gmane.comp.telephony.pbx.sipfoundry.general

Re: AudioCodes Hookflash Settings

Melcon Moraes — 2012-05-25T23:59:34

Actually, you need to check what is the hookflash timing on the maxattach
as well. You might need to change either on AC or on maxattach in order to
match each other.

-
MM

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Paul Needham <pan< at >qad.com> wrote:

Extension not valid if number entered during AAGreeting

wgreen — 2012-05-25T23:07:31


I am getting a extension not valid message if I enter a
number during the AA Greeting. If iI enter a number and get
the message 3 consecutive time the next greeting is a backup
AA greeting that is not active. At this point entering any
extension fails. I am running 4.4 on Centos 5.7.

Thanks

Master (0.0.4.5.2) version gives benign error afterinstall

Douglas Hubler — 2012-05-25T18:19:44

Just a note for those installing latest snapshot.  I'm looking into
it, but resulting system seems ok, I've been playing with error
reporting and introduced this

Benign error looks something like this:

...
Enter SIP domain name [ press enter for 'hubler.us' ] :
Enter SIP realm [ press enter for 'hubler.us' ] :
Configuring system, this may take a few minutes...
Error. Could not examine file "/var/sipxdata/cfdata/servers" in
readfile. System error for stat: "No such file or directory". Could
not examine file "/var/sipxdata/cfdata/servers" in readfile. System
error for stat: "No such file or directory". Could not examine file
"/var/sipxdata/cfdata/servers" in readfile. System error for stat: "No
such file or directory". Could not examine file
"/var/sipxdata/cfdata/servers" in readfile  ....

Re: Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

McIlvin, Don — 2012-05-25T15:51:28

 

So comments marked DM>>  where 3 options are discussed.

From: sipx-users-bounces< at >list.sipfoundry.org
[mailto:sipx-users-bounces< at >list.sipfoundry.org] On Behalf Of
pscheepens< at >epo.org
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2012 7:24 AM
To: Discussion list for users of sipXecs software
Subject: Re: [sipx-users] Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

 

Douglas Hubler <dhubler< at >ezuce.com> wrote on 25-05-2012 11:01:14:

where
I
least

So we have 2 usertypes: 
- the UC client devices, these are mainly hardphones and softphones on
any OS. 
These need access to the SIP SRV records etc. 
Since the world is moving more and more to software I think in bigger
installations 
these should run from the "company DNS". 
- the UC servers, these need a separate set of DNS records, only used
between them. 
These can be provided by the "UC DNS". 

There are then 3 options: 

 

DM>> There may be a 2b)

 

1) Use UC DNS for servers and UC clients, this would mean that the UC
clients only need the standard 
UC records or there is a forwarding to the c

Re: Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

Josh Patten — 2012-05-25T15:45:25

Voicemaill will still be limited to a single server in sipXecs 4.6, though
it can now be moved off of the master server. only openUC 4.6 will have
support for more than 1 (redundant) voicemail server.

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Geoff Van Brunt <gvanbrunt< at >dstgroup.com>wrote:

Re: XCAPI TE-Systems SIP Setup

Robert Schroeder — 2012-05-25T15:34:25

I was able to get the GFI FAXmaker and TE-Systems XCAPI products to work with the sipXecs platform. I have listed below areas of change to facilitate FoIP and fax needs for our business.

1. Configured a SIP Trunk to route inbound DID calls to the GFI XCAPI Gateway via Custom Dial Plan.
2. Registered a connection to the sipXecs server for routing outbound calls to maintain Dialing Permissions and CDR History.
3. Working with TE-Systems Tech Support added settings in the "Common Tweaks" Section of the XCAPI configuration for SIP related issues between XCAPI AND sipXecs.
4. Modified settings in the AudioCodes Mediant SIP Gateway configuration for t.38 and fax fallback.
5. Modified settings in the Linksys SPA-2102 & SPA-8000 ATAs for t.38 and fax fall back requirements.
6. Modified modem initialization settings on the GFI FAXmaker server for proper handshaking during modem negotiation periods when fax communications are in progress.
 
If anyone needs more detailed information please feel free to email me with q

Re: Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

Geoff Van Brunt — 2012-05-25T15:30:51

The best option is to have the sipX server be the authoritative server for its own zone. For example it would be voice.company.com where company.com is the DNS zone of the company. That way there is no stepping on of toes. What is needed is guidance for the company admins to configure this in their current DNS servers. Linux and Windows being the most common. 

One area where this gets complicated, is when there are multiple locations with multiple gateways. Thinking about it makes my head hurt so I've always just duplicated records to our company DNS. HA never worked for us anyway as voicemail wasn't fault tolerant. With this changing, I may have to rethink our current setup. Advice here by SipX HA DNS experts would be appreciated.


Geoff Van Brunt
IT Manager

605 Hewitson St.
Thunder Bay ON, P7B 5V5
Canada





T 807.626.1306
F 807.623.1792
M 807.476.7002
IP 1306
mailto:gvanbrunt< at >dstgroup.com
www.dstgroup.com
P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

This e-mail may be privileged and

Re: 4.5.2 firewall settings notes

Michael Picher — 2012-05-25T13:49:48

See:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/i/200001-300000/220001-230000/227001-228000/227133.jpg

Also, detailed info here:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk543/tk757/technologies_tech_note09186a00800949f2.shtml

EF = DSCP 46 (101110)

CS3 = DSCP 24 (011000)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differentiated_services

We should also modify the Polycom Templates in the system to reflect these
as the new commonly used settings.

[image: Inline image 1]

At present the Polycom templates lump signalling in with RTP at DSCP 46.

We should of course let folks know this difference if they are only
prioritizing 46 they may want to update their QOS settings.

Thanks,
   Mike


On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Douglas Hubler <dhubler< at >ezuce.com> wrote:

Re: Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

2012-05-25T13:45:07

Douglas Hubler <dhubler< at >ezuce.com> wrote on 25-05-2012 14:44:01:


this
UC
company DNS.
This is I think the important point. I almost mentioned a host file for 
the server part, 
but hostfiles don't support SRV's for example, so that might not work.


Yep, the only thing is that the forwarding to the company DNS might be 
difficult when the 
UC domain and the company domain are the same, I think a DNS server can't 
forward 
domain A when it hosts domain A.

Re: Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

Douglas Hubler — 2012-05-25T12:44:01

I don't see any advantage of #3 over #2.  If you disable/or enable a
single service in HA, it affects DNS now more than ever, but only for
internal connections between UC components so why open a ticket with
IT to make DNS change when the change does not affect any endpoints.
What we need it a clear list of endpoint related records you should
copy into your company DNS server.

It may help not to think of the DNS server embedded in UC as a "DNS
Server" but instead as an "name resolution system that happens to
follow the DNS specification"

This is a good discussion so thanks.  Fortunately the distinction
between #2 and #3 is really just a best practices thing and nothing
sipxecs has to do or not do.

Re: Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

2012-05-25T11:23:58

Douglas Hubler <dhubler< at >ezuce.com> wrote on 25-05-2012 11:01:14:

where
least

So we have 2 usertypes:
- the UC client devices, these are mainly hardphones and softphones on any 
OS.
These need access to the SIP SRV records etc. 
Since the world is moving more and more to software I think in bigger 
installations 
these should run from the "company DNS".
- the UC servers, these need a separate set of DNS records, only used 
between them.
These can be provided by the "UC DNS". 

There are then 3 options:
1) Use UC DNS for servers and UC clients, this would mean that the UC 
clients only need the standard 
UC records or there is a forwarding to the company DNS. There also has to 
be a (DHCP) way to point the UC 
clients to the UC DNS instead of the company DNS if it's not the same.
2) Use UC DNS for the servers and the company DNS for the clients, this 
means putting the 
necessary records in the company DNS. All records are available on the UC 
servers as well.
This is the safest I think because the client re

Re: Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

Douglas Hubler — 2012-05-25T09:01:14

yes, agree.


yes, a common setup is to copy records (A or SRV) records from the
sipxecs system for SIP and IM to your company DNS server.  sipxecs
maintains it's own DNS because "everything is a DNS issue" and sipxecs
breaks horribly all the time when we rely on company DNS server to be
correct.  In addition the number of records we require now for a HA
system has exploded because a lot more services are HA now.  If before
copying the "RR" records was problematic, now it's 10x worse.  The
silly thing is that these records were only used internally by sipxecs
so why make admins go thru the torture. Funny thing is this hasn't
changed much from 4.4, but it wasn't clear before that this is
actually what happened.

Re: Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

2012-05-25T06:59:25

Douglas Hubler <dhubler< at >ezuce.com> wrote on 25-05-2012 01:52:58:

webmin.

I think it is important that there is at least also a UC interface where
the important things for the UC system can be set. Like certain DHCP 
options.
 
of
doing.
good.
not
settings

IP address management is a reason why the "company DNS" should at least 
reflect 
the A records of IP addresses that are used.

Running your own "UC DNS" means handing out a different DNS server address 
to UC devices.
This is difficult, especially when they run on the Desk/Laptop (it's 
impossible).
That would mean all office devices use the "UC DNS"

Re: 4.5.2 firewall settings notes

Douglas Hubler — 2012-05-25T00:31:16

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:43 PM, McIlvin, Don
<Don.McIlvin< at >nrtnortheast.com> wrote:

I'm sure these are correct, but any info surround these values before
we set them as the default?

Re: Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

Douglas Hubler — 2012-05-24T23:52:58

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Gerald Drouillard
<gerrylist< at >drouillard.ca> wrote:

then we should make sure webmin works.  Did you typically install
webmin on sipxecs systems before or just thinking ahead?


y, dhcpd is off by default





install is trivial now.  it's about what you enable.  so far it's been
a much better experience.  you can ramp up services once you get a
certain level of the install.  it's better than have acd stats service
failing after install when you don't even plan to run a call center.


The DNS doesn't have to be the same that your entire company uses.  I
cannot find a good reason not to run the DNS.


everything is available via a template to we're definitely looking for
feedback for some real world systems

AudioCodes Hookflash Settings

Paul Needham — 2012-05-24T18:20:39

When trying to create a conference call using the flash key on an analog
clearone maxattach speaker phone connected to an audiocodes mp118, it rings
to the operator.

Scenario:

Dial first number - call established
hit flash -  phone immediately rings the operator

The maxattach also has a conference key that does nothing when pressed.

Is there a recommended setting in the AudioCodes for hookflash timing?
Currently set as "Flash Hook Period 700"

server 4.04
AC 6.20A

Thanks,

Paul Needham
Telecom Engineer Pr
Phone: 856-840-2620
Fax: 856-840-2621
SIP: pan< at >nj.sip.qad.com
Email:pan< at >qad.com
www.QAD.com


*
*

Re: Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

Gerald Drouillard — 2012-05-24T16:21:12

I think you can get as crazy as you want with this.  I believe the 
ultimate in interfaces for managing the services on the server is 
webmin.  It is very rare that you cannot do anything you want within webmin.

I have to admit that a lot of "newbies" to sipx have trouble setting up 
the DNS.  We get a lot of people with phone backgrounds coming to sipx 
when a "network/server" background would be the best.   UC device dns 
settings come from the dhcp server on the network or can be static.  You 
just cannot take over being the DHCP server without going in and 
shutting it off on whatever else is on the network.  I can see a lot of 
people bringing down their network without knowing what they are doing.  
I think the current 4.4 way is the correct way of doing it.  The page 
that goes out and looks at the current settings on the network is good. 
   If you don't know how to change your current DNS or DHCP server then 
you should get assistance from somebody that does before installing a 
phone server.  It i

Re: Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

2012-05-24T15:46:19

I think it is confusing to have a DNS "Settings" and an "Unmanaged 
Service" panel.
The only difference between the 2 is the "unmanaged" tick.
I would place the tick box at the bottom of the first screen with a 
clearer description, something like:

"It is advised to let the UC system manage and run it's own DNS for your 
UC devices. In this case leave the box unchecked.
If you however know what you are doing you can manage the DNS records 
needed for your UC system and devices in your own DNS. 
In this case check the box and make sure your DNS is set up correctly by 
running the DNS advisor."
 
I am for example running DNS out of SipX without any trouble, I would 
prefer to "tick" the box.

Paul

George Niculae <george< at >ezuce.com> wrote on 24-05-2012 16:53:04:


<sipx-users< at >list.sipfoundry.org>
wrote:
http://wiki.sipfoundry.org/display/sipXecs/Unmanaged+Services+%284.6+only%29

Re: Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

George Niculae — 2012-05-24T14:53:04

I created a wiki page for getting an impression on how it looks
http://wiki.sipfoundry.org/display/sipXecs/Unmanaged+Services+%284.6+only%29
I'll be showing / discussing unmanaged service option at May sipXecs
hangout, so I encourage you to participate, criticize, make together a
better config

http://www.google.com/moderator/#15/e=1fbcb9&t=1fbcb9.41

Thanks
George

Unmanaged services plan for 4.6

Douglas Hubler — 2012-05-24T13:10:26

DNS, IP tables, NTP and DHCP are among the few services that some
folks configure separately on sipxecs 4.4 or older systems.  Starting
with the 4.6 release these services are integrated in a much tighter
way.  In order not to conflict with any custom configuration methods,
these select services now have a "Unmanaged" setting you can set which
allows you to configure the services yourselves.  George and I
realized that for each service, an unmanaged state can have different
consequences depending on what the service does or how it's
configured.

So in short, there is no common specification for how unmanaged
services are dealt with, so George and I urge you to test out 4.6 and
see if you can still configure the systems as you once did.  Don't
worry, there will *always* be a way to hack want you want together in
4.6 because all the rules are now in editable text files, but the goal
is to lower the level of hacking you would have to do to make system
easier to setup out of the box and easier to maintain thru a

Re: Routing calls between 2 gateways or sip trunk.

Marand Remi — 2012-05-24T08:03:28


It is OK now thank you !!