This discussion is locked

ASK THE EXPERTS - UC 500 SYSTEM VOICE TECHNOLOGIES

Unanswered Question
Jul 16th, 2010

Welcome to the Cisco Networking Professionals Ask the Expert conversation. This is an opportunity to learn about the voice capabilities of the UC 500 system with Marcos Hernandez.  Marcos is a Technical Marketing Engineer with the Small Business Technology Group at Cisco. He has more than 14 years of experience with voice-over-packet technologies, with focus on VoIP, SIP, QoS, Cisco Unified CallManager Express, and managed services.

Remember to use the rating system to let Marcos know if you have received an adequate response.

Marcos might not be able to answer each question due to the volume expected during this event. Our moderators will post many of the unanswered questions in other discussion forums shortly after the event. This event lasts through July 30, 2010. Visit this forum often to view responses to your questions and the questions of other community members.

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Average Rating: 5 (1 ratings)
bjames@snetworks.com Fri, 07/16/2010 - 14:54

Hi Marcos, I have some questions;

Cisco is really pushing on video and collaboration, and they have said small business is a big deal for us, yet I do not see that much trickling down to the UC/SMB space in regards to video and collaboration. Is this just due to the large separation of the Company, or does it just take so long from a product cycle to modify UC tools/hardware/software to support CME/UC?

The other question I have relates to products will there be a time in the near future that the phones for example will work both the Call Manager and UC500 in a cross-platform way or will there always be separation?

Thanks,

Bob James

Marcos Hernandez Fri, 07/16/2010 - 16:15

Hi Bob,


Nice to hear from you.


It is very hard not to be vague when discussing roadmaps and future plans. Revenue Recognition rules and certain legislations, prevent us from sharing strategies that have not been formally committed. With that said, I can tell you that the Cisco Small Business Product Marketing Teams are invested in creating a portfolio where UC will play a fundamental role. We are exploring integration opportunities with Tandberg (market leaders for video endpoints), integration with the Cisco Cius tablet and also integration with the Consumer Telepresence Team, just to name a few.

Unlike some other technologies (for which we are considered newcomers in the SMB space), we feel that we have a right to own and become the preferred choice for Unified Communications and Collaboration in Small. The trick is to do it in a manner that does not undermine our installed base, but still makes financial sense to our SMB customers. It might be that an "adjusted" Enterprise solution is not the best fit for Small. I would expect a mixture of inherited solutions (from other Cisco BU's) and offerings that are native to our own SMB Product Teams.

With regards to our phone portfolio, specifically the SPA500/SPA300 series, there are NO plans to move them up the food chain (to CME or Call Manager). We will keep positioning those phones as the preferred choice for Centrex deployments (Broadsoft and the likes), where we have been extremely successful. For on-premise call control, UC500 (and future SMB UC solutions) will remain the only Cisco IP PBX'es that will support those phones.

I will also take a minute to insert a shameless plug, and it is related to Cloud. A LOT is being done in this area. The initial focus is Network Management and Managed Service Providers (MSP). But UC integration with the Cloud, specifically for small, is inevitable. It will happen and we will lead.

You know how to reach me if you need to discuss further. Thanks for the good and challenging questions. Keep them coming.

Marcos

bjames@snetworks.com Fri, 07/16/2010 - 16:20

Thanks Marcos, a very articulate answer.

I did just see where Cisco is now going to be offering Cloud integration to partners, and one of the verticals was Unified Communications. Is/will this be an offering that can be position for the SMB space (like a virtual UC560)?

As for the phones, what about the inverse 9900 video series on a UC5xx?

One again thanks for all the work you've done.

PS; WebEx Connect Rocks in the cloud...

Bob James

Marcos Hernandez Sat, 07/17/2010 - 13:38

Bob,

The Cloud Services for SMB that we are working on revolve around Security, Storage and most notably, Network Management. You can contact me directly and we can talk about including you in a pilot that we are running. UC Services specific to SMB, like I said, will come eventually, probably through a combined effort with another Cisco teams.

The 8900/9900 phones will eventually show up in CME. At that point, we will look into adding them to UC500 and CCA. But right now, this support is not on the roadmap.

Thanks,

Marcos

craig.corbett Tue, 07/20/2010 - 09:26

Hi Marcos, can you please shed some light on the fax capabilities on the UC540 & UC560.

What’s supported and what is not? I think on / off ramp faxing was possible with the UC520 but what about 540 – 560?

Can it be done with SIP etc or just FXO ISDN 2 and 30.

What is the recommended method for receiving faxes via the UC540 and UC560 electronically?

Many thanks,

Craig.

Marcos Hernandez Tue, 07/20/2010 - 12:33

Hi Craig,

Fax to Email, or Email to fax (commonly known as "T.37 onramp" and "T.37 offramp" respectively) are applications supported by any UC500 today, but only using the CLI. Support for them in CCA (and consequently, TAC support for the feature) is scheduled for CCA 2.3, due in the Fall timeframe. At this point, the feature will be formally included in the Platform Capabilities list, for the UC540 and the UC560. UC520 support of CLI will remain.


Here is a document that I wrote on how to enable onramp:

https://supportforums.cisco.com/docs/DOC-9718

I have another variation of it using fax detect, so you can combine voice and data on the same DID and have the UC500 detect either call type.

Again, my advise is to wait until the feature is formally supported in CCA, in order to take advantage of the TAC support.

T.37 requires a DSP, which might not necessarily be involved in a pure IP call, like when using a SIP trunk. Therefore, T.37 is only supported when using FXO and ISDN (BRI and PRI) for UC500.

Another alternative is to use a Fax Server. We interoperate with StoneVoice. More information on:

https://supportforums.cisco.com/docs/DOC-9420

Finally, check out this generic (but little dated) presentation on Fax Technologies that I did some time ago:

https://supportforums.cisco.com/docs/DOC-9719

Hope this helps.


Marcos

john_platts Tue, 07/20/2010 - 13:11

I know that IPv6 is currently supported on the following:

  • Cisco IOS software
  • Cisco CME 8.0
  • TNP phones in SCCP mode with firmware release 8.5(2) or later and Cisco CME 8.0 or later
  • Cisco SA500
  • Cisco AP541N
  • Cisco AnyConnect SSL VPN client

I know that Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, Qwest, and other major ISPs already have plans to migrate to IPv6. In addition, IPv6 provides the following benefits over IPv4:

  • Network Mobility can be leveraged to provide better WAN redundancy over a IPv6 network. Even though WAN redundancy is possible over IPv4, network mobility addresses the following problems commonly found in IPv4 WAN redundancy solutions:
    • In most IPv4 WAN redundancy solutions, the two WAN connections have very different IP addresses. As a result, some form of network address translation has to be implemented on the dual-WAN capable router.
    • In contrast, Network mobility enables IPv6 traffic to be re-routed over another Internet connection without having to perform any network address translation using the same public IP addresses.
    • IPv6 network mobility can be combined with a tunneling protocol to transport IPv4 traffic over a IPv6 connection, providing better redundancy over IPv6.
    • SIP registrations can still point to the wrong IP address if an IPv4 WAN connection fails over in many of the IPv4 WAN redundancy solutions, preventing inbound calls from coming through until the IPv4 WAN connection is restored or a re-registration occurs. In addition, network address translation involved in IPv4 WAN redundancy solutions prevents SIP calls from working properly. Similar problems can occur when SIP endpoints are behind NAT devices  that use a dynamically assigned public IP address. IPv6 network mobility fixes these issues by rerouting traffic over another Internet connection. In addition, IPv4 VoIP traffic can be sent over IPv6 network mobility-enabled WAN connections using a tunneling protocol and statically assigned public IPv4 addresses.
  • IPv6 eliminates Network Address Translation. The following problems are solved by removing Network Address Translation:
    • The need for application layer gateways (ALGs) are removed as devices use globally reachable addresses to communicate over the Internet.
    • XML can be pushed down to IP phones using IPv6 as IP phones can be assigned globally reachable IPv6 addresses.
    • Remote network management is easier to do over IPv6 as devices can be assigned globally reachable IPv6 addresses.
    • IPsec over IPv6 VPNs are easier to configure as port forwarding and NAT-T are no longer needed for IPsec over IPv6 VPNs.
    • SIP over TLS can be a problem for devices behind firewalls and routers as SIP over TLS can be incompatible with Network Address Translation and SIP ALGs cannot deal with SIP over TLS. However, the removal of NAT in IPv6 makes it easier to use SIP over TLS over an IPv6 connection, as SIP over TLS is more secure than unencrypted SIP.
    • The elimination of NAT in IPv6 makes it easier to deploy VoIP-enabled devices behind firewalls as SIP-enabled endpoints can be assigned globally reachable IP addresses.
  • There are only approximately 4 billion IPv4 addresses available and there are fewer public IPv4 addresses becoming available. On the other hand, there are 3.4 x 1038 IPv6 addresses available, providing more than enough IP addresses to cover the world's Internet needs.
  • IPv6 can be used with existing IPv4 connections using tunneling protocols. Even though tunneling IPv6 over IPv4 enables IPv6 to be used without having to have native IPv6 connectivity, better redundancy and reduced overhead are achieved with native IPv6 connectivity. Furthermore, NAT, IPv4 WAN redundancy, firewalls, and dynamically assigned IPv4 addresses can create incompatibilities with some IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling mechanisms.

Are there plans to support IPv6 on the 6900, 8900, 9900, and SPA500 series phones? When will IPv6 be supported in CCA?

Marcos Hernandez Wed, 07/21/2010 - 08:49

Hi John,


With the recent highly publicized news covering the depletion of public IPv4 addresses, more and more customers and Cisco resellers have expressed some anxiety on what's going to take to move to IPv6. Things such as Product capabilities, migration cost, technical feasibility and staff training are very present in many people's minds. Your post is a reflection of that.

Network hardware is just a piece of this complex puzzle. Small Business customers need to also consider software support for IPv6 (as in software applications used by the SMB), ISP compatibility and web presence; the point being that having Cisco, or any vendor for that matter, support IPv6, is not going to do the trick. Many other variables need to be taken into consideration.

SMB resellers need to formulate solid migration plans and be prepared to respond to challenging customer inquiries. But let's make sure we do not panic and this whole thing doesn't become another Y2K fire drill. Most software and hardware vendors, including Cisco, offer documentation and recommendations on how to act and seamlessly move into IPv6. We maintain a site with excellent resources to help you stay informed:

http://www.cisco.com/web/strategy/government/usfed_ipv6.html

As you correctly point out, our SMB network infrastructure devices all support IPv6.

For Unified Communication products in general, you can refer to the following page:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/srnd/ipv6/ipv6inuc.html

For the phones not listed in the above document (6900/8900/9900 and SPA500), IPv6 is scheduled for CY 2011.

For CCA, IPv6 support is NOT on the roadmap at this point, and we do not have an estimate on when this will happen either.

Thanks,


Marcos

john_platts Tue, 07/20/2010 - 13:41

We have been wanting to set up VPNs between servers hosting applications and our customers using the UC500 platform. Here is what I want to accomplish:

  • Easy VPN and AnyConnect SSL VPN connectivity enabled on the customer UC500 units.
  • VPN tunnels between the customer UC500 units and our servers.
  • In multisite deployments, VPN tunnels from one customer site to another customer site.

I know how to get Easy VPN, AnyConnect SSL VPN, and site-to-site VPNs between UC500 sites (when the site-to-site VPNs are terminated on the UC500 units themselves).

I need a VPN solution that can deal with the following:

  • Termination of VPNs between our servers and UC500 units.
  • Termination of VPNs between our servers and other IOS-based endpoints (such as the SR520 or ISRs).
  • Termination of VPNs between our servers and non-IOS-based devices (such as the SA500).
  • Termination of VPNs in a manner that works with dynamically assigned IP addresses, network address translation, and WAN failover devices. We need these capabilities in order to demo the UC500 and our hosted applications and to provide secure connectivity whenever the primary WAN connection fails.
  • There is connectivity between the customer's sites and our servers over the VPN tunnels to our servers while ensuring that there is no connectivity between one customer's sites and another customer's sites through the VPN tunnels to our servers.

We do not expect these capabilities to be CCA configurable on UC500 units immediately. However, we do need to be able to have these capabilities available on UC500 units without having to deploy a SA500, SA520, or ISR because:

  • We have already deployed the UC520 to several customers.
  • We send PSTN calls from the UC520 using SIP.
  • We already utilize VPN features available on the UC520.
  • We avoid the cost or the problems associated with deploying an extra device in front of the UC520.
Marcos Hernandez Wed, 07/21/2010 - 09:24

Another good question John.

Let me first state what we do and is supported by the Small Business TAC:

1) Multisite VPN (IPsec) between UC500's (any model) using CCA's Multisite manager

2) IPsec EZVPN Server on UC500 (any model) using CCA

3) SSL VPN Server on UC500 (any model) using CCA

4) Multisite VPN between SA500's using their native administration GUI's

5) SSL VPN Server on SA500 using its native administration GUI.

The following you can also do and get support from "traditional" TAC:

1) Use CLI to provision IPsec Multisite VPN between a UC520 and another UC520, SA500, SR500 or ISR.

2) Use CLI to provision an EZVPN Server or SSL VPN server on UC520.

Any other combination of features (or devices) is not supported, won't be supported and we don't recommend.


For the needs that you describe, such as dynamic IP's, failover, etc. SA500 is a possibility. We know it has issues, but we are constantly improving its capabilities.

If your desired deployment does not comply with the above supported scenarios, or if the above scenarios don't satisfy your existing needs, then the Cisco Small Business Security portfolio is not a good fit and you should not position it. An option would be to position ISR's.

Thanks,

Marcos

john_platts Thu, 07/22/2010 - 07:31

I actually do understand that some of the VPN deployment scenarios are not supported today. One of things that I would like to see with the UC500 platform is to integrate it with the cloud without having to place it in front of a SA500, SR500, or ISR. Using VPNs in the integration of the UC500 with the cloud gets allows unsecured traffic to be encrypted and protected and also gets around the network address translation problem.

Some of the features that I would like to see in the successor to the UC520, UC540, and UC560 platforms:

  • Support for VPNs between the all-in-one UC appliance and servers in the cloud (as a GUI configurable feature).
  • Enhancements to multisite support
  • Gigabit Ethernet PoE ports
  • Wireless-N wireless capability
  • Dual WAN capability
  • IPv6 support
  • Increase in the number of VPN tunnels supported
  • Support for the SPA500, 6900, 7900, 8900, and 9900 series phones
  • Integration of the phone system with data applications
  • Call monitoring and recording directly supported on the all-in-one UC appliance. We already have customers that really need this feature.
  • Easier remote management of the all-in-one UC appliance and all of the other on-premise components of the UC solution. We often have to remotely make changes to telephony settings (such as adding and removing phones, adding and removing extensions, changing SIP connectivity settings, changing call flow, changing names on extensions and phones) on UC520 units.
  • Easy remote upgrading of the all-in-one UC appliance and other solution components. Most other Cisco products for small businesses are easier to remotely upgrade because the firmware upgrade can be easily pushed down to the device. The following makes upgrading the UC500 more complicated than most other Cisco products designed for small businesses:
    • UC500 has a CUE module that might have to be upgraded
    • The UC520 has limited flash memory
    • The UC500 has to pull the files from the device performing the upgrade, rather than having the device performing the upgrade push down the necessary files
    • When CUE has to be upgraded, the UC500 CUE module has to pull the CUE files from the device performing the upgrade. There is currently no method available for uploading the CUE upgrade files to the CUE module.
  • Ability to generate a configuration in a GUI and pushing it down to the target all-in-one UC appliance
JOHN NIKOLATOS Wed, 07/21/2010 - 11:53

Hi marcos -

I have a client that is a Hedge fund and they have a lot of calls that people dial into and listen to a seminar or something like that. One person listens to the information until there is important information for the traders and then they want to get into the same call and the original person who made the call to listen for a few minutes..  A few users asked about the ability to dial in or barge into a call to listen when important information is being said then disconnect afterwards.  Is there some feature that allows this in the UC500 IOS?

Marcos Hernandez Wed, 07/21/2010 - 15:48

Hi John,


An ideal solution for what you want would be Silent Monitoring, which we DO NOT support natively on UC500/CME. It can be done with Telrex's CallRex solution, which is very affordable and stable. UCCX also supports this capability, but our testing has been focused around Telrex and not UCCX.

cBarge could also be used, but they barge-in must be initiated from an IP phone, whereas with Telrex all you need is a desktop client to pull the live audio in real time (with no two-way audio capabilities).

More information on:

http://www.cisco.com/go/sbcsapps

I predict that CME will eventually support some form of silent monitoring, but it is not on the roadmap at this point in time.


Hope this helps,


Marcos

JOHN NIKOLATOS Wed, 07/21/2010 - 12:40

Hi Marcos -

Another question about support of UC520, 540 and 560.  I have come to really like the UC500 products.  These devices are very customizable and are helping my business grow in many ways.  For one I am an owner of a uc520 for my business.  I am also a Integrator and Reseller of the UC500 product line.  Here are my frustrations with UC540 and UC560 support vs. UC520 support.

1) Cisco is requiring use of CCA to configure UC540 and UC560 to get any support.

2) Cisco allows TAC support of UC520 and CLI support of UC520 but not on the UC540 and UC560.

The Cisco CCA software has come a long way but still can not completely configure almost any of my phone system installs.  I have installed dozens of UC500's.   On only one of them has CCA completely worked for me to the point where I can give the CCA software to my client without worrying that it is going to ruin the configuration.  This like Whisper, OCTO lines and FAX ONRAMP are not supported and these are things being demanded by my clients.  If I configure them, I can not get support from Cisco on the UC540 and UC560 because of the lack of CLI support.

Cisco really should give a SKU for TAC support of the UC540 and UC560.  The other day I had to wait 30 minutes to get someone of the line for UC540 support and they could not help me...  because I was remote to the client site 11pm with a system down... and could not get CCA to run remotely.  I had only telnet capabilities to the unit at the time.  It was very frustrating.

I called in once and had CCA access but the issue was that CCA kept crashing and not working properly.  I had a Priority support call with a system down.  Small Business Support said I could get a TAC engineer as the next level...  after two weeks I received a call from someone.

The CCA doesnt work for SPA525 and PVC2300 camera integration.  The wizard run and show all devices and you apply it and nothing.  This has happened with every install I worked on.  I have to set the phones to SIP configure from the webpage and then place the phones back on SCCP for the configurations to work.

The CCA doesnt work so well for IOS upgrades..  I have done this dozen of times and it just doesnt work well.  Sometimes it does, sometimes it does not, IOS upgrades are successful and CUE upgrades fail..

I added licenses to a UC560 with 16 base licences.  I added 3x 8 user licenses to bring me to 40 licenses and the CCA erased all the base system licenses and I had a total of 24 licenses.

The CCA just doesnt work.  it can not configure everything and it is really the wrong way to go with the UC540 and UC560.  I Think it is a good tool to do preliminary configurations but how can CIsco force us to use this tool when it does not work.  Or how can you not give us the option for CLI support?  This small business support is really going to have me stop selling support contracts or the UC540 and UC560 products altogether.  

Small Business Support for the UC540 and UC560 is really poor as well.  I have invested in Cisco and TAC service because of a certain level of support and response and knoweldge base which I am not getting on the UC540 and UC560.  Cisco really needs to bring service back to the TAC and stop with Small Business Support.

herts2201 Wed, 07/21/2010 - 16:49

HI! Marcos

I am new member of

Cisco community. I have been given a task to setup UC

540 as demo kit as our company has just started on CISCO

products for small bussiness. I have 5 phones s

pa 525g 2 spa509g. I have done everything i am stuc

k where i have to label atleast one bu

tton as an AUTOATTENDENT. so when we show our customers we do not need

dial 398. just press one button on any of the phone and it should go to auto attendent.

another question is when i connect spa500 expension modules with spa 509g phone and run CCA 2.2.4 it does not show up any expension module.

do i need to add any extra files for that or i am missing something. when i pluged the phone spa509g all the lights come up on expension module so i think it is working fine. just not showing up in the CCA 2.2.4 as expension module. so i can not programme any button.

i will be highly thankfull to you if you will point me in right direction.

thanks

hafiz

Marcos Hernandez Wed, 07/21/2010 - 20:27

Hi Hafiz,


Welcome to the Support Forums. Hopefully you will find them useful.

For your first question, a personal speed dial on the phones would do the trick. Please check page 338 of the CCA 2.2.4 Administration Guide for instructions on how to configure:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/net_mgmt/cisco_configuration_assistant/version2_2_4/administration_guide/cca_224_sbcs_admin_guide.pdf

On the SPA500S question, please confirm which Software Pack version (IOS, CUE, Phone loads, etc,) is installed on the system. You need to be using one  the latest 8.0.X packs in order for this to work.


Thanks,


Marcos

Marcos Hernandez Wed, 07/21/2010 - 19:34

John,

Thanks for your feedback. I forwarded it to the CCA Product Manager and the SBCS Product Line Manager, the owners of the tool. They would like to get on the phone with you to discuss roadmap plans and help Engineering do a post-mortem on the issues you have had. The offer is on the table and I would really advise you to use this opportunity to vent, and help us at the same time.

Now, let's talk about the future of CCA and UC500, but first let me state some facts. It is true that we have had an incredibly hard time creating a GUI for a device that was not designed to be "GUI-fied". The simple act of pushing configuration to IOS is a challenge. Only until very recently (in the last 18 months or so), the IOS team added an XML API that allows the configuration of a device using more "modern" techniques. Still, it is not fully operational and tools like CCA rely on the "serialization" of commands through a VTY session. This is one of the reasons why for complex operations, time for completing a task is high and performance is low. Parsing the configuration is not easy either. Unless you reformat the output of a "show run" or a "show startup" to XML, for example, (which is one of the things that the aforementioned XML API does but CCA doesn't use today), you have to rely on things like descriptions, specific parameter ranges (like dial peers) and banners to properly read the config back. This is extremely error-prone, as you have experienced. The problem is exacerbated when you inject out-of-band CLI, to the point that CCA becomes unusable. Finally, the feature gap between the initial version of CCA and what could be done in CLI was so vast, that we had to spend most of our effort over the last couple of years trying to bridge it. You said it, we have come a long way. For instance, the CCA Admin Guide is hundreds of pages today, so the features are there. When you focus on Time to Market, quality becomes a challenge. We are committed to testing and validating our tool to the best of our capabilities, but we obviously need to do a better job at that. Way too many quality issues are being found in the field by partners like yourself. This is unacceptable, and here is what we are doing to address this problem:

1) Our Sales Teams have been authorized to escalate critical issues that are reported with CCA, to the highest possible levels in TAC and the Business Unit.

2) We are realigning some Development and DevTest resources to harden CCA and make it more predictable. Over the next few months, our main focus will be QUALITY.

3) Better documentation and training are being developed, including best practices, a Site Survey document and Design Guides, to name a few.

Why the focus on CCA, you might wonder. The reason John is that CCA offers a way to scale the number of WW deployments of our Voice Solutions and move more product, without our resellers having to invest countless hours in getting trained on IOS. In other words, it gives us and our partners, better bang for our buck. This is the conclusion that we have reached after conducting several closed surveys and market studies. For a more specialized partner like yourself, this duality can become an impediment to growing your practice. The answer that we have for you today is UC520. Traditional TAC support (and therefore CLI support) for UC540 and UC560 is NOT planned. An alternative is to obtain an Express certification and position ISR's. You would give up certain things, like SPA500 support, some 3rd party applications, etc., but it is also the natural evolution for a reseller with your profile.

Regardless of what you do or what we are recommending that you do, we WILL FIX CCA. The Team is working non-stop to manage its predictability and performance and you should expect to see significant improvements over the next couple of releases.


Finally, on the question of TAC/Smartnet support for UC540 and 560, there are no plans to move to that model, main reason being cost and competitive positioning.

Thanks a lot for your feedback. You know how to reach me if you want to take us up on that offer to discuss the issues with the CCA PM Team.

Marcos

john_platts Thu, 07/29/2010 - 19:43

I have found the following problems with CCA:

  • CCA does not like multiple ephone-dns with the same extension and assigned to one or more phones. I often use shared extensions that are configured with two or more ephone-dns on the UC520.
  • CCA does not currently like shared octo-lines. I have successfully configured them, and I know that they work in the 7.1.x and 8.0.x software pack releases.
  • CCA does not like configurations where two or more phones share the same first line button in a PBX configuration. I have configured systems where two or more phones share the same first line  in a PBX configuration.
  • Several of the data and security features found on the SR520, UC520, UC540, and UC560 are not configurable in CCA and can only be configured using CLI. On the other hand, many of these features can be configured through a GUI on the ISR, ASA 5500, SA500, SRP500, and Cisco Small Business routers.

Will CCA support zone-based firewall on the UC520, UC540, and UC560 in the future? I know that CCA currently configures zone-based firewall on the SR520, but not on the UC520, UC540, or UC560.

Here are new features introduced in CME 8.0 that are not yet in CCA:

  • Multiple music on hold streams
  • Logical Partitioning Class of Restriction
  • Cancel Call Waiting

  • Do-not-disturb and privacy feature buttons

When will these new CME 8.0 features appear in CCA?

Marcos Hernandez Fri, 07/30/2010 - 07:46

John,

As your questions are more about future plans and not a specific problem related to UC500, I recommend that you contact your Pre-sales engineer or SBMM. They will be able to share details about the roadmap.


Thanks,

Marcos

marshallcromwell Thu, 07/22/2010 - 05:42

Marcos - is it possible to have a shared line (I assume it would have to be a Key System or Hybrid configuration) that can have multiple

people on that line on the same time (similar to a home phone)?

For example, Caller is on 1001 and if other staff in the office pick up 1001, they can participate on the call at the same time?

I know that we can set up conferencing, but they want the ability to have multiple people on the same line without having to engage a conference call.

If not on the UC500, is there anything withing the Cisco UC solution set that might work or other suggestions?

Marcos Hernandez Thu, 07/22/2010 - 06:29

Hi Marshall,

This feature is usually called "party line" and UC500/CME supports a very simple form of it using cBarge. You still need a conference resource, but joining and leaving is a lot simpler. From the documentation:


The cBarge feature uses a shared conference resource which allows more that one person to barge into the call. A cBarge conference supports the maximum number of parties provisioned on the centralized conference resource. The centralized conference resource must be provisioned to use cBarge. cBarge is supported on SCCP shared octo-line directory numbers and SIP shared-line directory numbers.

When any party releases from the call, the call remains a conference call if at least three participants remain on the line. If only two parties remain in the conference, they are reconnected as a point-to-point call, which releases the conference bridge resources. When the target party parks the call or joins the call with another call, the barge initiator and the other parties remain connected.

For UC500, cBarge is supported in CCA 2.2.5, scheduled to release in a few days.

More information on:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucme/admin/configuration/guide/cmebarge.html#wp1017969

Let me know if this helps.

Marcos

JOHN NIKOLATOS Fri, 07/23/2010 - 09:42

Marcos - can you give me an example of how cbarge works...  Would a user have to start a conference first?  How do you get the cbarge button to show up?  How could someone barge into a call?  I just never done it and am a little confused.  I am expecting to see a CBARGE button somewhere and I would image someone hits that nad then dials an extension to barge in on the call.....

Marcos Hernandez Fri, 07/23/2010 - 11:14

Hi John,


See below for sample CLI that I have working in my lab. Remember that cBarge will be in CCA 2.2.5, due in a few days.

A prerequisite is to have HW conferencing (ad-hoc) enabled and phone privacy needs to be off. You need to be on latest IOS and 8.0.X software pack (to ensure the phones pick up latest firmware)

Call flow would be something like this:

1) Phone A and Phone B are in a shared octo line. This means phones with no octo-line support won't support this feature, obviously.

2) Both phones are provisioned with a softkey template that has "cBarge" for the "Remote in Use" state

3) A calls C and the call is connected

4) B will see A as "Remote in Use" on the shared line.

5) How to join the call is described in the documentation:

The cBarge soft keys display by default when a phone user presses the shared-line button for an active remote-in-use call. The user selects either barge or cBarge to join the shared-line call. When there are multiple active calls on the shared line, the barge initiator can select which call to join by highlighting the call.

!

sccp local Loopback0

sccp ccm 10.1.1.1 identifier 1 version 4.1

sccp

!

sccp ccm group 1

associate ccm 1 priority 1

associate profile 3 register mtp123412341234

associate profile 1 register confprof1

!

dspfarm profile 3 transcode

codec g711ulaw

codec g711alaw

codec g729abr8

codec g729ar8

codec g729r8

maximum sessions 2

associate application SCCP

!

dspfarm profile 1 conference

codec g711ulaw

codec g711alaw

codec g729ar8

codec g729abr8

codec g729r8

codec g729br8

maximum sessions 2

associate application SCCP

!

telephony-service

sdspfarm conference mute-on 111 mute-off 222

sdspfarm units 5

sdspfarm transcode sessions 8

sdspfarm unregister force

sdspfarm tag 1 confprof1

sdspfarm tag 3 mtp123412341234

no privacy

!

!

ephone-template 13

softkeys remote-in-use  CBarge Newcall

softkeys idle  Redial Newcall Cfwdall Pickup Gpickup Dnd Login

softkeys seized  Cfwdall Endcall Redial Pickup Gpickup Callback

softkeys connected  Hold Endcall Trnsfer Confrn Acct Park

!

ephone-dn 30  octo-line

no call-waiting beep

number 250 secondary 12149999999 no-reg primary

label Marcos

description Marcos

name Miller Marcos

preference 1 secondary 1

call-forward busy 299

call-forward noan 299 timeout 25

corlist incoming user-domestic

!

!

ephone-dn 45  dual-line

number C001 no-reg primary

conference ad-hoc

no huntstop

!

!

ephone-dn 46  dual-line

number C001 no-reg primary

conference ad-hoc

preference 1

no huntstop

!

!

ephone-dn 47  dual-line

number C001 no-reg primary

conference ad-hoc

preference 2

no huntstop

!

!

ephone-dn 48  dual-line

number C001 no-reg primary

conference ad-hoc

preference 3

!

!

ephone-dn 49  dual-line

number C002 no-reg primary

conference ad-hoc

no huntstop

!

!

ephone-dn 50  dual-line

number C002 no-reg primary

conference ad-hoc

preference 1

no huntstop

!

!

ephone-dn 51  dual-line

number C002 no-reg primary

conference ad-hoc

preference 2

no huntstop

!

!

ephone-dn 52  dual-line

number C002 no-reg primary

conference ad-hoc

preference 3

!

!

ephone 1

no privacy

ephone-template 13

button 2:30

!

ephone 2

no privacy

ephone-template 13

button 2:30

!

ephone 3

no privacy

ephone-template 13

button 2:30

!

Let me know if this helps,

Marcos

JOHN NIKOLATOS Fri, 07/23/2010 - 12:11

Marcos - thanks just before you sent this I got it to work..  It was hard from the documentation to tell that you needed the same SHARED line on each phone...

This is a good solution for the question I asked about SHARING a line...  for conference where one person dials into the conference and then tells other people to join after important information is being said...

Steve Davis Thu, 07/22/2010 - 11:57

Hello Marcos,

My client has a UC560 with the lates IOS and CME, 8.0

We are interested in the silent monitoring and call recording and I saw your post below.  I will be looking into Telrex but as far as UCCX I have a couple questions.  This is compatible with UCCX 8.0 Enhanced, correct?  Also, how many agents on the UC560/CME does it support.  I saw the UC560 documentation states only 12, but this documentation looks like it was written when it first came out. Has this agent limitation increased with the new CME.

Thanks for your help!

Steve

Marcos Hernandez Thu, 07/22/2010 - 12:50

Steve,

The documentation you are referring to is stale and we should really stop distributing it. We DO NOT promote the integration of UCCX with UC500. It hasn't been tested in ages and none of our Select partners can sell it. Forgive me for being so candid, but I don't want to waste your time. Do NOT position UCCX with UC500.

Thanks. Feel free to contact me anytime.

Marcos

JOHN NIKOLATOS Fri, 07/23/2010 - 12:19

Marcos - I have a few users with SPA525's and the 2300 cameras.  The SPA525 has a door solution.  I have installed 3 cameras and we have users with 525's watching the doors for when someone hits a buzzer.  The buzzer calls an extension on the phone system and all is working but here is the problem.

The SPA525's do not allow you to dial numbers within the camera view..  so if they leave their phones on camera view and someone calls the extension they can answer and ask how it is but are unable to DIAL the code to open the door.  They have to exit the Video interface and then dial the extension which takes a while to do...  YOu have to exit the camera view, then the camera options, then the settings menu and then get to a place where it your dial the phone buttons they actually give a tone to the door..

I notice a DOOR button on the SPA525's and I notice it is a URL code.... but maybe you can have it send DTMF tone as well?  I just need to be able to dial a code like 12345 so the dorr module hears it...

What is the DOOR URL anyway?

John Nikolatos

www.niktek.com

JOHN NIKOLATOS Fri, 07/23/2010 - 12:52

Marcos - one more point...

About a month ago or so, the SPA525 camera view had a button that said CALL not DOOR... and when I configured that I could get it to dial an extension of a phone...  but it seems that is no longer there? 

OK I added the "associated caller ID" and now I get a dial button and I can dial the door... but it kicks me out of the camera view...

Marcos Hernandez Fri, 07/23/2010 - 13:38

Right, that is the enhancement I mentioned earlier. I will forward your request to the SPA5252G Product Team.


Marcos

Marcos Hernandez Fri, 07/23/2010 - 13:34

Hi John,

Right now, it is not possible to dial a number without leaving the video screen. I will send this feedback to the Phone Team for consideration (I know this enhancement is coming, but we do not have an ETA).

The Door URL is a parameter currently available in the configuration UI, with its corresponding softkey in the Video screen. The idea is that after pushing a button, the phone will trigger an action to the I/O ports of a PVC2300/WVC2300 video camera using the camera API. This action is invoked via HTTP (therefore the need for a URL). You can find more information on the Camera Admin Guide:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/security/csbvsc/pvc2300_wvc2300/administration/guide/PVC2300_WVC2300_V20_UG_A.pdf

Also, if you need the API documentation for the camera, please contact your Sales SE or SBMM.


I know you probably don't want to add another component, but you could consider a Callbox from Cyberdata (using SIP), which comes with a door built-in relay. Take a look at this integration document that I wrote:

https://supportforums.cisco.com/click.jspa?searchID=14107478&objectType=102&objectID=9496

Finally, for the benefit of the broader Community, here are the manual configuration instructions for the MonitorView feature, with a little YouTube video demonstration:

https://supportforums.cisco.com/docs/DOC-9806

Let me know if this helps.


Marcos

Corrected my statement regarding the Door Softkey. I meant to say we do have it.

john_platts Fri, 07/23/2010 - 12:56

I have noticed that the following pre-Small Business Pro SBCS solution components have been phased out and replaced with Small Business Pro products:

  • Catalyst Express 520 series switches (replaced by ESW 500 series switches)
  • AP521 wireless access points (replaced by AP541N wireless AP)
  • 526 wireless mobility controller
  • CP-521G, CP-524G, CP-521SG, and CP-524SG (replaced by SPA50x phones)

I have not seen an end-of-life notice for the UC520. Are there plans to phase out the UC520 and only offer the newer UC500 models?

Have the 3rd generation UC500 models already been planned? There are some improvements that were not made on the UC540 and UC560 models that should be made on the 3rd generation UC500 models.

Marcos Hernandez Fri, 07/23/2010 - 13:06

Hi John,


There are no current plans to EOL the UC520. There are also no plans for a 3rd generation UC500 family, at least not for now.

Thanks,


Marcos

john_platts Fri, 07/23/2010 - 15:09

The 7925G and 7925G-EX were the only 7900 series phones released in the last two years. All of the other 7900 series phones have been out for over 2 years. I know that Cisco has discontinued the 7940G, 7941G, 7941G-GE, 7960G, 7961G, 7961G-GE, 7970G, and 7971G-GE phones.

Are there plans to release new 7900 series phones, or is the 7900 series going to be replaced by the 6900, 8900, and 9900 series phones?

Features that are available on the 7942G, 7945G, 7962G, 7965G, and 7975G phones, but not available on the 7931G phone:

  • Octo-line support
  • SSL VPN client
  • iLBC codec support
  • Wideband speaker
  • Additional XML phone application capabilities
  • Larger LCD display
  • 10/100/1000 Ethernet on 7945G, 7965G, and 7975G
  • Touch screen on 7975G

Are there plans to release a new 793x phone with a button layout similar to the 7931G phone?

I have seen information about SPA300 series and SPA525G2  phones. Do these phones support octo-line? I have heard about future  plans for octo line on SPA500 phones in a webcast about the SPA500  series phones. Will there be support for octo-line on the existing  SPA500 series phones in the future, or will it only be supported on  future models?

Octo-line has been a must have feature for any new IP phone supported on the UC500 platform, as these features are dependent on octo line support:

  • Extension mobility involving octo-line extensions
  • Shared octo-lines
  • Conference barge (cBarge)

I have read the release notes for the 9.0(2)SR1, 9.0(2)SR2, and 9.0(3) releases for the TNP phones, and I noticed that the 7942G, 7945G, 7962G, 7965G, and 7975G phones now support the SSL VPN client with the 9.0(2)SR1 release or later. When will the 9.0 firmware release for TNP phones be added to the UC500 software packs?

Marcos Hernandez Sat, 07/24/2010 - 14:00

Focus for the high-end phone families will definitely be shifted to the 6900/8900/9900 phones over time, but the 7900's remain a safe bet for a high quality device.


I am not aware of any plans to add another 793X phone.

Octo-line support is planned for the SPA525G. I have not heard of any plans to support octo on the SPA300.

For the time being, UC500 software packs will remain on current phone firmware (for 7900's). I do not have an estimate on when this will change.

Marcos

Steven DiStefano Sat, 07/24/2010 - 21:18

Marcos,

I have not heard the APS525G or SPA525G phone will support Octal line and didnt think it had the HW capability to support this.

This is pretty important to understand and my apology for asking (I know you are the expert) :-)

Steve

Marcos Hernandez Sun, 07/25/2010 - 14:56

Hi Steve,


Thanks for jumping in. I stand corrected, there are no plans to support octo-lines on the SPA500 series (any model). I was going by an old roadmap presentation, but I called the Phone Product Manager and he clarified. I apologize for the confusion.

Marcos

j.miller_32 Mon, 07/26/2010 - 16:22

Hi Marcos, 


Does the UC500 offer options to secure my network when deploying SIP Trunks?


Thanks

Marcos Hernandez Tue, 07/27/2010 - 07:21

Hi,

CCA supports, for all the ITSP's included in the list, the authentication for the SIP trunks that uses the digest mechanism.

If you are referring to security as in encryption for the SIP trunk, the UC500 CLI supports Transport Layer Security (TLS) for encryption of the SIP signaling (not media), which hardens the aforementioned authentication mechanism. You can find more information on:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/docs/ios/12_4t/12_4t11/FeatTLS.html

This is NOT supported in CCA, even with customized SIP Trunk configuration via the XML templates. The reason is that TLS requires that you enroll to a CA server, and this part is done outside of the SIP Trunk parameters.

Another important aspect of this is the support for TLS on the ITSP side. I don't know of any major SP (at least in the US) that supports TLS. TLS is usually seen in private connections across the Internet.

For media encryption, the IOS CLI supports SRTP. As with TLS, the ITSP gateways must be SRTP-aware and I know of none that are (at least in North America). Also, no CCA support for this feature. More info on:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/docs/ios/voice/sip/configuration/guide/sip_cg-srtp_ps6441_TSD_Products_Configuration_Guide_Chapter.html

Some ITSP's have resolved the incompatibility problems by requiring a full blown VPN connection between the customer and their facilities.

In short, the underlying IOS is capable of securing the SIP trunk, but the fact that not many ITSP's support this, and the fact that CCA doesn't yet have the feature, deem this implementation impractical.

I hope this helps,

Marcos

endtimeprophet Tue, 07/27/2010 - 07:01

I have a situation Marcus. We recently acquired the UC520 SBCS the one with integrated Wi-Fi. My boss has given me the job to deploy it. I read through the getting started with CCA and was basically ready to begin configuration. But my boss stopped me from going ahead saying i must come up with a deployment plan of some sort. You see my argument with him is this equipment comes ready to go from the box. But he wouldnt allow me to touch it without this deployment plan. Basically he is looking at things like, what IP scheme we will use, how i plan to deploy the SR520 router at his house and things like that. I have never installed one of these before and my reading says i must power it up (the uc500) and run the phone wizard. The SR-520 will be installed at his house. He has adsl internet there (I will obviously use the sr 520 utility). Our ip phones are SPA 525G. Is there any checklist i can use to plan my installation better. I am looking at a document that will list all the things we will configure on the uc500 and on the router. The uc500 has intergrated 8port poe switch. Our office is small with a max of 10 users. Can you please help with an initial deployment video for dummies per say? I am running out of time and dont know what do. Apparently this is also going to serve as a demo for a client who wishes to deploy ip fones in there firm.

endtimeprophet Tue, 07/27/2010 - 07:31

Graig,

Thank you so much. This will definitely help me. I hope tomorow wednesday 28 july 2010, i will make a point with my boss. thanks once again. you are a life saver.

Elijah.

Marcos Hernandez Tue, 07/27/2010 - 07:34

Elijah,


The Site Survey Craig mentions is a very good reference for what you want. I would also advise you to use and follow the Small Business Smart Designs, which provide instructions on how to deploy your scenarios and improve the chances of success. You can tell your boss that you are following the recommended guidelines, and then blame Cisco if it doesn't work ;-)

More info on (Partner login required):

https://supportforums.cisco.com/docs/DOC-9587

Here is the direct link:

http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/sell/smb/tools_and_resources/smart_business_comm_system.html

The site seems to be down right now due to some kind of maintenance. Try again later.


Thanks,

Marcos

endtimeprophet Tue, 07/27/2010 - 07:50

Thank you Marcos,

I am hopeful that the Small Business Smart Designs link you have given me will shed more light on my situation. I have tried like you said it appears offline. But once again thank you for all the wonderful things you guys at cisco do.

Elijah.

inewman@lizden.com Tue, 07/27/2010 - 14:47

Hello Marcos,

I have a question about site connections.

I have two office locations (T1) and one home (cable modem). UC520 8 users license, and SPA525G. Currently the sites are connected but the config was done by someone else. When I use CCA 2.2.2 and click multi site management it says this configuration is not supported, as well as the the firewall tab.

I recently got an offer from my ISP/Telco that would give me much better rates if I have all my phone numbers on one bill/location. Can I have one of my UC520's be the main gateway for all external calls (the one at HQ), so my second site would use the lines/trunks at HQ?

If so can I configure this will CCA 2.2.2? Will I run into licenseing issues (each site is maxed out with 8 users at each locaion)? What documentaion should I read up on?

Thank you!

Marcos Hernandez Tue, 07/27/2010 - 22:13

Hi,

The licensing is not a problem, since phones will still register to their local UC500. The issue here is that the CCA multisite manager is not designed to handle centralized call control scenarios, but rather extension to extension dialing (on two or more different sites).

The good news is that you can implement a CLI workaround and still get support for your UC520. If you email me at marchern@cisco.com and send me both configurations, I can suggest which CLI edits are necessary, so you don't have to reconfigure your system from scratch.


Thanks!

Marcos

john_platts Thu, 07/29/2010 - 19:44

I noticed that CCA 2.2 and earlier were released within 4 months of the last major release, but 8 months have elapsed after the CCA 2.2 release and CCA 2.3 has not yet been released. Why was CCA 2.3 delayed for so long? Will there be as long as a delay between CCA 2.3 and CCA 2.4, or will CCA 2.4 be released within 3-4 months of CCA 2.3?

Marcos Hernandez Fri, 07/30/2010 - 07:42

John,

There are plans for a 2.2.5 release of CCA (due in a couple of weeks or so) and a 3.0 fall release.

Marcos

bcronje Fri, 07/30/2010 - 01:27

Hi Marcos,

From a pre-sales point of view, where does Cisco position the UC500 series compared with CME on ISR router? To me it seems that whenever we have a customer that requires voice and WAN/Internet data connectivity it always makes more sense to go with CME as the UC500 series lacks any WIC slots. So I'm a bit unclear as to when UC500 will be a better choice than CME.

Also, can the UC500 interconnect with other SIP/H323 systems via trunks? I.e. If the customer has 3 branches, can one interconnect these branches using the UC500 series?

Thanks

Beyers Cronje

Marcos Hernandez Fri, 07/30/2010 - 07:57

Hi Beyers,

We recommend that UC500 be deployed as a voice appliance primarily. ISR's being multi-purpose and as you correctly point out, expandable, are normally used in the SMB space to combine WAN termination and multi-service applications (voice, security, VPN, etc.). Even though some of these applications are also present in UC500, you will notice that they will always tend to gravitate towards voice, and their corresponding scalability numbers are typically lower than ISR.


There is another dimension in our positioning, and it is support. UC500 currently enjoys a specific and more comprehensive support model than its larger counterparts (with the exception of UC520, which is still supported by traditional TAC).

Finally, a third dimension is partner profile and certification. UC500 requires that you obtain a Cisco certification that is more reachable, giving you the option to evolve into more advanced specializations that would allow you to position ISR's. We are not opposed to this idea and we actually encourage and celebrate this growth in our partners' practices.

Thanks,


Marcos

Actions

Login or Register to take actions

This Discussion

Posted July 16, 2010 at 1:36 PM
Stats:
Replies:55 Avg. Rating:5
Views:14034 Votes:0
Shares:0
Tags: No tags.

Discussions Leaderboard