About cdjohnston

cdjohnston · ‎09-17-2016

I am working on setting up an ASA5520 to use the TRACK and SLA MONITOR function to support failover to a backup DSL link. The route injection is showing metric of 1 for the backup link when primary service is restored, even though static route shows metric of 254. I have the configuration, it works well and routes are going to the right place during normal operations. If I pull the plug on the primary link, all traffic switches over to go out the DSL link as expected. The show route command shows the new default gateway is the DSL connection. When I put the primary ethernet link back in I can see the arp-cache entry for the primary ISP, and i can ping the ISP's CPE address HOWEVER, the default-gateway route is still going out the DSL link - - even though i can ping the primary next-hop gateway. The only (convenient and non-intrusive) recovery is to "clear route" in the firewall and then the service goes back out the (much faster) primary link. Here are some configuration snippets: interface GigabitEthernet0/0 nameif outside security-level 0 ip address X.X.X.50 255.255.255.252 ! interface GigabitEthernet0/1 nameif inside security-level 100 ip address 192.168.120.1 255.255.255.0 ! interface GigabitEthernet0/2 nameif DSL security-level 0 ip address dhcp setroute route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 x.x.x.49 1 track 1 route DSL 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 254 (Note the metric is 254 here) sla monitor 1 type echo protocol ipIcmpEcho 142.254.183.169 interface outside (This address is one hop beyond my ISP CPE) num-packets 2 frequency 5 sla monitor schedule 1 life forever start-time now track 1 rtr 1 reachability route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 x.x.x.49 1 track 1 route DSL 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1 254 route outside 142.254.183.169 255.255.255.255 x.x.x.49 1 Here's the status of the SLA: MRW-TR# sh sla monitor operational-state Entry number: 1 Modification time: 18:41:13.932 UTC Sat Sep 17 2016 Number of Octets Used by this Entry: 1480 Number of operations attempted: 540 Number of operations skipped: 5 Current seconds left in Life: Forever Operational state of entry: Active Last time this entry was reset: Never Connection loss occurred: FALSE Timeout occurred: FALSE Over thresholds occurred: FALSE Latest RTT (milliseconds): 1 Latest operation start time: 19:26:33.936 UTC Sat Sep 17 2016 Latest operation return code: OK RTT Values: RTTAvg: 1 RTTMin: 1 RTTMax: 1 NumOfRTT: 2 RTTSum: 2 RTTSum2: 2 So this is the routing table when it is all happy: Gateway of last resort is x.x.x.49 to network 0.0.0.0 C 192.168.120.0 255.255.255.0 is directly connected, inside C x.x.x.48 255.255.255.252 is directly connected, outside S 192.168.110.0 255.255.255.0 [1/0] via 192.168.1.1, outside [1/0] via x.x.x.49, outside S 142.254.183.169 255.255.255.255 [1/0] via x.x.x.49, outside S 172.16.110.0 255.255.255.0 [1/0] via 192.168.1.1, outside [1/0] via x.x.x.49, outside S 10.1.110.0 255.255.255.0 [1/0] via 192.168.1.1, outside [1/0] via x.x.x.49, outside S 10.10.110.0 255.255.255.0 [1/0] via 192.168.1.1, outside [1/0] via x.x.x.49, outside C 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 is directly connected, DSL S* 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 [1/0] via x.x.x.49, outside This is the routing table when the primary Ethernet is unplugged and then it is plugged back in (service restored) Gateway of last resort is 192.168.1.1 to network 0.0.0.0 C 192.168.120.0 255.255.255.0 is directly connected, inside C x.x.x.48 255.255.255.252 is directly connected, outside S 192.168.110.0 255.255.255.0 [1/0] via 192.168.1.1, outside [1/0] via x.x.x.49, outside S 142.254.183.169 255.255.255.255 [1/0] via x.x.x.49, outside S 172.16.110.0 255.255.255.0 [1/0] via 192.168.1.1, outside [1/0] via x.x.x.49, outside S 10.1.110.0 255.255.255.0 [1/0] via 192.168.1.1, outside [1/0] via x.x.x.49, outside S 10.10.110.0 255.255.255.0 [1/0] via 192.168.1.1, outside [1/0] via x.x.x.49, outside C 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 is directly connected, DSL S* 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 [1/0] via x.x.x.49 , outside My observations In order to recover from the static route going out the wrong door, i can do a "clear route" command and everything bounces back to the primary link. Even though my static route statement has a metric of 254 on it, why does the routing table show a metric of 1 for the backup link? I can change the static route metric for the backup link to any number other than 1 in the command line, however, it will always show up as 1 in the route table. And what's up with the routing table (restored service version)? Thanks for your help! Chris

cdjohnston · ‎06-21-2016

This is an odd one. I have my lab setup where i have a 2801 communicating to a UC540. When the 2801 was on 12.4.24T8 things worked fine. Once i migrated to 15.1.4 things changed. The setup i have is the 2801 has an FXO port facing the PSTN. I have a paralell hunt group that rings a phone on the 2801 and two phones across the "wan" on the UC540 simultaneously. When the 2801 was on the 12.4 image, all of this works fine. Once migrated to 15.1 the call comes in, the hunt-group does its job and all phones ring. HOWEVER, when you pick up the call on the UC540 side, the call comes in and it is stable and shows connected on the phone. But once you say more than 5 seconds of anything calling into that POTS on the 2801, the call drops. the 'debug voip ccapi inout' looks ok and shows a normal call disconnect. I do see an odd outcall from the UC540 from the extension that picks up the call to 'nowhere'. Any suggestions of where i should look? Thanks Chris

cdjohnston · ‎06-21-2016

This is an odd one. I have my lab setup where i have a 2801 communicating to a UC540. When the 2801 was on 12.4.24T8 things worked fine. Once i migrated to 15.1.4 things changed. The setup i have is the 2801 has an FXO port facing the PSTN. I have a paralell hunt group that rings a phone on the 2801 and two phones across the "wan" on the UC540 simultaneously. When the 2801 was on the 12.4 image, all of this works fine. Once migrated to 15.1 the call comes in, the hunt-group does its job and all phones ring. HOWEVER, when you pick up the call on the UC540 side, the call comes in and it is stable and shows connected on the phone. But once you say more than 5 seconds of anything calling into that POTS on the 2801, the call drops. the 'debug voip ccapi inout' looks ok and shows a normal call disconnect. I do see an odd outcall from the UC540 from the extension that picks up the call to 'nowhere'. Any suggestions of where i should look? Thanks Chris

cdjohnston · ‎04-07-2016

HOLY CATS, BATMAN! - All I needed was that one-liner of "this or this" for the hidden command. Saved me hours of dorking around with holding the reset to get myself to a point i could crash recover the unit. This was a life saver! THANKS AGAIN!

cdjohnston · ‎12-14-2013

Hey there. I wound up using their local barracuda box as the gateway for the SMTP relay to get the email back into their server. Klunky but it works.

cdjohnston · ‎04-21-2013

Hello world... I hope someone has an answer to this - i have gone through the CUE CLI documentation looking to config it up as an SMTP relay, and this idea does not seem like it will work. System is UC540 on 8.6.5 I have a PRI with a DID block for the client - they want individual fax numbers for each person. That part is easy enough. They do NOT want to store it in their vociemail box. They just want it sent to their email inbox. They do not want to use the "listen" mode where fax and voice comes in on the same DID because the delay for the customer calling in is too great in their opinion. This is fine. I get it. However I am having a dickens of a time using the CUE to send the emails based upon the DID to the user mailbox. I am talking about configuring a separate ephone-dn and an account on the CUE for the fax email user. when i go this route, The sending fax machine just hangs and never successfully transmits. IF, however, I set the "mta send server" to my test-bench smtp relay by IP address, it all works. Fax as email attachment comes through like greased lightning. I try to do it via the extension and have CUE submit it out, things just hang. IS THERE A WAY to configure the CUE to act as a simple SMTP relay for all things internal? This is the config that works for me: mta send server 192.168.110.25 port 25 <IP addess of my bench smtp server> mta send server 10.10.10.1 port 25 mta send with-subject both mta send mail-from hostname LAB-UC540.lab.org mta send mail-from username $s$ mta receive aliases 10.10.10.2 mta receive maximum-recipients 7 For the MMOIP, I have: dial-peer voice 3020 pots translation-profile incoming Lab_Fax_T37_Called_26 service onramp incoming called-number 4627 direct-inward-dial port 0/2/0:23 dial-peer voice 1801 mmoip service fax_on_vfc_onramp_app out-bound destination-pattern 4627 information-type fax session target mailto: chris@routerguy.com The above works remarkably well This (generic CCA config) is broken: dial-peer voice 3020 pots translation-profile incoming Lab_Fax_T37_Called_26 service onramp incoming called-number 4627 direct-inward-dial port 0/2/0:23 dial-peer voice 1800 mmoip description ** fax onramp for outbound faxmail to CUE ** service fax_on_vfc_onramp_app out-bound destination-pattern ^....$ information-type fax session target mailto:$d$@10.10.10.1 fax receive called-subscriber $d$ fax interface-type fax-mail mta send server 10.10.10.1 port 25 mta send with-subject both mta send mail-from hostname 10.10.10.2 mta send mail-from username $s$ mta receive aliases 10.10.10.2 mta receive maximum-recipients 7 Any suggestions? Or do I build a small internal LAN smtp relay server?

cdjohnston · ‎04-15-2013

I have a final difinitive answer for everyone here... It's not good news. I opened a TAC case with Cisco on this. It turns out that the tech tried to convince me that it is all in black and white that the SPA500DS supports ONLY SIP, not SCCP. The documentation he referred me to is as follows: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/voicesw/ps6788/phones/ps10499/data_sheet_c78-711964.html http://www.cisco.com/cisco/web/solutions/small_business/products/voice_conferencing/SPA_500/index.html-tab-Models The first link simply mentions SIP, it does not deny SCCP and the second one is a little less vague. My email converation with him went like this: Hi Chris My name is XXXX and I am the engineer assigned to your case. The SPA500DS is for SIP deployments only. UC500 use SCCP for SPA500 and 7900 series phone registrations. Here we describe the SPA500DS capabilities noting that they are for SIP deployments. Unfortunately there is no way to integrate the 500DS with a UC500. The workaround would be to use a 500S or a similar 7900 series phone with a 7916 side car. Again I apologize for confusion and inconvenience. Then I ask: Is there an expected date to make it compatible or will someone offer this in BIG RED letters so that there is NO mis-interpretation? We are going to attempt to upsell a customer to the 7900+7916 Final Response: No sir, no expected date to work on the UC500. I share your frustration about the documentation and would change it myself if I had the power. The 500S is a written label. The 7900 and the 7916 is the closest to the same functionality. So that kinda puts the nail in that coffin. For now... I hope someone at Cisco marketing and product management realizes that the SPA500 is commonly used on the UC500 platform. Wouldn't it be nice to offer products that look like the platform, walk like the platform actually talk like the platform? Jus' sayin!

cdjohnston · ‎09-27-2012

Guys - i think i found it. I took Kwon's suggesting of wiping and adding line by line manually. This did not work. It was NOT UNTIL AFTER i did the following: In the global command: Voice Register Global you then do a create profile Everything seems to have woken up!!!

cdjohnston · ‎09-26-2012

I have tried this as well - that is NOT using CCA to install the jabber configs. Do any one of you have a recommendation of what config statements to include or not include? I was able to restore the ability for desk phones to call jabber phones by adding: no outbound-proxy int the voice register global configuration as documented by the CCME/Jabber documentation. What else should be added? Thanks Chris

cdjohnston · ‎08-16-2012

Hello George; Interesting that you ran into this as well. I used 3cdaemon for the tftp server to redo the M4b from the 540 upgrade package and the 520 package. Considering the only way you can recover is to do a rommon tftpdnld i know that i am not encountering anything whacky from the CCA. ONLY when i downgraded the image to 151-2.T4 was i able to boot. So basically, i have a flash card (in its final form) where all of the parts are 8.6 but the IOS image is from 8.2 Oh, and any info when the ATA187 is going to be supported? Chris

cdjohnston · ‎08-16-2012

Hello John; I will do just that and report back - probably this PM

cdjohnston · ‎08-15-2012

Heya John; I have 520, 540, and 560 "kits" since i service several clients. even though i am on old-school CLI guy, I use the upgrade feature of CCA since it saves me time during upgrade. I do not have to manually have to upload tidbits and organize accordingly. So since it is CCA, the upgrade feature is smart enough to realize "Hey, I'm working on a 520 and not a 540 so this package is wrong" So - needless to say, i installed the 520 package. It failed - and in my original post you can see the output of the console. So I then went and extracted just the IOS images one at a time so I could tftp copy into a spare flashcard until i could get something that would boot - so it was the uc500-advipservicesk9-mz.151-2.T4 from the 8.2 package that worked for me. In the 8.6 package, we have an interim release in there uc500-advipservicesk9-mz.151-4.M4b - definitely not part of the 'T' train at all... I did not download these packages from the normal CCO site i get them at, but at the website https://upload.cisco.com

cdjohnston · ‎08-15-2012

Hello there. I ran into an interesting problem. I have this UC520 here that I wanted to update with the 8.6.0 package. So, I let CCA go to town and to the upgrade. However, upon final reboot, nothing was happening. So i got into the serial interface and the UC520 was stuck in rommon> mode. I tried to issue the boot command and it go through and complained about a software forced crash. in fact the actual checksum error message was as follows: rommon 31 > reset System Bootstrap, Version 12.4(11r)XW, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) Technical Support: http://www.cisco.com/techsupport Copyright (c) 2007 by cisco Systems, Inc. UC500 series platform with 262144 Kbytes of main memory Readonly ROMMON initialized program load complete, entry point: 0x80015000, size: 0xb700 program load complete, entry point: 0x80015000, size: 0xb700 program load complete, entry point: 0x80020000, size: 0x280c288 Self decompressing the image : ##################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################### [OK] Error : uncompressed image checksum is incorrect 0xC8778C32 Expected a checksum of 0xC8778B92 *** System received a Software forced crash *** signal= 0x17, code= 0x9, context= 0x80026434 PC = 0x0, Vector = 0x0, SP = 0x0 I then extracted the IOS image from the UC540 version of the 8.6 package, installed it using rommon tftpdnld and booted with that. I get the same error. I then extracted the IOS image from the 8.2 package and installed on a flash and that boots fine. If anyone has suggestions or has seen this error before and has a workaround, i would love to hear about your experiences. BTW - I have successfully installed that 8.6 image on several UC540's - just not UC520 boxes. Chris

cdjohnston · ‎07-25-2012

Adam - this is interesting. I have a client that has had a tough go with a 2.0 server. But now the database is stopping randomly. every couple hours or so. What was the answer that they offered to you? Chris

cdjohnston · ‎07-25-2012

BEWARE - The upgrade for the client on the "File Exchange" site labeled "Upgrade_Cisco_SCC_Advanced_2.0_to_2.1.012_OL_x32.exe" is not an upgrade to 2.1 - it downgrades to 2.0.9

Date Registered	‎06-05-2002 08:17 PM
Date Last Visited	‎08-15-2018 02:19 AM
Total Messages Posted	32

ASA SLA/TRACK Not functioning as expec...

inbound pots on CUCME to remote (VPN) C...

inbound pots on CUCME to remote (VPN) C...

HOLY CATS, BATMAN! - All I

Using CUE as SMTP relay

Using CUE as SMTP relay

SPA 500DS and UC500

IOS Jabber with sip trunk doesn't work

IOS Jabber with sip trunk doesn't work

UC520 upgrade to 8.6 fail

UC520 upgrade to 8.6 fail

UC520 upgrade to 8.6 fail

UC520 upgrade to 8.6 fail

CallConnector Server Database and Prese...

Re: Cisco Smart CallConnector Suite