Hi Dave,
do you have any other SIP devices where call flow or signaling has to pass
Checkpoint?
Are any SIP inspections turned off on Checkpoint?
Regards, Martin
Von: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] Im Auftrag von Dave
Wolgast
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 12. Februar 2014 23:56
Dave,
I'd suggest getting some packet captures and seeing what the traffic actually
looks like.
Brian
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Dave
Wolgast
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 5:56 PM
To: Cisco VOIP Newsletter - puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-vo
My customer has 3 beautiful new 8831 SIP conference phones running SIP load
9-3-3-5. The customer is running CUCM 9.1(2)SU1.
When we make a call from the phone to either internal or PSTN destinations,
the remote phone rings. When answered, we get about 1 second of rtp to the
8831, then it drops wi
Morning all,
I recall reading about some kind of bug relating to the synchronisation of
Unity Call Handlers within a cluster.
I have searched the archives in markmail.org but cannot locate it.
Does anyone know anything about this? Or has an idea?
Cheers
Dana
__
Ryan -
What you say is interesting because it contradicts what the guy on my
license TAC case specifically told me (I can provide you his name in a private
email if you wish)
"Note that the licensing is tied to the eth0 mac address so if your
ELM is a VM be sure it has a sta
Hi Louis,
If you ordered a 5.x to 9.x upgrade kit then the license that will be produced
by that sales order will be for an upgrade 9.x license. This license is
different than a 9.x fresh install license and will require the previous
licenses to be present on the 9.x system (as the result of a
I agree with Matthew, if you are spinning up lab clusters or moving things
around go with a dedicated ELM/PLM. Note that the licensing is tied to the
eth0 mac address so if your ELM is a VM be sure it has a static mac address.
There are no node licenses, so you can add multiple cluster to the s
You should be able to setup a standard SIP trunk and point a route pattern at
Netbox through the trunk. Then just put a SD to the RP on a phone.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 12, 2014, at 12:13 PM, Ben Story wrote:
>
> Has anyone ever done any integration between S2 Netbox security and Cisco IP
Agreed. I think the upgrade license mainly allows you to reuse your old
licenses, so if you apply the upgrade license, it ought to then allow you to
upload your old licenses.
James Buchanan | Sr. Network Engineer
Presidio | www.presidio.com
12 Cadillac Drive Suite 130, Brentwood, TN 37027
D: 615
You shouldn't have much issue. If you've bought it you'll get it. Worst
case might be requiring an email to licens...@cisco.com.
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Louis Koekemoer (ZA) <
louis.koekem...@dimensiondata.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I have a question. We need to upgrade a clien
Hi all,
I have a question. We need to upgrade a client of ours that is running IPCC 5.x
to UCCX 9.x. The supported upgrade path to UCCX is only from IPCC 7.x. We want
to avoid having to do a 5 to 7 and 7 to 9 upgrade. If we do a rebuild straight
onto 9 on new hardware, will Cisco Licensing g
Thanks guys, I will check into those items.
One system having this is effected by the bug id (8.5.1.11900-21, SU1) but
the other was on 8.6.2a and we updated to 8.6.2a SU3 and same issue and the
bug info states it should be fixed in 8.6.2a SU3 (23900).
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Brian Mead
What full CUCM version are you running?
You're probably hitting CSCtz29142-VMware CUCM Media resources introduces
jitter causing bad voice quality.
If you get a packet capture from CUCM for one of the calls using a software
resource. check the Delta values for the RTP stream in Wireshark. If
If you put a monitor session (span/Wireshark) on the Switchport does it comes
out of IPVMS garbled?
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Erick
Bergquist
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 2:19 PM
To: voip puck
Subject: [cisco-voip] UCS C series audio issues
Has anyone experienced choppy/garbled/broken-up audio for MoH, conference
calls or MTP audio from UC Servers on UCS C series? All software based
(IPVMS).
The network side is fine, QoS and no errors on the switch ports. The CPU
load is minimal and CM performance minimal also, so no CPU pegging.
T
I hear ya.
No jumping for 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, Onta
If I had a (supported) VMWare environment to do this all in, I would have
considered it. Unfortunately, timing did not allow for this.
But it is a good idea.
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
University of Guelph
Agreed, I was more seeking to clarify if a subscriber needed to be deleted,
when was the supported time to do it in that scenario. Ideally I would
think you would not want the subscribe info include in the upgrade and/or
restore process if it wasn't going to be there after the upgrade or was
going
Thanks Ryan
The plan was to get the PUB 100% on 9.1.2, kill the old sub forcing the
phones to the Pub (reordering CM group to make PUB primary just in case)
and then rebuild the Sub from scratch on the same IP/host and/or build a
second SUB and reorder the CM groups etc. The problem is we've been g
Has anyone ever done any integration between S2 Netbox security and Cisco
IP phones? Specifically we would like to be able to have an extension or
button on a phone open a door.
--
Ben Story
CCSP, CCNA, CCNA Wireless, CCDA
ben.st...@gmail.com
@ntwrk80
http://showbrain.blogspot.com
http://rand0mw0r
You shouldn't have to delete any subscribers. In order to do so you'll have to
go through a lot of pain removing them from CM groups, etc.
What you want to do will save time assuming everything works perfectly and no
phone touches the new cluster until all the subs are installed and replication
What was stated earlier is correct for you Lelio.
Go back to the old docs, forget you ever heard of a thing called Jump upgrade,
and move forward like you would have otherwise.
Yes, you do need to apply your rehosted license AFTER the DRS restore.
CSCtb86875 is the particular defect you'll hit
Subs don't talk to ELM. Only the Pub talks.
You then have two possible setups, dedicated ELM/PLM and Colocated ELM/PLM with
CUCM or Unity Connection.
You also have one other scenario, rebuilding the Pub that you've mentioned.
If you have the VM Resources considering all the changes you are talking
Greetings all -
My client recently purchased 2 x PAKs for CUCM servers. They have
several physical host machines configured with ESX5.
My understanding of the difference with CUCM 9 is the ELM. Licenses
are no longer tied to the MAC but are tied to some random characters
That would be helpful, thanks.
I personally don't see a way around it, supported or otherwise, either that
or building a new SUB and updating CM Groups, MGRLs etc... Same amount of
work and a couple resets but no downtime.
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 8:22 PM, Matthew Loraditch <
mloradi...@heliontech
Anyone with ideas about this? I downgraded to CUCILYNC 8.6.1 and no longer
have this issue. As far as I can tell, we can't upgrade to version 9.X because
we're not running Lync yet.
Thanks,
Bill Hendrix
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
george.hend...@
26 matches
Mail list logo
