Shared Line vs Normal Line

[Marcus Olson]

So historically we've always done all our configurations via CLI.  Up until recently when the CCA started to become a useful tool..  the problem is all of our configurations were done as 'normal lines'  meaning we'd have more than one ephone with the same extension as a 'normal line' .. this has worked absolutely fine.  Now though CCA complains that the line is already in use elsewhere.

So when a user has more than one phone, say one at home, or a admin has a users dn as a normal line on their phone as well how do we go about making changes without CCA complaining?

What is the difference between a Shared Line and a Normal Line (which is applied as say 1:22  on multiple phones).. what is the best way to convert these to shared lines so we can begin using CCA to modify users phones?         

[mcasimirc63]

If the user has more than one phone you would need to use a "shared line" for both phones.  In CLI it just looks like the same DN is assigned to multiple phones.  I don't know why they made a distinction between a shared line and a normal line in CCA because it's all the same in CLI.

Also in CCA, you can't give a user a shared line on button one with a mailbox and assign any other button as a normal line with a mailbox. But you can do the reverse. 

[Marcus Olson]

So how does one convert a 'normal line' to a 'shared line' if its the same in CLI.  There must be some difference in the CLI that lets CCA know its shared.  Thats what I can't figure out..         

[David Trad]

Hi Marcus "O",

So how does one convert a 'normal line' to a 'shared line' if its the same in CLI.

A pretty darn good question

I have a need to do a CIPC and a Desk Phone (10 of them actually) but have them both setup to use the same extension number, playing with this function now on our office system before I apply it at a customer level, if I work this question out I will let you know, otherwise I will wait for someone in the know on this and probably save myself a lot of time.

Cheers,

David.

[mcasimirc63]

In CCA delete the Normal Line and then re add it as a Shared line.  If you configured the phone in CLI it might not be configureable via CCA with whatever your added.  You might need to unplug the phone, delete the ephone via CLI, sync up CUE, plug the phone back in and wait for the phone to auto register (turn on auto-reg) and then when it shows up in CCA reconfigure it.  I don't think the CUE portion is necessary btw but I would do it anyway as a clean start.

[Marcus Olson]

Surely there must be something in the CLI that identifies a line as shared vs normal. 

Btw, the most frustrating part is that back when you could manage phones via the web interface of the CUE it allowed you to have more than one 'normal' line on a phone.

I'm guessing for a shared line to work NO PHONES can have 1:xxx for the button configuration.  Right?         

What you just described is not an option for over 50+ phones.. its also extremely hard to justify that to a client.. from a cost prespective.

[mcasimirc63]

 Surely there must be something in the CLI that identifies a line as shared vs normal. 

To identify the numbers you would have to copy and paste the config into a text editor and do a find to see which ephone-dn's are applied to multiple phones.  Then you could create additional temporary ephone-dn's with no VM and assign them to the phones hoping that CCA will be able to read it after the change.

I'm guessing for a shared line to work NO PHONES can have 1:xxx for the button configuration.  Right?          

I'm not sure what you mean.  If there is a button configuration that CCA does not recognize, it will not be editable.  Meaning it will not save the changes you made if you edit the phone or it won't read the configuration you did via CLI.  If you have a normal CLI configuration where you added a ephone-dn to a phone and didn't share it then CCA might be able to read it

What you just described is not an option for over 50+ phones.. its also extremely hard to justify that to a client.. from a cost prespective.

You simply tell the client that if god wanted you to hold on to your money, he would have put handles on it....

CCA has it's place for sure in these larger deployments because editing multiple phones and dn's via CLI is an engineering task for every change. 

[Marcus Olson]

I'm just trying to figure out what the CCA uses or see's that makes it believe a line is 'normal' vs. 'shared'.  When I say button 1:xxx I mean 1:xxx = Normal,  1mxxx = monitor,  is shared 1sxxx ?           

[Ryan Hardy]

I would reply to this but im getting blocked cause of my "content."  i had a long message too.  Short version, shared line in CCA is an Octo line in CLI. 

[mcasimirc63]

A shared line can be either dual or octo line if you are using 7900 series phones.  If you are using SPA phones, every ephone-dn will be dual.  In CLI a shared line will be the same ephone-dn applied to multiple phones. 

ephone 46

button 1:xxx

ephone 45

button 1:xxx

Here is a list of the button separators/functions

1:xxx = Is a "normal" button separator.  It can be dual or octo-line.  This is what you are looking for.

1fxxx = Feature ring ( not CCA compliant)

1mxxx = Monitor

1o111, 222, 333, 333 = Overlay line (another type of shared line where multiple ephone-dn's are applied to one button)

1c111,222, 333, 444=  Overlay with call waiting

1x111, 222, 333 = Overlay expansion / rollover (ephone-dn will rollover to the next in a hunt group fashion.  Not CCA compliant)

1s111 = silent ring (not cca compliant)

1w111= watch mode

[Marcus Olson]

Ok, so I do have the same dn applied to multiple ephones, yet it still shows up as 'normal' in cca.  There must be something else thats signifying that its shared vs normal.  Is it possibly something on the CUE side?    

[David Trad]

Marcus "O",

I think I have found a pattern with the way CCA builds the system... I may be wrong here, but CCA seems to use pre-defined DN ranges for specific functions, it could be that it is seeing it as Normal because it is not in the DN range for shared DN's and sits in the pre-defined range of "Normal DN's"..

It is a running theory here, as silly as it sounds I do actually think this is how it works, but I am sure someone from Cisco will correct this

"IF" I am right this would mean you would need to delete the current DN configuration and create a new one from scratch so CCA uses the defined DN range.

Cheers,

David.

[Marcus Olson]

I'm going to test this theory out David.  I have noticed that CCA likes to build top down (ephone-dn 600, 599, 598...) where as I've always done bottom up.. (ephone 6,7,8,9....).

I'll try creating a Ephone-DN via CCA and specify it as shared and see where it populates it.  With the system having an infinit amount dn's (i think) i'm not sure how that would work.  You could have 200 ephone-dn's .. obviously the max ephone is in the 100's if I recall.  I think that would cause overlap.. but then again that wouldn't be the first time the CCA had a huge oversight in logic.

[lgaughan]

David,

No, CCA does not use pre-defined ranges for DNs.  It does build top down, picking up unused DN tags as it goes.  Its just that CCA configurations tend to look the same, since some features/functions always get generated in the same order (for example, MWI is usually at the very top).

Laura

[mcasimirc63]

Check under the ephone-dn to see if this makes a difference because this is what I have noticed so far.

ephone-dn  292  dual-line (or could be octo-line)

number 205 no-reg primary (This line is not shared)

label 205

description Chris Christie

name Chris Christie

call-forward busy 399

call-forward noan 399 timeout 20

!

!

ephone-dn  293  octo-line

number 230 no-reg both  (This line is shared)

label Anderson Silva

description 230

name Anderson Silva

call-forward busy 399

call-forward noan 399 timeout 20