Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

Odd publisher <-> Subscriber behavior

I recently had to rebuild our Publisher, and during the process the subscriber replication agreements were broken.

I've used the instructions available online to recreate the replication agreements, but now I have a cosmetic issue.

I have one publisher and two subscribers (a third will be online soon).

Each subscriber is responsible for a specific device pool. All servers are

allowing registration, but when viewing the device status in CCM, some phones are shown as unregistered.

Using CCM on the Publisher, I can see active phones on itself and the 1st Subscriber. All others are listed as unregistered.

Using CCM on the 2nd Subscriber, I can see phones on itself and the Publisher. All others are listed as unregistered.

Using CCM on the 3rd Subscriber, I can see phones on itself and the Publisher. All others are listed as unregistered.

Is there a mechanism that the SQL server should be using to notify the

Publisher of registrations on the subscribers?

5 REPLIES

Re: Odd publisher <-> Subscriber behavior

I was wondering what ver of CCM your running, on 3.3.2,

I have seen on 3.3.2, if you login to webadmin on the sub, the devices registered with that server are listed as registered, all other are listed as unregistered, not sure if this is by design or not.

Another thing, if your device pools are backed up by another server, do the devices re-register properly with the backup ccm server ?

Third, are all 3 servers running the same ver of CCM ??????? and the same patch levels???

-Todd

New Member

Re: Odd publisher <-> Subscriber behavior

Sorry, I meant to include that. All three are running 3.2(2C).

I'd believe that it is by design, except that each server displays the registered

phones on two of the three servers.

I believe they do re-register properly. I have not forced a fail-over, but when I

deployed the last subscriber, I updated the CM group and restarted the phones, and they did register with their new primary (but I didn't know that since webadmin showed them as unregistered).

Re: Odd publisher <-> Subscriber behavior

I know this is a pain, but rather than try to re-establish broken links, I've found it just as easy (and more reliable) to rebuild the subscriber.

The installation of the subscriber does all of the link re-creation for you as part of the proccess and you know you have a good build, with nothing suspect.

You should just re-home all the handsets to different servers before you start the re-build to make sure they don't try and move back too early. The whole proccess should only take a couple of hours per subscriber. Oh and make sure you keep the server names the same as before.

Paul

New Member

Re: Odd publisher <-> Subscriber behavior

I was afraid it might come to that. I may check with the TAC to see if they encountered this and have any recommendations, but I guess I'll start to just have to get used to the idea.

We use the A/D plugin, are trying to use IPMA and I've noticed that the upgrade/same-server replacement processes don't handle these plugins particularly well. On the bright side I can re-install and configure these features with my eyes closed after the last couple 'upgrade' attempts.

Re: Odd publisher <-> Subscriber behavior

Here is one last suggestion, try to power down the entire 3 servers in the cluster, bring up the publisher, the start the subscribers, this will re-establish the SDL intra cluster connections and hence replication for the sql as well. It may be worth a try prior to rebuilding the subscribers.

127
Views
0
Helpful
5
Replies