Hi Chuck, After looking at the install I performed in my lab, it seems I did infact use the wrong ISO when I installed UCCX. I originally installed 8.5.1 base, which is why is wasn't working. I have since installed 8.5.1 SU3 and now it is working as expected. Thanks ... View more

Thanks for the reply Gergely. I should have included more in my inital post about the user info. So I have tried to different ways so far. The "admin" user for CM is in the Audit Users and CCM Super Users groups. Those groups have the role I believe needed which is "Standard AXL API Access". I have tried this user and it does not seem to work. I then created a seperate user of "ccx-admin" and assigned this user to just about every group in CM and was assigned the above role plus almost all others listed (just to see if I could get it working), but a no go that route either. Thanks ... View more

Excellent!! Thanks guys for the clue bat I'll go and crawl back to my certified area of the forums with the crazy R&S/SP folks where I belong lol Cheers! ... View more

Ok Guys, I think I got it now. Raymond started me in the right direction when I finally get on to the Dynamic Configuration Tool. Once I selected the 2921 CME bundle, I saw that it came with the FL-CME-SRST-25. So all I need now to cover the router seats is 2x FL-CME-SRST-5 which will give me the 35 seats for 32 handsets and 3 spares. I then selected one 7965G and saw the license option as you mentioned Barry SW-CCME-UL-7965. And thanks Rob for the link. So I think what I need to purchase is simply the 2921 CME-SRST Bundle and an additional 2x FL-CME-SRST-5. Then when I order the handsets, just make sure they come with the SW-CCME-UL-XXXX license and i'm good. Please corrent me if this wrong guys. Last question ... when I get the 2921 Bundle in, lets say I do not have the extra 2x FL-CME-SRST-5's just yet, will IOS let me provision that 26th handset or will I need to install that PAK (even it's a Demo or Eval until I can get the permanant licenses)?? I only ask because I have most of the handsets and the 2921 will be in any day now, however I won't have time to get the extra 10 seats until next week sometime, but wish to start the install this weekend. I'll get the handset licenses later next week as well since they're not enforcing it, but these folks must be in compliance. Thanks guys for the help!! I'll have to give the points to Rob for the link he sent which basically solidifed my understanding of the licensing (unless Im still confused ) And I have to agree with you Barry, i'll need my NFL helmet with any more changes in this licensing BS!! Regards, Max ... View more

We finally got our 5520's upgraded. It didn't go as smoothly as we would have liked. We first tried to down the secondary unit, upgrade the memory in it, bring it back up and then failover to it. When we failed over to the standby with 2gb of ram, it would not forward packets (from the standby, I could ping inside hosts and outside hosts, but no hosts could ping out). We ended up rolling back the change and calling TAC to see what they had to say. TAC did say that there was not any documentation in regards to the procedure (upgrade a failover pair memory), but he did say that Cisco recommends upgrading the secondary unit first just as we did. The next night, we decided to go all out and try what a few others have suggested and failover to standby, upgrade memory and OS on primary unit. Then rack primary back up, turn the secondary (active) unit off, and then turn on the primary and wait for it to boot (which caused a downtime of however long it took for the primary unit to boot). Then take the secondary unit offline, wash, rinse, repeat. After both units were back online, we had a few nat messages after the migration, but everything seemed to work without any problems. Since it was late, we didn't test extensively, we didn't notice anything as being down. Turns out that almost every nat rule that was created during the migration had _unidirectional_ added to the end of it. There's no documentation of why that happened either. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/security/asa/asa83/upgrading/migrating.html After making the statements bidirectional, all was well. I think alot of our headache would have never happened if Cisco would have had this documented. We have mixed feelings about how the new statements and functions work and need to be configured. We also feel that the creation of all of the new objects is too much fluff and clutters up the config. back to my coffee now max ... View more

Thanks for the response guys. Since we have a very tight change control (for those that don't speak network), I would rather take the known downtime so they can expect it. Telling them I can do this with no hit to services, and then taking it down would look bad. This is the methodology I had in mind anyways, but I wanted to make sure no one has been able to do it without taking any downtime. Thanks again guys, M ... View more