Problem with local contact resolution

[reimanje]

Hello!

It happenes sometimes that when a call comes in the Jabber client would not present the Callers name, even if it is an existing Outlook contact.

I just see that I get a call from number +XXXXXXXX. When I look into the call list later I can also only see the missed calls from that number (no name resolution). 

But ...

When I search that contact in the Jabber search bar it will show up. And right at that moment all the entrys in the call list will now show the name instead of the number. 

And it works from there on. At least with this specific contact.

It happens on Jabber v 11.7.X and 11.8.X.

Anyone else ever had this?

Kind regards,

Jens

[Slavik Bialik]

After testing it out, it also happens to me, on Cisco Jabber 11.9.1.
Only i think it works that way because Cisco caching the information locally when you search contacts, so if you didn't look for the contact yet, so his number isn't cached yet, and when you call this number it won't be resolved to a name. It's like when you set a picture for an employee, and someone is calling this employee he sees this picture, but if you change this employee his picture, the one who called him will still see his old picture for a while, because it is cached on his local computer.
I suspect this data is being cached and saved to one of the files that are located here:
C:\Users\user\AppData\Local\Cisco\Unified Communications\Jabber\CSF\Contacts

Can't say for sure, but I think this is the bahavior of Jabber.

[reimanje]

Hi!

Hm. I don't think so. It only happens sometimes. Normaly contact resolution works just fine. 

And besides that, would that not kind of defeat the purpose? 

That is one of the main features, isn't it. I have an outlook contact and when a call comes in from that person I will see the name instead of the number. 

Kind regards, 

Jens

[Slavik Bialik]

Well, I do agree that it should work, in a better world of course, heh.
Anyway, after searching a while, I finally found a reported Cisco Bug about this issue that fully supports my guess above about the caching:
https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCun65353

Seems they aren't fixing it, it's first reported on 2015.

[cisco-contracts]

That looks indeed exactly like what I see here.

A shame that this is still not fixed. 

But, thank you very very much for pointing me to this.

This is at least something I can work with. 

Let‘s see what TAC has to say.

Kind regards,

Jens