About Jonathan Schulenberg

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-18-2018

Not in any currently available release. For this topic I don't have roadmap details on how/when/if reporting would work for Flex CC but even if I did it requires a NDA so I couldn't address it on the forums. Anything forward-looking is a question for your Cisco AM/SE.

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-18-2018

Unless you're in the brand new Contact Center Flex licensing model, there is no difference between an Agent and Supervisor. Both of them consume a seat license when logged in to Finesse. To answer the question ask-asked: I'm not aware of a report/filter that cleanly shows that information. PS- Ensure you apply the latest ES02 patch published for CCX when you upgrade; it resolves several Sev2 defects.

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-17-2018

Yes, I think it's a great feature for low-scale (100 ELIN max) / low-resolution (Device Pool, typically per-site) use cases. Layer 3 roaming on WLCs could hang you up here if you had a campus but the OP's environment sounds like a solid fit: branch offices with centralized trunking but [apparently] no serious E911 (e.g. floor/suite/sqft) requirements. It's pretty simple: turn it on, define the ELINs in whatever format you need, assign each Device Pool and ELIN Group, and flag the appropriate Route Patterns.

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-17-2018

You should use the "voice-class sip audio forced" command on the PSTN-facing dial-peers instead of the SIP Profile. It's more efficient and intended to solve exactly this use case.

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-17-2018

That screenshot shows a Line Button Template, not a Softkey Template.

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-17-2018

I haven't tried that combination, though the emergency call handler doesn't care whether the Route Pattern is truly an emergency number such as 911; you could test it with any off-net pattern (e.g. your cell phone, assuming it's not configured as a Remote Destination). The traditional answer was 'no': transformations occurring at the Route Pattern level would not override transformations farther downstream at the Route Group appearance on the Route List or at the Gateway/Trunk. The more common approach to outbound caller ID masking is to use the External Phone Number Mask field on the DN instead of a Transformation CSS on the Trunk/Gateway.

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-16-2018

If you’re using a classic Line+Device CSS design with the 911 Route Pattern on the Device-level CSS then this should work just fine with Device Mobility. Configure the roaming site-specific Device CSS on each Device Pool. You actually have a second option in CUCM 11.5: the new Emergency Call Handler functions as a low-scale / low-resolution CER alternative. The ELIN is set at the time of the call based on the phone’s Device Pool at the time, including accounting for Device Mobility roaming. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-callmanager/200452-Usage-of-Native-Emergency-Call-Routing-F.html

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-16-2018

Clustering makes this easier in a way: you must use the dual NIC recommended design. This is because clustering can only occur on NIC1 and the clustering NIC cannot be NATed. The Traversal Client zone on Expressway-C should point at Expressway-E NIC1, which only has a private IP. On internal DNS the A record should resolve to NIC1’s IP address while PTR records both NIC IP addresses and the NATed public IP all resolve back to the A record. Public DNS obviously resolves the the NATed address of NIC2. It’s worth mentioning that PTR resolution must also work; you may need to open a ticket with your ISP to get that created.

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-16-2018

Supervised transfer/call screening and taking a message are two separate operations. You may be able to use an Interview Handler for this though. Taking the name would be the first question and the message the second question. That feature is used so rarely that I don’t remember whether you can send it to DL or not; worth a try though. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/connection/10x/administration/guide/10xcucsagx/10xcucsag080.html#pgfId-1110984

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-16-2018

Check the security menu and verify that the ITL/CTL have been erased. Assuming this phone is used off greymarket and previously registered to Cisco call control it will reject XML files that aren’t digitally signed by that previous system.

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-16-2018

You haven’t specified the product or the version you’re using. Assuming a current version of CCX in the answer: one option is the license utilization report. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/crs/express_11_6_2/user/guide/uccx_b_ccx-reporting-guide-1162new/uccx_b_ccx-reporting-guide-1162new_chapter_01.html#UCCX_RF_L7A68928_00

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-16-2018

This is, to some extent, implementation/load-dependent. The only data I am aware of Cisco publishing on this front is here: https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/uc_system/virtualization/cisco-collaboration-virtualization.html For example, clicking on CUCM shows some IOPS related data at the bottom of the page: https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/uc_system/virtualization/virtualization-cisco-unified-communications-manager.html#iops

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-16-2018

This is a shot in the dark but you may want to try adding “voice-class sip audio forced“ to the PSTN-facing dial-peer(s). I added this to my default config template after having similar issues with Level3 and Jabber a few years back. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/voice/cube/configuration/cube-book/voi-audio-forced.html

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-16-2018

The phone’s default behavior for some of these services is to contact the CUCM server to which it is registered. This affords a degree of resiliency without needing a load balancer. You’ll need to disable this behavior with the <provisioning>1</provisioning> element.

Jonathan Schulenberg · ‎12-16-2018

Presumably all of the users can make outbound calls so this isn’t a normal COR situation. The only unorthodox idea I can think of is to create a second loopback interface on the gateway so it has a second IP address. Then create a second SIP Trunk in CUCM to the gateway but flag it as an on-net destination. To that you could attach route pattern(s) with a unique prefix as Jaime mentioned. That’s an ugly workaround though. It would be a lot easier to just tell the CIO they have to pick: allow off-net to off-net transfers clusterwide; or, tell the exec to make their own calls.

Date Registered	‎05-04-2007 07:25 AM
Date Last Visited	‎12-18-2018 09:21 AM
Total Messages Posted	7,207
Total Helpful Votes Received	7446

Re: CUIC agent reports, re:concurent su...

Re: CUIC agent reports, re:concurent su...

Re: Device Mobility + 911 Caller ID + C...

Re: No audio on 8845/8865 phones callin...

Re: Cisco 7925G Wireless IP Phone - Mis...

Re: Device Mobility + 911 Caller ID + C...

Re: Device Mobility + 911 Caller ID + C...

Re: Setup of Expressway cluster: DNS en...

Re: CUC asks for caller name

Re: Cisco IP Phone CP-8941 Registerd

Re: CUIC agent reports

Re: CUCM-11.5 IOWAIT and IPOS Requireme...

Re: No audio on 8845/8865 phones callin...

Re: Contacts not available on Cisco CP-...

Re: Offnet to Offnet Transfer Question