Thanks to you and Charles for the insight... my switch-version is failing on
some CUIC stuff so that explains it.
I would have thought they might have removed all the CUCM unique tables.. the
output was showing it replicating the call forwarding table... I presume it's
empty, but still..
Matt
Hi
Have a strange problem where the sync with AD has broken , everyday morning we
have to keep performing a full sync as the users show inactive even though the
setting is to sync every 6 hours. Have even deleted the LDAP configuration and
redone but no luck. any help is appreciated.
Shabbar
I may be wrong about this, but isn't it the underlying pub/sub stuff? I
ran into this a while back where dbreplication wasn't working but the ccx
db was. Turned out it was the passwords weren't synced between the
databases, they had to root the box and run a script to sync 60+ passwords
between t
Hi Matthew,
All the platform related information is stored in the platform database. I know
it is a bit strange to have two database instances, but the UCCX basically
inherits the CUCM platform and builds its application and database on top of
it. Therefore, the platform database (utils dbrepli
Working on a TAC case where a switch-version is failing... and anyway, they are
pointing to issues with the CUCM tables not replicating and are having me do
the normal CLI commands you do on CUCM to fix things (utils dbreplication reset
all, etc)
So at this point I am just super curious, why the
Device control is still based on device association, not owner userid.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 25, 2014, at 7:28 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:
>
> Fair enough. I know that with SNR you need to associate both the hard phone
> and remote destination profile to the same userid to make things wo
Fair enough. I know that with SNR you need to associate both the hard phone and
remote destination profile to the same userid to make things work.
I'm wondering what the differences would be with both devices configured
configured as anonymous. I'm guessing 'remotely' controlling the hard phone
Licensing and making things work are completely separate. So as long as you
leave the device anonymous/public space a user will not move up to the higher
tier of licensing.
From: Lelio Fulgenzi [mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 12:13 PM
To: NateCCIE
Cc: cisco-vo
Jose, or anyone :)
I am at a similar spot as you were with troubleshooting this,
- User account works OK "Internal"
- "External", account gives "Cannot Communicate with Server"
- If I use invalid credentials, it correctly gives an invalid password error
I can observe traffic back and forth betwe
>From a licensing perspective a CSF or other soft-client device added to UCM
>and assigned to a user counts as a phone. If your license gets your users 1
>phone then you get pick hard or soft phone. If you get 2 then you can have one
>of each (if you have CUWL and your users get 10 then buy mor
Nope. Each Jabber softphone client will use its own enhanced license, so if a
user want Jabber on a PC/MAC and on a iPhone, that is 3 enhanced licenses
including one deskphone. Just like CIPC.
From: Lelio Fulgenzi [mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 11:14 AM
To: Nat
If they take up an enhanced license, I'm ok with that. We have enough to go
around for now.
My concern is if, after pairing a hard phone and a jabber client to the same
userID, the system wants to use an enhanced plus license. I don't have any if
those and I'm not keen on operating in non-com
Thanks for clearing that up. It's good to know that some platforms don't
support phone only mode.
We have Enhanced licenses, not Enhanced Plus, I'm hoping that each user can
have at least one Jabber instance. I'm also hoping that I don't need enhanced
plus for users to have multiple jabber ins
Your looking for Jabber Phone mode.
Some clients support it some don't. I believe we're still waiting for Mac phone
mode.
Normally when you say jabber for everyone your talking about free im&p with no
softphone. Softphone is always licensed.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 25, 2014, at 9:41 AM,
Great. Thanks for the screenshot.
Sent from my iPad
> On Nov 25, 2014, at 11:55 AM, "Walenta, Philip"
> wrote:
>
> Yes. First you set it up to be phone only. Actually now that I look at this
> I realized – it is a username being used, I just have all my lab device
> usernames matching th
Yes. First you set it up to be phone only. Actually now that I look at this I
realized - it is a username being used, I just have all my lab device usernames
matching the extensions.
[cid:image001.png@01D0089E.38EE9840]
Then login:
[cid:image002.png@01D0089E.38EE9840]
-Origin
You say extension and password, it's not username?
Sent from my iPad
> On Nov 25, 2014, at 11:47 AM, "Walenta, Philip"
> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure about the pure soft phone.
>
> It is possible to run without IM&P, I do it in several of my labs.
>
> You login with extension/password only and it
I'm not sure about the pure soft phone.
It is possible to run without IM&P, I do it in several of my labs.
You login with extension/password only and it works purely like a soft phone.
-Original Message-
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio
Ful
I know I have a lot of reading and catching up to do, but I'm wondering if it's
possible to deploy Jabber across our organization (even if just for a small
pilot) without an IM/presence installation?
If possible, what do I lose? I'm assuming the obvious presence modality options
are not availa
19 matches
Mail list logo
