FYI...for the first issue Cisco has opened up a defect: CSCuu47433. We
specifically ran into this issue when using both the UCCX .ova template 2.5
(which came pre-loaded on the BE7000) and the most recent 2.6.ova file off of
cisco.com downloads page. The hardware is the BE7000H M4 -not sure
I've been transitioning from the Nortel world to the Cisco world and I've been
formally trained on the administration of the UCCE-Enterprise. (That sounds so
Star Trekkian - LOLOLOL) Instead of barraging the board with theoretical
questions, I'd rather learn hands-on. I'd be willing to trade
I know there are some TAC people on this mailing list, so what's up with
the bootable image topic? Are we not entitled to a copy, or do we have to
exchange favors in order to upgrade our customers/selves?
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 5:45 PM NateCCIE natec...@gmail.com wrote:
TAC will get you the
Thanks Brian. And from what you recall, this whole don't make it easy
game which TAC engages inhow do we play it with them?
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 9:18 AM Brian Meade bmead...@vt.edu wrote:
Agreement with Red Hat. They don't want people being able to easily
download Red Hat. There were
Hi all,
Is there a way to distribute ¼ of calls to one number/ddi and rest to a
different set of numbers.
CUCM 9 HP cant do that for me.
Anything in UCCX 9!!
TIA.
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
You can definitely do this in UCCX. Use Java to create a random number 0
to 3 for each call.
Random rand = new Random();
int value = rand.nextInt(4);
Then create an if statement to match if the random value is 0-2 or 3 and
use a redirect step to send the call to 2 different places based on which
It would help if we had a little more understanding of what you are trying to
accomplish.
Are you trying to distribute calls ¼ and ¾ over an hour, a day, a month? Will
there be any other quantification on the call itself (calling number, called
number, any IVR entry?)?
From: cisco-voip
Agreement with Red Hat. They don't want people being able to easily
download Red Hat. There were some rumors of CUCM 11.x being on CentOS
which would allow us to just keep the bootables on cisco.com but I don't
think that's happening any more.
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Anthony Holloway
use case might help us to understand...
But things that come to might are using UCCx for sending calls where you
want them to go. you could also look at using Hunt groups native to CM but
knowing what your trying to accomplish will help us to give a better answer.
YMMV
Scott
On Fri, May
So backbone is the only team that can publish bootables. So the other
teams have to reach out for help getting them published for a customer.
The only method I've seen work effectively is my publisher is down and I
need to rebuild as fast as possible. I may or may not have used that
method
Thanks Phil,
Its just calls coming into a particular number calling party doesnt
matter and no IVR for this and no TOD
75% to a diff number/ext/ddi or the rest 25% to another though out.
We got UCCX, UCx, ARC and CM v 9. Can use any for it!!
From: Walenta, Philip
This is what I’ve told TAC, I need to rebuild a server and I don’t have access
to the old version, they are usually agreeable.
Matthew G. Loraditch – CCNP-Voice, CCNA-RS, CCDA
Network Engineer
Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
Facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/heliontech?ref=hl |
Its about a phased migration from one service desk to another.
One main DDI will need to be migrated to a new SD. To start with 25% of calls
to new and rest to the same SD.
There are no IVRs or agents just plain call distribution.
Thanks
From: Scott Voll
Hi Gents,
I'm implementing Expressway C and E version 8.5.2 for MRA and i have the
following client setup :
- Split horizon DNS.
- 2 domains as follows, Internal: domainX.local and external: domainX.com
- All UC servers are joining the internal domain, CUCM.domainX.local,
IMP.doaminX.local,
I think you could also use a global variable and look up which call your on
and route 1-3 to one and number 4 somewhere else. But my UCCx is a little
rusty as my partner has managed UCCx since I came here.
or a circular hunt group in CM might work to. Haven't' tried this.
YMMV
Scot
On Fri,
Trying to get my head around the SRV records. It's not really clear in the
documentation what I should use for the _cisco-uds SRV records. Should I use
the publisher? the TFTP server? the subscribers that the jabber clients will
connect to?
Also, I want to use a different domain in the
Lelio,
I give highest priority to subscriber nodes but it's up to you which
servers you want to throw the extra UDS load on.
The mydomain.acme.com like you wrote should be fine. It doesn't matter
that the domain of the servers is different. If you're on 10.5 IMP, make
sure you add
Inline
Matthew G. Loraditch - CCNP-Voice, CCNA-RS, CCDA
Network Engineer
Direct Voice: 443.541.1518
Facebookhttps://www.facebook.com/heliontech?ref=hl |
Twitterhttps://twitter.com/HelionTech |
LinkedInhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/helion-technologies?trk=top_nav_home
|
Here is an excellent read.
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/solutions/Enterprise/Borderless_Networks/Unified_Access/BYOD_Design_Guide/BYOD_CollabEdge.html
-Keith
From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio
Fulgenzi
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 12:14 PM
Aha! Another document to read! Thanks for sharing.
I think this is the one our Cisco account team referred us to when we said we
don't have split DNS. Basically, it talks about configuring your edge firewall
to filter out (deny) anyone from off-campus to query the cisco-uds and cuplogin
SRV
Thanks Brian.
We're doing phone only for now. I will be deploying v9.x of IMP next and then
integrating accordingly. And adding the appropriate SRV records for that.
---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
University
21 matches
Mail list logo
