally that would make the handshake fail.
>>>
>>> Get Outlook for iOS 
>>>
>>> Matthew Loraditch​
>>> Sr. Network Engineer
>>> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
>>> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*   |
>>> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com*
>>> 
>>> [image: Helion Technologies] 
>>> [image: Facebook] 
>>> [image: Twitter] 
>>> [image: LinkedIn] 
>>> --
>>> *From:* Lelio Fulgenzi 
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2020 5:15:40 PM
>>> *To:* Matthew Loraditch 
>>> *Cc:* James Buchanan ; voyp list, cisco-voip
>>> (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) 
>>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Field Notice from Cisco making Secure LDAP
>>> mandatory
>>>
>>>
>>> [EXTERNAL]
>>>
>>>
>>> I couldn’t get secure ldap to work without loading the certificates from
>>> the AD servers. I also had more luck using the global catalog ports.
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Feb 9, 2020, at 5:05 PM, Matthew Loraditch <
>>> mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I was wondering if they were going to post anything as it’s very unclear
>>> if ldap over tls was the fix.
>>>
>>> Apparently (and amen) it is. Did it on our office system last week to
>>> see if it would work without any certificate needs. It just worked and
>>> during a save it will instantly tell you if it worked or not.
>>>
>>> Outside of the most regimented environments you should be able to just
>>> make the change. If it fails talk to your AD team as they would likely have
>>> something blocked or disabled.
>>>
>>> Get Outlook for iOS 
>>>
>>> Matthew Loraditch​
>>> Sr. Network Engineer
>>> p: *443.541.1518* <443.541.1518>
>>> w: *www.heliontechnologies.com*   |
>>> e: *mloradi...@heliontechnologies.com*
>>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>>  
>>> 
>>> --
>>> *From:* cisco-voip  on behalf of
>>> James Buchanan 
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, February 9, 2020 4:57:40 PM
>>> *To:* voyp list, cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net) <
>>> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
>>> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Field Notice from Cisco making Secure LDAP
>>> mandatory
>>>
>>>
>>> [EXTERNAL]
>>>
>>> Hello folks,
>>>
>>> I know you all needed some more work. I sure did! So here you are!
>>>
>>>
>>> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/trouble/12_5_1/fieldNotice/cucm_b_fn-secure-ldap-mandatory-ad.html
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm interested in any early thoughts on other integrations--vCenter,
>>> ISE, VPN, TACACS, etc. I assume it applies across the board.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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
>>>
>> ___
>> 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] Webex calling / flex sku’s

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

My biggest worry is the expiration of the service. We've notoriously been late 
in renewing our SmartNet/EA in the past. If, with Flex, the expiry is forced, 
based on a license file, it means we will have to be more diligent. 
Unfortunately, getting something like this passed requires three or four 
separate departments, emails (from licensing) get lost, etc. Hopefully it will 
all work out in the future.

And then there's Webex hardware as a service! 

Lelio


-Original Message-
From: Pawlowski, Adam  
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2020 8:49 AM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi 
Cc: cisco-voip voyp list 
Subject: RE: Webex calling / flex sku’s

So, yes, in doing this research flex is a bit interesting. 

Early EAs had different restrictions on license quantity, which can impact a 
flex purchase. 1:1 may not be possible based on the license allowance ratios in 
Flex for anonymous phones or general mailboxes. 

It's also all subscription so your licenses end with the sub , not that anyone 
in enterprise should be floating support but that's not a game that seems that 
you can play with Flex. That just means processing budgets to re-up sooner, or, 
if you're looking at other solutions, getting that process rolling faster since 
you lose entitlement when you stop paying.

And yeah we have A-SPK -EDU for Webex/Teams meetings which is different than 
the public sector enterprise for sure. 

What I will say with Flex is that if you can meet minimums for service, you can 
up quantities within the term of the agreement, so you should be able to add 
"more" of something you already have without re-ordering the whole thing. You 
can't back down though I believe. I'm going to have misspoken about a lot of 
this since I'm an end user, we don't work with a partner, but our Cisco account 
team is very helpful in getting these answers when I come up with crazy 
questions - I hope yours is as well.

Adam

> -Original Message-
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi 
> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2020 8:44 AM
> To: Pawlowski, Adam 
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list 
> Subject: Re: Webex calling / flex sku’s
> 
> Thanks! We only have a short time frame, so, based on my quick 
> research, I think I may postpone the webex calling portion and only go 
> for making our trial webex site full fledged, matching our production site.
> 
> I’ll have some time to work out what our production webex calling and 
> cc agent solution would look like, then get that going on trial first.
> 
> I’m hoping we can get them to give us spk-edu for a short period of 
> time, co- term with our production site.
> 
> Interesting thing about the public sector SKUs, they don’t include the 
> “how many student licenses do you need?” Question like the edu sku 
> does. Not sure how they work that in.
> 
> Our EA comes due next year. I’m sure there will be a lot of stuff that 
> changes (again). I wish we had licensed the trial site earlier.
> 
> One thing I know, is that more than likely we will move to flex.
> 
> Lelio
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> > On Feb 14, 2020, at 8:37 AM, Pawlowski, Adam  wrote:
> >
> > We're actually looking to do something similar here. While obv a 
> > Cisco
> account contact should be able to help, I also like to know what I'm 
> dealing with. The Webex Calling datasheets describe different tiers, 
> including basic/enterprise, but under the EA the basic doesn't exist I 
> guess, or at least I got a warning from CCW playing with it.
> >
> > List pricing puts Webex Calling at almost 100% over premise calling, 
> > and
> UCM Cloud is like 80% more - both of those numbers are hard to reconcile.
> >
> > Based on CCW the enterprise calling is A-FLEX-EACL2  if you're doing 
> > this
> under A-FLEX-PUBLICSECT . I know you mentioned A-SPK-EDU but I don't 
> know if that part is still available or not, they've made a lot of 
> changes in the last few years.
> >
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of 
> >> Lelio Fulgenzi
> >> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:39 PM
> >> To: cisco-voip voyp list 
> >> Subject: [cisco-voip] Webex calling / flex sku’s
> >>
> >>
> >> I’m trying to do a last minute pitch for a full fledged lab 
> >> environment for webex cloud : mc/ec/tc/sc, Teams, webex calling 
> >> w/pstn,
> vm (, and call center).
> >>
> >> I know it’s not always as simple as top level sku’s but I’m 
> >> wondering if anyone can shed some light.
> >>
> >> I’m gonna use A-SPK-EDU to start, it’s still the right one in our 
> >> case I believe. I want to make sure I’m not getting Spark Call, but 
> >> the
> broadsoft webex calling.
> >>
> >> Any pointers?
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >> ___
> >> 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] Webex calling / flex sku’s

[Pawlowski, Adam]

So, yes, in doing this research flex is a bit interesting. 

Early EAs had different restrictions on license quantity, which can impact a 
flex purchase. 1:1 may not be possible based on the license allowance ratios in 
Flex for anonymous phones or general mailboxes. 

It's also all subscription so your licenses end with the sub , not that anyone 
in enterprise should be floating support but that's not a game that seems that 
you can play with Flex. That just means processing budgets to re-up sooner, or, 
if you're looking at other solutions, getting that process rolling faster since 
you lose entitlement when you stop paying.

And yeah we have A-SPK -EDU for Webex/Teams meetings which is different than 
the public sector enterprise for sure. 

What I will say with Flex is that if you can meet minimums for service, you can 
up quantities within the term of the agreement, so you should be able to add 
"more" of something you already have without re-ordering the whole thing. You 
can't back down though I believe. I'm going to have misspoken about a lot of 
this since I'm an end user, we don't work with a partner, but our Cisco account 
team is very helpful in getting these answers when I come up with crazy 
questions - I hope yours is as well.

Adam

> -Original Message-
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi 
> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2020 8:44 AM
> To: Pawlowski, Adam 
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list 
> Subject: Re: Webex calling / flex sku’s
> 
> Thanks! We only have a short time frame, so, based on my quick research, I
> think I may postpone the webex calling portion and only go for making our 
> trial
> webex site full fledged, matching our production site.
> 
> I’ll have some time to work out what our production webex calling and cc agent
> solution would look like, then get that going on trial first.
> 
> I’m hoping we can get them to give us spk-edu for a short period of time, co-
> term with our production site.
> 
> Interesting thing about the public sector SKUs, they don’t include the “how
> many student licenses do you need?” Question like the edu sku does. Not sure
> how they work that in.
> 
> Our EA comes due next year. I’m sure there will be a lot of stuff that changes
> (again). I wish we had licensed the trial site earlier.
> 
> One thing I know, is that more than likely we will move to flex.
> 
> Lelio
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> > On Feb 14, 2020, at 8:37 AM, Pawlowski, Adam  wrote:
> >
> > We're actually looking to do something similar here. While obv a Cisco
> account contact should be able to help, I also like to know what I'm dealing
> with. The Webex Calling datasheets describe different tiers, including
> basic/enterprise, but under the EA the basic doesn't exist I guess, or at 
> least I
> got a warning from CCW playing with it.
> >
> > List pricing puts Webex Calling at almost 100% over premise calling, and
> UCM Cloud is like 80% more - both of those numbers are hard to reconcile.
> >
> > Based on CCW the enterprise calling is A-FLEX-EACL2  if you're doing this
> under A-FLEX-PUBLICSECT . I know you mentioned A-SPK-EDU but I don't know
> if that part is still available or not, they've made a lot of changes in the 
> last few
> years.
> >
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of
> >> Lelio Fulgenzi
> >> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:39 PM
> >> To: cisco-voip voyp list 
> >> Subject: [cisco-voip] Webex calling / flex sku’s
> >>
> >>
> >> I’m trying to do a last minute pitch for a full fledged lab
> >> environment for webex cloud : mc/ec/tc/sc, Teams, webex calling w/pstn,
> vm (, and call center).
> >>
> >> I know it’s not always as simple as top level sku’s but I’m wondering
> >> if anyone can shed some light.
> >>
> >> I’m gonna use A-SPK-EDU to start, it’s still the right one in our
> >> case I believe. I want to make sure I’m not getting Spark Call, but the
> broadsoft webex calling.
> >>
> >> Any pointers?
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >> ___
> >> 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] Webex calling / flex sku’s

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

Thanks! We only have a short time frame, so, based on my quick research, I 
think I may postpone the webex calling portion and only go for making our trial 
webex site full fledged, matching our production site. 

I’ll have some time to work out what our production webex calling and cc agent 
solution would look like, then get that going on trial first. 

I’m hoping we can get them to give us spk-edu for a short period of time, 
co-term with our production site. 

Interesting thing about the public sector SKUs, they don’t include the “how 
many student licenses do you need?” Question like the edu sku does. Not sure 
how they work that in. 

Our EA comes due next year. I’m sure there will be a lot of stuff that changes 
(again). I wish we had licensed the trial site earlier. 

One thing I know, is that more than likely we will move to flex. 

Lelio


Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 14, 2020, at 8:37 AM, Pawlowski, Adam  wrote:
> 
> We're actually looking to do something similar here. While obv a Cisco 
> account contact should be able to help, I also like to know what I'm dealing 
> with. The Webex Calling datasheets describe different tiers, including 
> basic/enterprise, but under the EA the basic doesn't exist I guess, or at 
> least I got a warning from CCW playing with it.
> 
> List pricing puts Webex Calling at almost 100% over premise calling, and UCM 
> Cloud is like 80% more - both of those numbers are hard to reconcile. 
> 
> Based on CCW the enterprise calling is A-FLEX-EACL2  if you're doing this 
> under A-FLEX-PUBLICSECT . I know you mentioned A-SPK-EDU but I don't know if 
> that part is still available or not, they've made a lot of changes in the 
> last few years.
> 
> 
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Lelio
>> Fulgenzi
>> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:39 PM
>> To: cisco-voip voyp list 
>> Subject: [cisco-voip] Webex calling / flex sku’s
>> 
>> 
>> I’m trying to do a last minute pitch for a full fledged lab environment for 
>> webex
>> cloud : mc/ec/tc/sc, Teams, webex calling w/pstn, vm (, and call center).
>> 
>> I know it’s not always as simple as top level sku’s but I’m wondering if 
>> anyone
>> can shed some light.
>> 
>> I’m gonna use A-SPK-EDU to start, it’s still the right one in our case I 
>> believe. I
>> want to make sure I’m not getting Spark Call, but the broadsoft webex 
>> calling.
>> 
>> Any pointers?
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> ___
>> 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] Webex calling / flex sku’s

[Pawlowski, Adam]

We're actually looking to do something similar here. While obv a Cisco account 
contact should be able to help, I also like to know what I'm dealing with. The 
Webex Calling datasheets describe different tiers, including basic/enterprise, 
but under the EA the basic doesn't exist I guess, or at least I got a warning 
from CCW playing with it.

List pricing puts Webex Calling at almost 100% over premise calling, and UCM 
Cloud is like 80% more - both of those numbers are hard to reconcile. 

Based on CCW the enterprise calling is A-FLEX-EACL2  if you're doing this under 
A-FLEX-PUBLICSECT . I know you mentioned A-SPK-EDU but I don't know if that 
part is still available or not, they've made a lot of changes in the last few 
years.



> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Lelio
> Fulgenzi
> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2020 5:39 PM
> To: cisco-voip voyp list 
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Webex calling / flex sku’s
> 
> 
> I’m trying to do a last minute pitch for a full fledged lab environment for 
> webex
> cloud : mc/ec/tc/sc, Teams, webex calling w/pstn, vm (, and call center).
> 
> I know it’s not always as simple as top level sku’s but I’m wondering if 
> anyone
> can shed some light.
> 
> I’m gonna use A-SPK-EDU to start, it’s still the right one in our case I 
> believe. I
> want to make sure I’m not getting Spark Call, but the broadsoft webex calling.
> 
> Any pointers?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> ___
> 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