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

CCM 5.1.3 Attendant Console Extra ? **LASTNAME** **PRIMARYEXTENSION**

Since patching to 5.1.3, Atttendant Consoles have 6 extra rows at the top with ? **LASTNAME** and in the Telephone Field **PRIMARYEXTENSION**. Until the upgrade, these were not present.

2 REPLIES
Hall of Fame Super Red

Re: CCM 5.1.3 Attendant Console Extra ? **LASTNAME** **PRIMARYEX

Hi Jackie,

Can you check to see if you had perhaps used BAT to insert 6 Users previously. There is a really odd 5.1 Bug that actually puts this info into the Directory;

You may be hitting this very odd Bug;

CSCsh53133 Bug Details

BAT overwrites last names with **LASTNAME**

Symptom:

When using Bulk Administration / Users / Update User function, BAT overwrites last names with **LASTNAME**

Conditions:

The BAT file looks as follows:

USER ID,PASSWORD,MANAGER USER ID,DEPARTMENT,PIN,DEFAULT PROFILE,USER LOCALE,TELEPHONE NUMBER,PRIMARY EXTENSION,ASSOCIATED PC,IPCC EXTENSION,MAIL ID,USER GROUP 1,CONTROLLED PROFILE 1,CONTROLLED DEVICE 1

userid,,,test,,,,,,,,,,Standard CCM End Users,SEPXXXXXXXXXXXX

Workaround:

1. Modify BAT file so it includes 'LAST NAME' field set to '*'. This field should be before the user group, user profile and controlled device fields.

Example:

USER ID,LAST NAME,PASSWORD,MANAGER USER ID,DEPARTMENT,PIN,DEFAULT PROFILE,USER LOCALE,TELEPHONE NUMBER,PRIMARY EXTENSION,ASSOCIATED PC,IPCC EXTENSION,MAIL ID,USER GROUP 1,CONTROLLED PROFILE 1,CONTROLLED DEVICE 1

userid,*,,,test,,,,,,,,,,Standard CCM End Users,SEPXXXXXXXXXXXX

2. When using above BAT file, specify '*' in the 'Value for fields to be ignored' field on the BAT job configuration page.

1st Found-In

5.1(1.1000.3)

Fixed-In

5.1(1.2105.1)

5.1(1.9131.22)

5.1(1.9131.23)

5.1(2.1000.11)

6.0(0.9901.136)

6.0(1.1000.37)

6.1(0.39000.15)

6.1(0.39000.16)

Hope this helps!

Rob

Community Member

Re: CCM 5.1.3 Attendant Console Extra ? **LASTNAME** **PRIMARYEX

We have been up and running for quite a while and only until 5.1.1.4000, 5.1.2.1000,

5.1.2.3000, 5.1.3.1000 were applied did we encounter this issue.

158
Views
0
Helpful
2
Replies
CreatePlease to create content