CFA During Publisher Failure CUCM 7.1

Answered Question
Mar 3rd, 2010

Now, before any goes and pastes content from an SRND please look at this scenario closely.  I have searched on NetPro and I did find a thread concerning the same issue I am seeing but that post was never answered.

Versions: (for Java;-)

I am running 7.1(3b)SU1 and 7.1(3b)SU2 in my lab and I have tested on both versions.

Background:

I have a multi-node cluster and I am taking the publisher off of the network to force a test of the User Facing Feature preservation during publisher failure.

Issue:

From the subscriber node CCMAdmin interface, when I try to configure a line for unconditional forwarding (i.e. Call Forward All - CFA) it fails with an error:

"Access to the requested resource has been denied. The attempted action was a violation of security protocols and will not be allowed. Please try another action."

From CCMUser on the subscriber node when trying to perfom the same basic action I get the error: "Update Failed: No Update Permission"

Now when I forward the line from the IP phone all is working as expected.

OK, now we paste from the SRND:

Page 65 (of the PDF version of 7x SRND): "Database modifications for user-facing call processing features are made on the subscriber servers to which the IP phones are registered.  These features include:"

<we all know the list, or most of us do anyway>

Call Forward All (CFA) is at the top of list.

As I said earlier I have searched on NetPro and I have seen folks ask the question of making changes on the Subscriber when the publisher is offline.  In most, if not all of these threads, someone inevitably responds by pasting the above section (in full) from the SRND.  But, I am thinking that the text in the SRND may be misleading.

I have tested CFA preservation (as well as key features like EM) during faked Publisher failures as part of the normal validation we apply to our deployments.  The funny thing is I always test it from the phone (which works as noted above). I haven't really ever thought of testing it from the CCMAdmin/CCMUser web interface.

So, either I am running into a software defect OR the documentation is misleading.  From the NetPro threads I have read, I don't think I am solo in this misunderstanding. I have even read responses which pretty much say "here is the excerpt from the SRND and yes you can do this from the subscriber".

Has any body else ran into this?  Is there another doc or section of the SRND that clarifies the behavior? And, most importantly, is the behavior I am seeing operating as designed.  I suspect it is but I am curious what you all think.

Hey Java, this has got you written all over it ;-)

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Bill

I have this problem too.
0 votes
Correct Answer by Jaime Valencia about 6 years 9 months ago

mmmm, interesting. Sound like a challenge LOL

I haven't tried it from the CCMAdmin because this being a UFF I would assume the 1st place a user would try to use any of the features would be the phone and not really log into CCMAdmin to do this (apart from the whole security issue of having your users fooling around in CCMAdmin, imagine what they could do if they could change the text line labels on the phones from their co-workers =) )

At least that would be my understanding if I hear user-facing, obviously other people might have a different idea.

I just looked up the error and someone also replicated this on 7.1.2.30000-3.

On CCMAdmin they got the same error, on CCMUser:

Update failed. No UPDATE permission.

Now, the reply from the BU folks on that:

They mentioned something similar to what I think UFF means, "User interface changes are accepted". In other words, changes from the user phone.

They added "But all web based CUCM Admin and User updates must be done on the publisher. " So, no PUB, no web changes.

I guess the SRND should specify that the UFF can only be used via the user phone and not any other means.

The errors you're receiving are by design, but I don't believe there is a doc that clearly specifies that UFF basically means changes from the phone are the only ones accepted. UFF term is a little vague indeed and open to interpretation, because CCMUser can be used to change CFA as well, and some people might consider it part of what UFF means to them.

Hope this answers your questions Bill

HTH

java

If this helps, please rate

www.cisco.com/go/pdihelpdesk

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 5 (1 ratings)
Loading.
Correct Answer
Jaime Valencia Wed, 03/03/2010 - 15:25

mmmm, interesting. Sound like a challenge LOL

I haven't tried it from the CCMAdmin because this being a UFF I would assume the 1st place a user would try to use any of the features would be the phone and not really log into CCMAdmin to do this (apart from the whole security issue of having your users fooling around in CCMAdmin, imagine what they could do if they could change the text line labels on the phones from their co-workers =) )

At least that would be my understanding if I hear user-facing, obviously other people might have a different idea.

I just looked up the error and someone also replicated this on 7.1.2.30000-3.

On CCMAdmin they got the same error, on CCMUser:

Update failed. No UPDATE permission.

Now, the reply from the BU folks on that:

They mentioned something similar to what I think UFF means, "User interface changes are accepted". In other words, changes from the user phone.

They added "But all web based CUCM Admin and User updates must be done on the publisher. " So, no PUB, no web changes.

I guess the SRND should specify that the UFF can only be used via the user phone and not any other means.

The errors you're receiving are by design, but I don't believe there is a doc that clearly specifies that UFF basically means changes from the phone are the only ones accepted. UFF term is a little vague indeed and open to interpretation, because CCMUser can be used to change CFA as well, and some people might consider it part of what UFF means to them.

Hope this answers your questions Bill

HTH

java

If this helps, please rate

www.cisco.com/go/pdihelpdesk

William Bell Wed, 03/03/2010 - 15:45

Java,  I knew I could count on you.  You nailed the problem right on the head.  Like you I have always tested from the phone and never really gave the web interfaces a thought.  A customer of mine brought it to my attention while they were testing failure scenarios in their lab.  The argument they have, and I agree with, is that CCMUser is a user facing feature.

I guess I'll take the ding on that one.

Thanks again.

-Bill

Actions

This Discussion