01-13-2014 03:40 PM - edited 03-19-2019 07:45 AM
We're planning a migration from Call manager and Unity 7 to CUCM and Unity Connection 9.
I wanted to baseline the current voicemail port utilization on our Unity 7 systems to validate the port requirements for Connection.
However the Unity Toolkit Port Usage tool won't run properly on our systems.
We have Unity 7.0(2) mix of ES 35 and ES44
Most of the systems have an older version of the port usage tool installed. (2.0.0.2)
They return an endless set of popup warnings regarding a parsing error:
PortUsageAnalyzer "Error in ParseLogFile Routine: Subscript out of range Number =9"
One of the systems has a newer version of the port usage tool installed (2.0.0.5)
It tells me that there are no calls present in the log data.
What irks me is that I swear that I successfully ran the port tool on this system a few months ago for another project.
So either it got upgraded to a newer version that's incompatible, or something else is wrong.
In both cases I cannot get the data I am looking for.
Any suggestions on how to get the port usage tool working with my Unity 7 system?
Can I get a copy of version 2.0.0.3 or 2.0.0.4 if they would work better?
I don't see a way to download prior versions online.
Thanks,
Vivien
Solved! Go to Solution.
01-14-2014 05:54 AM
couple things I can fill in at any rate...
1. the Unity version of the port Usage Analyzer tool hasn't been touched in over 4 years (September of 2009) so it wasn't updated out from under you, I assure you! That was when 2.0.0.5 was put out - 2.0.0.3 and 4 were only out shortly and were mostly about moving the max ports suport up to 144 and then again to 256 - no other parsing changes were made in there.
2. the reason 2.0.0.2 had to be updated along the way was because the logging format changed a couple times and parsing out the port data had to be updated to match it (this is very likely the subscript out of range error you see on 2.0.0.2).
3. One possibility - if you're running a cluster (failover) scenario the logging data does not replicate between the systems - it's worth checking both pri/sub servers.
it's possible your log files really don't contain port usage data for the timeframe you're looking for (i.e. logs get purged) - I know the first instinct is when you run a tool and it doesn't work it must be the tool that's broken but in this case the parsing is pretty straight forward.
01-14-2014 05:46 AM
Unity connection ports are free so install ova template that supports as many or more ports as your current system.
Chris
Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPhone App
01-14-2014 05:07 PM
That's good to know, but I was trying to model the WAN bandwidth requirement if I have my primary and secondary servers in two different sites. The guidlelines say that you need to model that based on the number of ports configured.
I do have a clarifying question about that - will the BW need scale with the number of ports configured or the number of ports USED? If it's the latter then I can still take your advice and just configure Maxports without worrying about blowing up the WAN link.
-Vivien
01-14-2014 05:54 AM
couple things I can fill in at any rate...
1. the Unity version of the port Usage Analyzer tool hasn't been touched in over 4 years (September of 2009) so it wasn't updated out from under you, I assure you! That was when 2.0.0.5 was put out - 2.0.0.3 and 4 were only out shortly and were mostly about moving the max ports suport up to 144 and then again to 256 - no other parsing changes were made in there.
2. the reason 2.0.0.2 had to be updated along the way was because the logging format changed a couple times and parsing out the port data had to be updated to match it (this is very likely the subscript out of range error you see on 2.0.0.2).
3. One possibility - if you're running a cluster (failover) scenario the logging data does not replicate between the systems - it's worth checking both pri/sub servers.
it's possible your log files really don't contain port usage data for the timeframe you're looking for (i.e. logs get purged) - I know the first instinct is when you run a tool and it doesn't work it must be the tool that's broken but in this case the parsing is pretty straight forward.
01-14-2014 05:05 PM
Thanks - I'll get the newer version on the servers with 2.0.0.2.
And your suspicion about the server with missing data was right on target -
it was in failover and I didn't think to check that beforehand.
Thanks,
Vivien
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide