Re: [cisco-voip] Skype for business Cloud Connector installation problem

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

Did you set the paths?

At what point did you get the error?



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
Claiton Campos
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 7:50 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Skype for business Cloud Connector installation problem


Hi all,
I´m trying to set up a cloud connector edition in my environment to link the 
office 365 with my CUCM via sip trunk, but during install the CCE i get the 
error.

Create-BaseVM : The configuration of the operating system has taken longer than 
usual. Please check the virtual
machine network configuration.
No C:\Program 
Files\WindowsPowerShell\Modules\CloudConnector\Initialize-CcHost.ps1:71 
caractere:5
+ Create-BaseVM -INI $ini -VHDPath $vhdFilePath -UnattendISOPath 
$unattendISOP ...
+ 

+ CategoryInfo  : NotSpecified: (:) [Write-Error], 
WriteErrorException
+ FullyQualifiedErrorId : 
Microsoft.PowerShell.Commands.WriteErrorException,Create-BaseVM

someone already installed CCE once and found an error like this?

Regards,



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

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco and Lync/Skype with Media Bypass

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

Media Bypass in SfB maximums are not posted, they only post the Mediation 
server transcoding maximums, which are between 1100 and 1500 for each dedicated 
mediation server and 150 for co-located mediation server.
https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg615015.aspx

In my opinion, the bigger limitation however is on the CUCM side.  SfB 
endpoints will bypass the mediation server, however every call will terminate 
to either CUCM MTP or an MTP within an IOS gateway (if configured in 
MRG/MRGLs).  Today, it is not possible to connect a SfB endpoint directly to a 
Cisco endpoint without a Cisco MTP in the middle.  This is extremely important 
when designing your integration, especially if you have a large deployment.



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
Norton, Mike
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 6:50 PM
To: Mark Holloway ; voip puck 

Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco and Lync/Skype with Media Bypass



Are you using the official Planning Tool that you download and install from 
Microsoft? One of the questions it asks about each site is what percentage of 
calls will use media bypass. When you get to the end it should take your media 
bypass use into consideration in its recommendations.

-mn


-Original Message-
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark 
Holloway
Sent: October-12-16 2:39 PM
To: voip puck mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Cisco and Lync/Skype with Media Bypass

This is more of a Microsoft question but I’ve searched everywhere and cannot 
find an answer. I’m currently working on a design to integrate CUCM and Skype 
for Biz. The Skype client will have media bypass enabled. All the Lync/Skype 
capacity calculators and TechNet articles talk about how many calls a Mediation 
server can handle when media is anchored. With media bypass only SIP signaling 
will pass through the Mediation server. There are no published numbers on how 
many concurrent SIP signaling only calls a mediation server can handle. 
Everything just reference “many more calls” but no ball park numbers. If anyone 
has info that would be great.

Thanks,
Mark


___
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



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

Re: [cisco-voip] List of SIP Internet Providers

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

I think it depends on quality guarantee versus cost.  For call centers (like 
Clifford points out), quality would usually be of upmost importance.  But for 
general usage or college campus environment, maybe quality is not of upmost 
importance and cellular-like quality is more than acceptable.

Or, in some cases, the internet provider may also be the ITSP/SIP provider 
which may provide QoS control as the traffic would never leave their network.

I've also seen where a customer's WAN carrier also provided the SIP trunks over 
their existing MPLS network.  It usually requires a slight increase for BW on 
links, but the trunks and local loop charges are already being paid thereby 
drastically reducing the costs associated with a dedicated L3 circuit just for 
SIP traffic.

It's always a good idea to understand the full cost of the service rather than 
focus on 'per minute' charges.  I've seen several customers that assume SIP 
equals lower costs only to find out that dedicated L3 trunks can cost more than 
a couple PRI lines they are replacing.

Anyways, my 2 cents.

From: Lelio Fulgenzi [mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca]
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 10:43 PM
To: Matt Slaga (AM) 
Cc: Clifford McGlamry ; John Huston 
; Cisco VoIP Group 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] List of SIP Internet Providers


One question I have is whether people use SIP providers over their regular 
internet connection or do the get a SIP provider who provides layer 3 to the 
site?



Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 12, 2016, at 2:51 PM, Matt Slaga (AM) 
mailto:matt.sl...@dimensiondata.com>> wrote:
Intelepeer
Nextiva
Sip.us<http://sip.us>
Etherspeak
Megapath
GoTrunk
Broadvox

Many others

http://www.whichvoip.com/lp/top-business-sip-providers.htm?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=sip%20trunk%20provider&utm_content=STP&utm_campaign=WhichVoIP%20SIP:SIP%20Trunking<http://www.whichvoip.com/lp/top-business-sip-providers.htm?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=sip%20trunk%20provider&utm_content=STP&utm_campaign=WhichVoIP%20SIP:SIP%20Trunking>



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
Clifford McGlamry
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 11:07 AM
To: John Huston mailto:fentonguy2...@yahoo.com>>
Cc: Cisco VoIP Group 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] List of SIP Internet Providers


I've been using voip.ms for some time.  They do a pretty good job.

Cliff



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of John 
Huston via cisco-voip
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 10:55 AM
To: Cisco Voip
Subject: [cisco-voip] List of SIP Internet Providers

I have been asked to look at moving our SIP trunks so they over the Internet.  
An example of a company that does this in the US is 
bandwidth.com<http://bandwidth.com>

I am writing to find out if there is a list of other companies such as 
Bandwidth and if so where I could find it.  I have googled this and I am unable 
to find one.

Thank you in advance for your help.

John


NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY:
The information contained in this email transmission is confidential 
information which may contain information that is legally privileged and 
prohibited from disclosure under applicable law or by contractual agreement. 
The information is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity 
named above.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the 
contents of this email transmission is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this email transmission in error, please notify us 
immediately by telephone to arrange for the return of the original transmission 
to us.


itevomcid
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<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] List of SIP Internet Providers

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

Intelepeer
Nextiva
Sip.us
Etherspeak
Megapath
GoTrunk
Broadvox

Many others

http://www.whichvoip.com/lp/top-business-sip-providers.htm?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=sip%20trunk%20provider&utm_content=STP&utm_campaign=WhichVoIP%20SIP:SIP%20Trunking



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
Clifford McGlamry
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 11:07 AM
To: John Huston 
Cc: Cisco VoIP Group 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] List of SIP Internet Providers


I’ve been using voip.ms for some time.  They do a pretty good job.

Cliff



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of John 
Huston via cisco-voip
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 10:55 AM
To: Cisco Voip
Subject: [cisco-voip] List of SIP Internet Providers

I have been asked to look at moving our SIP trunks so they over the Internet.  
An example of a company that does this in the US is bandwidth.com

I am writing to find out if there is a list of other companies such as 
Bandwidth and if so where I could find it.  I have googled this and I am unable 
to find one.

Thank you in advance for your help.

John


NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY:
The information contained in this email transmission is confidential 
information which may contain information that is legally privileged and 
prohibited from disclosure under applicable law or by contractual agreement. 
The information is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity 
named above.
If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the 
contents of this email transmission is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this email transmission in error, please notify us 
immediately by telephone to arrange for the return of the original transmission 
to us.


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

Re: [cisco-voip] Helios IP Uni intercom units Dual Button.

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

Yes, that’s too bad on the Helios support.  We were actually looking into some 
of their units for a similar scenario.  Looks like we will cross Helios off the 
vendor list.



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
Matthew Collins
Sent: Thursday, June 9, 2016 4:08 AM
To: Norton, Mike ; Cisco VoIP Group 

Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Helios IP Uni intercom units Dual Button.


Thanks for your reply’s Mike and Neal,

We have hard coded the voice vlan as they were booting in the data vlan. From 
the traces its not looking like a network issues with qos ect.

Yes they register to the a CUCM system as 3rd party sip end points.

With regards to locations they are either side of a pair of 2 way airlock doors 
so there is no chance of getting feedback from each other. I did test two 
devices between different floors to completely rule this out but there was 
still issues.

Mike I think you may be right about the speakerphone logic as calls between a 
intercom and a desk phone are ok. Just annoying Helios point blank refuse any 
support.

Regards

Matthew Collins







From: Norton, Mike [mailto:mikenor...@pwsd76.ab.ca]
Sent: 08 June 2016 17:55
To: Matthew Collins mailto:mcoll...@block.co.uk>>; Cisco 
VoIP Group mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: RE: Helios IP Uni intercom units Dual Button.

Matthew – “The phones are registered and they can place calls between each 
other.”

Are they actually meant to be used that way?

Sounds to me like the speakerphone logic is getting confused and/or sucks. E.g. 
the speakerphone logic on one side makes adjustments, it confuses the 
speakerphone logic on the other side, causing it to also make adjustments, 
which makes the first side readjust, etc. etc. Could be that they are meant 
more for calling a standard handset and not really meant for calling each 
other. Just a guess.

Furthermore, are they within “earshot” of each other? ‘Cause that would 
definitely cause feedback and weird speakerphone behaviour.

-mn


From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
Matthew Collins
Sent: June-08-16 9:18 AM
To: Cisco VoIP Group 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: [cisco-voip] Helios IP Uni intercom units Dual Button.

Hi all,

I have been asked to configure some Helios IP Uni intercom units and register 
them to the CUCM, I have been able to compete this, The phones are registered 
and they can place calls between each other but the audio quality is poor, and 
when I say poor I don’t mean packet loss but the Audio volume keeps getting 
higher then lower, There is a lot of feedback. I might get 10 seconds of clear 
audio then its all start to go bad again. I have tested lots of the audio 
settings but not been able to get the right combo. I have also upgraded them to 
their latest firmware. I’m unable to log a call with Helios for support as we 
didn’t purchase them direct. They are telling my to do to the supplier, But we 
are unsure where they were purchased from.

Any thoughts? What was anyone else’s experience, Did they just work out of the 
box without tweaking the audio settings?

Thanks in advance.


Matthew


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

Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco UCM with Skype for Business

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

Another option, although not perfect, is using a hardware device like a 
Kuandobox.

http://www.plenom.com/products/kuandobox/

Works well in cube environments, but not so well in offices, or places where 
users use speakerphone often.



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
Alastair Watts
Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2016 8:28 AM
To: kiwi.vo...@gmail.com; dan...@ohnesorge.me
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Cisco UCM with Skype for Business



I echo Daniel’s comments below regarding the Lync/SfB integration, and 
recommend that you look at the reasons why you’re choosing to integrate SfB - 
particularly with voice/video or with SfB mobile clients.

In the last few months, Cisco acquired Acano, whose portfolio of products can 
assist with bridging SfB and CUCM when joining the two is required.

I strongly recommend reviewing the Cisco Live talk that was presented earlier 
this year in Melbourne (available at 
https://www.ciscolive.com/online/connect/sessionDetail.ww?SESSION_ID=89886) , 
which goes into integration options between Lync/SfB and Cisco, including 
limitations, and includes the Acano product set and how it can assist with the 
integration.

Al

On 6 Apr 2016, at 17:10, Daniel Ohnesorge via cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>> wrote:

You have a few options but none will suit your needs:

- Partitioned Intra-Domain Federation from CUPS to Lync will provide IM/Presence
- Direct SIP Trunk to Lync Mediation Server will provide the ability to call 
Enterprise Voice enabled Lync clients (no video)
- VCS/Expressway to Lync Mediation Server with/without Media Bypass will 
provide voice and video to Enterprise Voice enabled Lync clients
- RCC (with Enterprise Voice disabled) will give you deskphone control of your 
Cisco phones from Lync client
- CUCILync (with Enterprise Voice disabled) will give you voice/video softphone 
as well as deskphone control

All of the above solutions cater different needs but you are limited with 
mobile support. You can run Jabber on mobile devices in Phone-only mode and 
then have separate Lync client for IM but that would be a bad user experience.

Unless there is a specific reason to use Lync/SFB, if you already have a CUCM 
you may want to go Jabber and choose one of the above options.

This is always a good read: 
https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/office/en-US/cef0dd13-1092-46ec-9d1c-6679511d2206/lync-cisco-cucm-rcc?forum=ocsvoice

and: http://www.justin-morris.net/cuci-lync-and-why-you-should-think-twice/

and finally: 
https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/11500646/cupsjabberlynccucilynciphoneandriod-head-spinning

Sent from my iPhone

On 6 Apr 2016, at 17:06, Ki Wi 
mailto:kiwi.vo...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Group,
anyone have experience integrating ?

The objective is to use Skype for business client for IM & voice/video call.

It seems like the legacy approach is to use CUCILYNC. However, that's for 
windows desktop. If we use Skype for mobile clients, there's no such plug in.

Is there a way to achieve presence synchronization between UCM and Skype 
presence service?
Assuming they are using the same URI ?
+
Able to leverage on UCM to receive and initial calls.

Regards,
Ki Wi
___
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



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

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM with Lync RCC

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

Yes, you are correct.  Same as Cisco wants you to ditch Microsoft and go with 
their phone system.  It might actually be funny if it wasn’t costing companies 
so much investment and time.



From: Haas, Neal [mailto:nh...@co.fresno.ca.us]
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 11:20 AM
To: Matt Slaga (AM) ; 'Mike King' ; 
'george.hend...@l-3com.com' 
Cc: 'Cisco VoIPoE List' 
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] CUCM with Lync RCC

Translated “To work properly though, Microsoft wants to be the ingress for all 
your calls” MS wants you to ditch Cisco and go with their Phone system :>

Thank you,
Neal Haas


From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Matt 
Slaga (AM)
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 8:11 AM
To: Mike King; george.hend...@l-3com.com<mailto:george.hend...@l-3com.com>
Cc: Cisco VoIPoE List
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM with Lync RCC

Skype for Business Call via Work may be a solution for you.  It is Microsoft’s 
replacement for the antiquated RCC solution.  To work properly though, 
Microsoft wants to be the ingress for all your calls.

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn933908.aspx



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mike 
King
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 10:44 AM
To: george.hend...@l-3com.com<mailto:george.hend...@l-3com.com>
Cc: Cisco VoIPoE List 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM with Lync RCC


George,

Microsoft has recently rebranded Lync to Skype for Business:
https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Lync-is-now-Skype-for-Business-%E2%80%94-see-what-s-new-aba02d7e-c801-4a82-bccd-e7207240f612

They have the following help guide:
https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Make-a-Skype-for-Business-call-but-use-your-PBX-desk-phone-for-audio-6a316c11-a05e-460c-b969-32ff0ad848e6


Unfortunately, they seem to be hiding the implementation details, this looks 
more user facing.

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 9:24 AM, 
mailto:george.hend...@l-3com.com>> wrote:
We are in the process of upgrading our Clients from Office Communicator to 
Lync.  One of the things we’ve used with MOC is CUCILync, which works great and 
we can make calls on our desk phone in MOC.  However, with Lync, this doesn’t 
seem to work the same.  I’ve installed a compatible version of CUCILYNC that 
works with Lync, but don’t see any way to make desk phone calls in Lync.  There 
is an option in Lync when I right-click a contact for “Place a Call” and seems 
to be an Icon for CUCILYNC, but it does nothing when I click on it.

Also, if we wanted to just remove CUCILYNC, to have call/phone control in Lync, 
would this require we stand up a Cisco Presence server?

Thanks,

Bill Hendrix


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



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

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM with Lync RCC

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

Skype for Business Call via Work may be a solution for you.  It is Microsoft’s 
replacement for the antiquated RCC solution.  To work properly though, 
Microsoft wants to be the ingress for all your calls.

https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn933908.aspx



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mike 
King
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 10:44 AM
To: george.hend...@l-3com.com
Cc: Cisco VoIPoE List 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM with Lync RCC


George,

Microsoft has recently rebranded Lync to Skype for Business:
https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Lync-is-now-Skype-for-Business-%E2%80%94-see-what-s-new-aba02d7e-c801-4a82-bccd-e7207240f612

They have the following help guide:
https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Make-a-Skype-for-Business-call-but-use-your-PBX-desk-phone-for-audio-6a316c11-a05e-460c-b969-32ff0ad848e6


Unfortunately, they seem to be hiding the implementation details, this looks 
more user facing.

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 9:24 AM, 
mailto:george.hend...@l-3com.com>> wrote:
We are in the process of upgrading our Clients from Office Communicator to 
Lync.  One of the things we’ve used with MOC is CUCILync, which works great and 
we can make calls on our desk phone in MOC.  However, with Lync, this doesn’t 
seem to work the same.  I’ve installed a compatible version of CUCILYNC that 
works with Lync, but don’t see any way to make desk phone calls in Lync.  There 
is an option in Lync when I right-click a contact for “Place a Call” and seems 
to be an Icon for CUCILYNC, but it does nothing when I click on it.

Also, if we wanted to just remove CUCILYNC, to have call/phone control in Lync, 
would this require we stand up a Cisco Presence server?

Thanks,

Bill Hendrix


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



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

Re: [cisco-voip] jabber on wIntel on a stick platform

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

I couldn’t imagine an Intel Atom providing enough CPU for pushing and pulling a 
full HD stream.  Would be interested to hear once someone tests it out.

We’ve got one of our engineers that built a drone that can join Skype for 
Business meetings, now that is an interesting prospect.  Brings new thoughts to 
‘camera placement’ ☺



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Scott 
Voll
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 10:43 AM
To: Ed Leatherman 
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] jabber on wIntel on a stick platform


can you get a HD camera that you could power over USB extensions?  or is the 
computer close enough to the camera?

On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 3:06 AM, Ed Leatherman 
mailto:ealeather...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Neat idea Lelio, i might try that out myself.

On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi 
mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>> wrote:

anyone try running jabber on the wIntel on a stick platform?

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E1688384

seems like it might make a pretty cheap but fully functional video conferencing 
endpoint for a small room when you add an HD webcam and some bluetooth 
accessories like a handset and keyboard or pointer.

---
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



--
Ed Leatherman

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



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

Re: [cisco-voip] jabber dual domain question

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

Erick,

Yes, you are absolutely correct.  If you are configuring pinpoint DNS, then you 
have to use command line.

From: Erick Wellnitz [mailto:ewellnitzv...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 12:06 PM
To: Matt Slaga (AM)
Cc: Eric Pedersen; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] jabber dual domain question

That is where the problem lies with the GUI when using the pinpoint subdomain 
to deal with an internal domain of .local (or any other non-public domain) and 
a public domain of .com, .net, .us, etc

If the SRV resides in the protocol folder of the pinpoint subdomain, at least 
in my testing, the SRV information doesn't get returned as expected. Using 
PowerShell or DNSCMD were the only methods that were able to place the SRV at 
the root of the pinpoint subdomain which produced the expected behavior.

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Matt Slaga (AM) 
mailto:matt.sl...@dimensiondata.com>> wrote:
In the GUI, you have to create the root SRV records under the protocol 
folder/subdomain, in this case ‘_tcp’.

[cid:image001.png@01D076B6.5E751040]

From: cisco-voip 
[mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>]
 On Behalf Of Erick Wellnitz
Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2015 6:30 PM
To: Eric Pedersen
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] jabber dual domain question


I've been labbing this up today and was interested in figuring out what the 
difference is between dnscmd, powershell and the GUI because my 2012 R2 box 
gave me a warning that MS is going to stop supporting dnscmd in favor of 
powershell,
2012 R2 din't like the @, so I used the fqdn of the
dnscmd  /recordadd _cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com<http://tcp.xyz.com/>. 
_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com<http://tcp.xyz.com> SRV 0 0 8443 
cucm1.xyz.com<http://cucm1.xyz.com/>

This can be replicated in powershell by tweaking the MS recommended way to use 
the fqdn for the -Name parameter instead of the 'host' section of the name 
_cisco-uds._tcp
First add the zone:
Add-DnsServerPrimaryZone -Name _cisc-uds._tcp.xyz -ReplicationScope Domain
Replication Scope options are Domain, Forest, or you can set up a zone file so 
the zone is not AD integrated.
Add-DnsResourceRecord -Srv -ZoneName 
_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com<http://tcp.xyz.com> -Name 
_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com<http://tcp.xyz.com> -DomainName 
cucm1.xyz.com<http://cucm1.xyz.com> -Port 8443 -Priority 0 -Weight 0

The GUI doesn't allow for the creation of SRVs at the root of the Zone like the 
command line and power shell do.





On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Eric Pedersen 
mailto:peders...@bennettjones.com>> wrote:
Yes that’s right, then you create @ SRV records in that zone. It looked a 
little bizarre to me.  If it’s Window DNS you’re using, you can’t do it with 
the GUI; you need to use dnscmd.  Someone kindly posted this in the 
Collaboration CCP forum:

dnscmd . /zoneadd _cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com<http://tcp.xyz.com>. /dsprimary
dnscmd . /recordadd _cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com<http://tcp.xyz.com>. @ SRV 0 0 8443 
cucm1.xyz.com<http://cucm1.xyz.com>
dnscmd . /recordadd _cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com<http://tcp.xyz.com>. @ SRV 0 0 8443 
cucm2.xyz.com<http://cucm2.xyz.com>



From: Erick Wellnitz 
[mailto:ewellnitzv...@gmail.com<mailto:ewellnitzv...@gmail.com>]
Sent: 10 April 2015 9:24 AM
To: Eric Pedersen
Cc: Anthony Holloway; 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] jabber dual domain question

Okay, the bulb is getting a little brighter...

So, if I understand what you're saying, create 
_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com<http://tcp.xyz.com> as a zone then create the SRV under 
that?

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Eric Pedersen 
mailto:peders...@bennettjones.com>> wrote:
I was told by a Cisco engineer that cisco-internal is no longer supported and 
it didn’t work for us after we enabled MRA. I think the pinpoint subdomain 
being referred to now is creating the _cisco-uds._tcp SRV record as a domain on 
your internal DNS server. That works perfectly.

From: cisco-voip 
[mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>]
 On Behalf Of Erick Wellnitz
Sent: 10 April 2015 8:32 AM
To: Anthony Holloway
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] jabber dual domain question

I'm seeing the 10.6.2 client query for 
_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com<http://tcp.xyz.com>, _cuplogin._tcp.xyz.com...then 
_collab-edge._tls.xyz.com<http://tls.xyz.com>


I don't see a query for cisco-internal.xyz.com<http://cisco-internal.xyz.com>



On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Anthony Holloway 
mailto:avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com>> wrote:
According to the document you linked, Jabber will first perform this query:

_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com<h

Re: [cisco-voip] jabber dual domain question

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

In the GUI, you have to create the root SRV records under the protocol 
folder/subdomain, in this case ‘_tcp’.

[cid:image001.png@01D075C2.2519AFD0]

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Erick 
Wellnitz
Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2015 6:30 PM
To: Eric Pedersen
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] jabber dual domain question


I've been labbing this up today and was interested in figuring out what the 
difference is between dnscmd, powershell and the GUI because my 2012 R2 box 
gave me a warning that MS is going to stop supporting dnscmd in favor of 
powershell,
2012 R2 din't like the @, so I used the fqdn of the
dnscmd  /recordadd _cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com. 
_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com SRV 0 0 8443 
cucm1.xyz.com

This can be replicated in powershell by tweaking the MS recommended way to use 
the fqdn for the -Name parameter instead of the 'host' section of the name 
_cisco-uds._tcp
First add the zone:
Add-DnsServerPrimaryZone -Name _cisc-uds._tcp.xyz -ReplicationScope Domain
Replication Scope options are Domain, Forest, or you can set up a zone file so 
the zone is not AD integrated.
Add-DnsResourceRecord -Srv -ZoneName 
_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com -Name 
_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com -DomainName 
cucm1.xyz.com -Port 8443 -Priority 0 -Weight 0

The GUI doesn't allow for the creation of SRVs at the root of the Zone like the 
command line and power shell do.





On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Eric Pedersen 
mailto:peders...@bennettjones.com>> wrote:
Yes that’s right, then you create @ SRV records in that zone. It looked a 
little bizarre to me.  If it’s Window DNS you’re using, you can’t do it with 
the GUI; you need to use dnscmd.  Someone kindly posted this in the 
Collaboration CCP forum:

dnscmd . /zoneadd _cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com. /dsprimary
dnscmd . /recordadd _cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com. @ SRV 0 0 8443 
cucm1.xyz.com
dnscmd . /recordadd _cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com. @ SRV 0 0 8443 
cucm2.xyz.com



From: Erick Wellnitz 
[mailto:ewellnitzv...@gmail.com]
Sent: 10 April 2015 9:24 AM
To: Eric Pedersen
Cc: Anthony Holloway; 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] jabber dual domain question

Okay, the bulb is getting a little brighter...

So, if I understand what you're saying, create 
_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com as a zone then create the SRV under 
that?

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Eric Pedersen 
mailto:peders...@bennettjones.com>> wrote:
I was told by a Cisco engineer that cisco-internal is no longer supported and 
it didn’t work for us after we enabled MRA. I think the pinpoint subdomain 
being referred to now is creating the _cisco-uds._tcp SRV record as a domain on 
your internal DNS server. That works perfectly.

From: cisco-voip 
[mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net]
 On Behalf Of Erick Wellnitz
Sent: 10 April 2015 8:32 AM
To: Anthony Holloway
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] jabber dual domain question

I'm seeing the 10.6.2 client query for 
_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com, _cuplogin._tcp.xyz.com...then 
_collab-edge._tls.xyz.com


I don't see a query for cisco-internal.xyz.com



On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Anthony Holloway 
mailto:avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com>> wrote:
According to the document you linked, Jabber will first perform this query:

_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com

If nothing comes back, then it will try:

_cisco-uds._tcp.cisco-internal.xyz.com

Therefore, the pinpoint subdomain you are creating is: 
cisco-internal.xyz.com on your internal DNS 
server.  This alleviates your need to host xyz.com (the parent 
domain) on your internal DNS, where it would become authoritative and require 
you to enter every external DNS entry into your internal DNS server.

Excerpt from Jabber DNS Guide, modified to fit your example:

When the client queries the name server for SRV records, it issues additional 
queries if the name server does not return _cisco-uds or _cuplogin.

The additional queries check for the 
cisco-internal.xyz.com pinpoint subdomain zone.

For example, Adam McKenzie's services domain is xyz.com when he 
starts the client. The client then issues the following query:
_cisco-uds._tcp.xyz.com
_cuplogin._tcp.xyz.com
_collab-edge._tls.xyz.com

If the name server does not return _cisco-uds or _cuplogin SRV records, the 
client then issues the following que

Re: [cisco-voip] GoDaddy UCC Cert?

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

I usually use ssls.com, especially for single name certs.  You can get 5 year 
single SAN cert (that comes from Comodo) for $25.



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of James 
Buchanan
Sent: Friday, February 6, 2015 12:31 PM
To: Heim, Dennis
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] GoDaddy UCC Cert?


I have a customer on su2 and using UC SAN certs with no issues

Sent from my iPhone

On 06 Feb 2015, at 19:23, Heim, Dennis 
mailto:dennis.h...@wwt.com>> wrote:
As of 10.5 SU1 we were still running into issues with the multi-server 
certificates not work. Supposedly it is fixed in SU2. However, we decided just 
to go with single server certs to resolve the issue. Anyone have it working on 
SU2 and not getting device resets?

Dennis Heim | Emerging Technology Architect (Collaboration)
World Wide Technology, Inc. | +1 314-212-1814


"Innovation happens on project squared" -- http://www.projectsquared.com


From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
Matthew Loraditch
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 12:11 PM
To: Kevin Przybylowski; 
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] GoDaddy UCC Cert?

They have always done this. It’s a bonus I suppose. Even when you buy a single 
hostname cert they add www to it. A little lagniappe I suppose but a bit of 
work in this case.

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

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Kevin 
Przybylowski
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 11:55 AM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] GoDaddy UCC Cert?

I ran into an issue recently where I wasn’t able to upload a godaddy UCC cert 
to CUCM (Multi-Server) until regenerating the CSR with 
“www.Common-Name” .

It appears godaddy adds www. as a SAN for all UCC certs now?  Has anyone else 
seen this?


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


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

Re: [cisco-voip] CIPC & MS Lync trying to control the same call

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

It seems you have Lync and CUCM integrated with SNR ringdown from UCM to Lync.

While this works great for most users, what you are experiencing is the reason 
I normally leave call center agents out of this configuration.

I would suggest removing the Cisco SNR and Lync Enterprise Voice configuration 
from the call center agents, and leave Lync for just IM&Presence for that user 
subset.







From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Bantz 
John F
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2014 1:35 PM
To: 'cisco-voip@puck.nether.net'
Subject: [cisco-voip] CIPC & MS Lync trying to control the same call


Hello group,

We have a mixed environment with Microsoft Lync (with some enterprise voice 
functions turned on) & Cisco CIPC softphones.  We use Zeacom for our contact 
center platform.  We have a need for our contact center agents to use their 
hard-phone while in the office, but have the ability to WFH using CIPC.  We 
also need to record calls to either device via the BIB connection to our call 
recording server.  So we recently enabled device mobility for our contact 
center agents and this makes this possible.

On some peoples computers though we are finding that when they are running CIP 
and MS Lync at the same time, both Lync and CIPC are trying to answer and/or 
place calls at the same time (fighting for call control it seems).  Example, an 
agent will receive an incoming call to CICP, and Lync will try and intercept 
this call and pop to front to answer.  Other examples include; when an agent 
goes off hook and dials a call using CIPC, Lync also pops up and plays dial 
tone in their ear at the same time that CIPC places a call.  CIPC connects the 
call, but they continue to hear the dial-tone in their ear along with the call 
in progress.

This does not happen to all users, only a subset of them.  Our work-around is 
to have them close out of Lync when in WFH mode, but that isn’t the best 
solution because they need the IM feature that Lync provides.

Has anyone in the group seen this before?  Anyone have any ideas on how to fix 
it so tht CIPC calls stay with CIPC, and Lync doesn’t try fighting for these 
calls??

Thanks!!
John Bantz
John Deere – GCS Telecommunications
6400 NW 86th Street
Johnston, IA 50131
515-267-4628 - office
515-314-6478 - cell

Confidentiality: This message, including attachments, may be confidential. If 
you believe the message was sent to you in error, do not read the contents and 
please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error. If you 
are not the intended recipient, retention, dissemination, distribution, or 
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Thank you.



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

Re: [cisco-voip] CUPS RCC Plug-in and Lync 2013

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

I found a workaround, I just altered the bat file to work with Lync 2013’s 
registry.



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Matt 
Slaga (AM)
Sent: Friday, August 1, 2014 10:02 AM
To: 'Cisco-Voip-Puck' (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)
Subject: [cisco-voip] CUPS RCC Plug-in and Lync 2013


Anyone have any data on whether the CUPS RCC Plug-in is compatible with Lync 
2013 client?  I can’t find anything specific to Lync 2013.


Thanks!

Matt Slaga
Dimension Data
Tel:+1-571-203-4132
matt.sl...@dimensiondata.com<mailto:matt.sl...@dimensiondata.com>



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

[cisco-voip] CUPS RCC Plug-in and Lync 2013

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

Anyone have any data on whether the CUPS RCC Plug-in is compatible with Lync 
2013 client?  I can't find anything specific to Lync 2013.


Thanks!

Matt Slaga
Dimension Data
Tel:+1-571-203-4132
matt.sl...@dimensiondata.com



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

Re: [cisco-voip] International Calls

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

You should also reach out to Intelepeer or SoTel for comparisons.  I use both 
for different aspects/testing and their prices are better than $42.99.  I’ve 
got 10 DIDs and 5 ports for slightly more than that.



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jose 
Colon II
Sent: Tuesday, July 8, 2014 11:38 AM
To: Brian Meade
Cc: Cisco VOIP
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] International Calls


I asked vonage about SIP trunks over the phone and their business unit is 
either not very informed or they just do not off that anymore. I did however 
talk to Via:Talk and they seem to be very helpful. They do offer sip trunks for 
42.99 a month and they have better rates then Vonage.

They also offer a working sample config for thier network for a cisco router.

Thanks for the help.

On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Brian Meade 
mailto:bmead...@vt.edu>> wrote:
You just need to point the international route pattern to the Vonage device.  
Vonage also offers business SIP Trunks.

You could make it so only a certain line can access the number by messing with 
the partitions/CSS on the line.

On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Jose Colon II 
mailto:jcolon...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Need some advice for international calls.

I want to be able to make international calls as easy as picking a line off the 
phone but using a service like vonage to complete the call. I want to be able 
to allow multiple people to use this line from different parts of the building 
so it would look like below.

Example. Hook the Vonage device to a FXO card that then can be used from a 
cisco phone by picking line 2 on a cisco phone.

The service does not have to be vonage. I am just looking for a way to make 
international calls cheaper and to allow multiple people to use it.

Anyone doing anything like this?



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




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

Re: [cisco-voip] IMP 10.x Source the SIP traffic from a particular node to OCS2007R2

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

For multiple CUPS servers, you need to set the Service Parameter ‘Server Name 
(supplemental)’ to the same ID for both servers.   This allows you to hit 
either CUPS server and have it parsed appropriately, at least in theory.


Server Name (supplemental):

This parameter specifies a hostname (or IP address in HTTP URL format) that is 
used by clients in Request-URIs that is different than the one the server would 
normally recognize as its own. This is useful when building a server farm and 
publishing a single hostname for the farm.



Maximum length: 255



Allowed values: Please provide a fully-qualified domain name (FQDN) or 
dotted-ip address.



: WARNING: For this change to take effect, the Cisco SIP Proxy service will 
require a restart. During the restart, the Cisco SIP Proxy service will drop 
any existing transactions and will not accept any new incoming requests. To 
restart this service, please access the SIP Proxy Settings page.




From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jason 
Aarons (AM)
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 3:36 PM
To: Justin Steinberg
Cc: Cisco VOIP
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IMP 10.x Source the SIP traffic from a particular 
node to OCS2007R2

It’s the SIP Proxy Service via the log files.  If you disable that the CUPS 
Redundancy / Server Recovery Manager whines and goes to a dark place.

Seems the outbound SIP to OCS2007R2 is based on the node the user is on and 
can’t be changed/modified per Cisco TAC (are they wrong?)  However OCS/Lync 
lets you set things per Front End Server ☺


From: Justin Steinberg [mailto:jsteinb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 2:20 PM
To: Jason Aarons (AM)
Cc: Cisco VOIP
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IMP 10.x Source the SIP traffic from a particular 
node to OCS2007R2



The SIP federation service does this, so you could disable that service on 
certain nodes.
On Jun 26, 2014 11:32 AM, "Jason Aarons (AM)" 
mailto:jason.aar...@dimensiondata.com>> wrote:
I’ve setup a Partitioned Intradomain Federation between IMP 10.5 and OCS 2007R2.

We have 3 nodes running IMP.  Can I set a service parameter to source the IMP 
traffic from a particular node?

Jason Aarons
Consultant
Dimension Data
904-338-3245
Planned PTO: July 4 – Aug 12th


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


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

Re: [cisco-voip] info sent to Lync for RCC

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

You are correct, that is where you would use the normalization rules text file, 
or adjust the 7 digit UCM string into E.164.



From: Erick Wellnitz [mailto:ewellnitzv...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2014 3:48 PM
To: Matt Slaga (AM)
Cc: cisco-voip
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] info sent to Lync for RCC

Okay.  I see what is being sent and Lync is not matching the calling number to 
the address book.  From what I understand Lync uses Telephone Number from AD as 
the Work telephone number displayed on the Lync contact card and uses this as 
the lookup field.

What happens then is the 7 digit extension is not matched and the lookup fails. 
 Is this where we would use normalization rules or is there a better way to do 
this?



On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Matt Slaga (AM) 
mailto:matt.sl...@dimensiondata.com>> wrote:
Erick,

Lync will perform a Reverse Number Lookup (RNL) on a dialed or received number 
against the Lync address book service, which is pulled nightly from AD.

Your traces from CUPS will show the CSTA signaling outbound to Lync.  You can 
also perform traces on Lync to see the inbound and RNL.
You will not see anything from UCM to Lync directly.



From: cisco-voip 
[mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>]
 On Behalf Of Erick Wellnitz
Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2014 10:55 AM
To: cisco-voip
Subject: [cisco-voip] info sent to Lync for RCC


Does anyone kow what I should be looking for to see what information gets 
passed from IM/P or CUCM to Lync for RCC?  I'm specifically looking for caller 
ID information sent to Lync.

I'm sure I'm missing it or don't have th eappropriate trace turned on.

Thanks!


itevomcid

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

Re: [cisco-voip] info sent to Lync for RCC

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

Erick,

Lync will perform a Reverse Number Lookup (RNL) on a dialed or received number 
against the Lync address book service, which is pulled nightly from AD.

Your traces from CUPS will show the CSTA signaling outbound to Lync.  You can 
also perform traces on Lync to see the inbound and RNL.
You will not see anything from UCM to Lync directly.



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Erick 
Wellnitz
Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2014 10:55 AM
To: cisco-voip
Subject: [cisco-voip] info sent to Lync for RCC


Does anyone kow what I should be looking for to see what information gets 
passed from IM/P or CUCM to Lync for RCC?  I'm specifically looking for caller 
ID information sent to Lync.

I'm sure I'm missing it or don't have th eappropriate trace turned on.

Thanks!


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

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 7x with ACME SBC

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

And, ACME actually supports their LUA scripting through their TAC center.  
Cisco passes you off to DevNet.

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark 
Holloway
Sent: Monday, May 5, 2014 3:35 PM
To: Tim Smith
Cc: cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 7x with ACME SBC



The Acme Packet SBC has a very advanced SIP Header Manipulation regex based 
language. It also supports LUA. You can write “plugins” for the SBC using LUA 
to extend it’s functionality. Pretty cool for an edge appliance!

On May 5, 2014, at 5:12 AM, Tim Smith 
mailto:tim.sm...@enject.com.au>> wrote:


Hi guys,

I love this combo.
They work really well together and both products have great capability for 
normalisation HMR on Acme, LUA on CUCM.

Acme HA is fantastic.
Virtual option is great.
Acme docco is comprehensive and quite plentiful!

Jason - I’ve unicasted you some info on one of my deployments.

Cheers,

Tim.

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
Holloway Mark
Sent: Saturday, 19 April 2014 5:51 AM
To: Jason Aarons (AM)
Cc: cisco-voip (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 7x with ACME SBC

There are Acme guides for CUCM up through 9.x.  Acme is the only non-Cisco SBC 
blessed by Cisco for CUCM, CVP, UCCE. They’ve even blessed it as a CUSP 
replacement as it can fill both CUBE/CUSP requirements in CVP/UCCE environments 
on one box. Much of it had to do with customer frustration of ISR scalability 
as well as Acme’s High Availability being much more robust and resilient. 
Anyone interested please email me offline.


On Apr 18, 2014, at 2:34 PM, Jason Aarons (AM) 
mailto:jason.aar...@dimensiondata.com>> wrote:



I haven’t seen any kind of integration guide on Cisco.com 
with a ACME SBC.   I can’t imagine Cisco would create one since it would 
compete with their CUBE product.

Looking on Oracle.com to see if they have anything.

Lastly I think the customer should upgrade from CUCM 7x to at least 8.5 for SIP 
Trunks.  Anyone dis-agree?


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



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

Re: [cisco-voip] Certificates on CUCM and CUCM IM & P

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

As long as you assigned hostnames as the Subject Name on the certificates, all 
you would need to do is update DNS.  It is very rare to assign a certificate to 
an IP address.



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
Michel L. M. B. Perez
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2014 9:28 AM
To: Heim, Dennis
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Certificates on CUCM and CUCM IM & P


Not yet, i have done some virtual machines to test it and will do the test with 
some devices.

Thanks.

--
Michel Perez
Skype: michelmbperez
michelmbpe...@gmail.com
http://br.linkedin.com/in/michelmbperez

2014-04-11 2:06 GMT-03:00 Heim, Dennis 
mailto:dennis.h...@wwt.com>>:
Have you populated the IP Address as a subject alternative name?

Dennis Heim | Solution Architect (Collaboration)
World Wide Technology, Inc. | 314-212-1814

PS Engineering:  Innovate & Ignite.


From: cisco-voip 
[mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net]
 On Behalf Of Michel L. M. B. Perez
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 8:13 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] Certificates on CUCM and CUCM IM & P

Guys,

I have a question, it is a simples question, but i was trying to find some 
documentation about that, and i cannot find some real explanation.

Well my customer has 5 Collab Servers (3 CUCM and 2 CUCM IM & P), all of them 
virtualized above VmWare and UCS Machine, 2.5K IP Phones.

My question is, i have a SIP Trunk from CUCM and CUCM IM & IP and i am using 
the certificates from CUCM and CUCM IM & P to make this a Secure SIP Trunk, not 
non Secure.

My CUCM and CUCM IM & P are using authentication with Microsoft Domain 
Controlles TLS on TCP/636 port using AD certificate imported on both clusters.

I have a key token this token is installed under both servers, making SIP and 
SCCP Secured. So everything here at my customer is not non-Secure.

My final question is now this machines need be moved from one vlan to another, 
and these IP adressess need to be changed.

I think that probably i will have lots of problems with that, so am i right, 
that i will need to generate again certificates and make all the authentication 
between this systems work properly after this modification?

Thanks a lot.
--
Michel Perez
Skype: michelmbperez
michelmbpe...@gmail.com
http://br.linkedin.com/in/michelmbperez



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

Re: [cisco-voip] LUA Scripts

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

That will probably be hard to come by.  TAC doesn’t support LUA scripts in UCM, 
they will defer you to the Cisco Developer Network for assistance.  The link 
below is the developer guide for SIP transparency and normalization.  It does 
not have any detail on load or process time.

https://developer.cisco.com/fileMedia/download/7e805b95-8bd1-46ea-a759-89797326f58b



From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
Mehtab Shinwari
Sent: Tuesday, April 8, 2014 2:52 PM
To: avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com; dennis.h...@wwt.com
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] LUA Scripts



Thank you Anthony for sharing your experience. The access violation condition, 
do you know of a document that describes the threshold/limits etc before it 
stops processing the script.
I know that the impact would depend on the type of script also, but let's say 
if we have a script that inspect every invite on a sip trunk and modifies a 
header. We could have thousands of invites in a few hours during business and I 
am just wondering if there is an easy way to see how much cycles a script would 
use.

Regards


Mehtab Shinwari


 Original message 
From: Anthony Holloway 
mailto:avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com>>
Date:
To: "Heim, Dennis" mailto:dennis.h...@wwt.com>>
Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] LUA Scripts


I have created one and no, there is not. In fact, the feature implementation 
prevents an impact to system resources and terminates your application if there 
is a violation in that regard. I know this because the logs kept saying that 
some resource limit had been exceeded because of my sloppy code, which was 
looping infinitely on me. :)

Take my case as you will, as I cannot give you specifics on the size of this 
implementation, other than saying it wasn't very large. Kind of medium-ish, 
maybe even on the extra-medium side.


On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Heim, Dennis 
mailto:dennis.h...@wwt.com>>
 wrote:
Has anyone using LUA scripts seen any impact on CPU or memory utilization?

Dennis Heim | Solution Architect (Collaboration)
World Wide Technology, Inc. | 314-212-1814

PS Engineering: Innovate & Ignite.



___
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


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

Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 10

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

Yes, you can order NFR versions.

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of 
Michel L. M. B. Perez
Sent: Saturday, April 5, 2014 10:04 PM
To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM 10


Anyone here already have access for download CUCM 10?

Thanks.

--
Michel Perez
Skype: michelmbperez
michelmbpe...@gmail.com
http://br.linkedin.com/in/michelmbperez


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

Re: [cisco-voip] UCM 9.1 SIP Normalization Rules

[Matt Slaga (AM)]

The port number is actually something entirely different.  In this case, I have 
70 SIP trunks between UCM and Lync for a global egress point access (CSS 
different for each SIP trunk).  The ports are actually in the 5020-5050 range.

UCM puts this request in the SIP Start Line (Invite) with 5060 regardless of 
what the SIP trunk uses.

Everything works fine if the user is part of the Lync pool that is associated 
with the Mediation server.  If they are on a different pool, this port of 5060 
(not talking transport here, just SIP message adjustment) causes Lync to drop 
the invite.  When this port reads 5061 in the SIP invite, the calls flow 
properly.



From: Florian Kroessbacher [mailto:florian.kroessbac...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 9:24 AM
To: Matt Slaga (AM)
Cc: 'Cisco-Voip-Puck' (cisco-voip@puck.nether.net)
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCM 9.1 SIP Normalization Rules



what about to change the destination port in the siptrunk config ??
--
Florian Kroessbacher
gmail: florian.kroessbac...@gmail.com<mailto:florian.kroessbac...@gmail.com>


On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Matt Slaga (AM) 
mailto:matt.sl...@dimensiondata.com>> wrote:
I’m attempting to apply a SIP Normalization rule to make a port adjustment on 
SIP calls between UCM and Lync 2013.


In the header, UCM sends the port number as 5060.  Lync has problems digesting 
this when referring the call to another pool and wants to see the header at 
5061.


The script we are attempting to use is below.  It has been applied to the 
various SIP trunks between UCM and Lync.


When reviewing traces, the port is not being adjusted.  Either the LUA script 
is wrong below, or for some reason it is not being applied.


Any thoughts?




M = {}
function M.outbound_INVITE(msg)
local method, ruri, ver = msg:getRequestLine()
local uri = string.gsub(ruri, "5060", "5061")
msg:setRequestUri(uri)
end
return M














Matt Slaga
Dimension Data
Tel:+1-571-203-4132
matt.sl...@dimensiondata.com<mailto:matt.sl...@dimensiondata.com>





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