CUCM 8.6.2 to 10.5 with pcd

Hi,
Im going to upgrade my cucm 8.6.2 (UCS C220 esxi 5.0) to 10.5 using pcd.
What are the require file for this process from below list or let me know if required another.
ciscocm.refresh_upgrade_v1.5.cop.sgn
UCSInstall_UCOS_10.5.1.10000-7.sgn.iso
https://software.cisco.com/download/release.html?mdfid=285963825&softwareid=282074295&release=10.5(1)&flowid=50402
or
Bootable_UCSInstall_UCOS_10.5.1.10000-7.sgn.iso
does it required bootable image(Bootable_UCSInstall_UCOS_10.5.1.10000-7.sgn.iso) or can we use (UCSInstall_UCOS_10.5.1.10000-7.sgn.iso)
Thanks,

Hi All,
i have a issue with common partition disk space while checking before the upgrade task.
i have deleted some file by following method.
1- delete some core file using RTMT but still its 22GB
(trace and log center - > remote browse -.> crash dumps -> cisco callmanager/cisco ctimanager)
2- file delete activelog /cm/trace/ccm/sdi/* noconfirm
3- changed the high/low level water mark
but still its 22GB free.
is there any other way to get free space without using ciscocm.free_common_space_v1.1.cop.sgn
since i cannot revert to previous version in case of any issue.
Thanks.
I

Similar Messages

CUCM 8.6.2.20000-2 integrated with Office 365?

Hi people,
VOICE MAIL APPLICATION:
Does anybody knows something like that? How to integrate with Cisco Unified Communication Manager 8.6? It is similar the integration with Exchange 2010?
Best regards,
Daniel

Unless you can create a SIP trunk on Office 365 and allow traffic to pass between CUCM and Office 365 across the SIP trunk it would not work. Cisco never supported any Exchange UM for voicemail, it works, but if you have issues Cisco is not going to help you there. No different here, if you can get it to work based on the above, then support is on you.
HTH,
Chris

Migrating a CUCM-SME with PCD

Hi,
can a CUCM Session Management Edition be migrated using PCD?
I suppose yes, since that is like a classic CUCM without phone registered.
Thanks and regards,
Christian

It should be possible, as you mention, it's just a CUCM that is just performing trunking function, nothing different from any other CUCM with phones attached to it.

CUCM 9.1 Bulk Insert Remote Destinations with a +

If I try a bulk insert of remote destinations that begin with a + sign (eg +15552125555) I get the following error:
"A character to numeric conversion process failed"
If i create the remote destination manually it works fine so I know that the string can contain a + sign. and If I export the existing remote destinations the format is identical to my csv. Is there anything that needs to be done for it to correctly handle the + character?

CSV file attached. I've removed the identifyig information but this is what i exported from the call manager. If I try to import it back in it throws that error.

Error with pcd:portal_content/com.sap.pct/platform_add_ons/com.sap.ip.bi/

Hi!
I am facing with either authorization or some other problem within interaction between BEx Analyzer and Portal.
When try to check the functionality of the object
pcd:portal_content/com.sap.pct/platform_add_ons/com.sap.ip.bi/iViews/com.sap.ip.bi.bexanalyzer
via "Preview"
I get the following error:
com.sapportals.portal.prt.runtime.PortalRuntimeException: Exception in SAP Application Integrator occured: Unable to parse template
Can some one help me to solve my problem?
What are the steps to integrate BEX Integration into SAP EP?
I am on SAP EP 7.0 SPS 17.
Thank you very much!
regards

Hi Holger,
As you aptly said its the authorization problem. The role which we are assigning to the user must have permissions set. Please make 'Everyone' user with end user permissions and for the everyone group also. After this restart your server. Also pls chk for the full Domain name URL thru which we are accessiong portal
Please check SAP Note 890314 .
This will surely help you.
hope this was useful.
Regards
Shaila

While Accessing UWL iviews - Issues with PCD Paths.

Hello All,
We Are using EP 7.0 SP 18.
I am trying to access the UWL iview with two different paths.
Path1 :--> http://xxxx:50xxx/irj/servlet/prt/portal/prtroot/pcd!3aportal_content!2fevery_user!2fgeneral!2feu_core_role!2fcom.sap.uwl.home_core_ws!2fcom.sap.netweaver.bc.uwl.overview!2fcom.sap.netweaver.bc.uwl.uwl_page!2fcom.sap.netweaver.bc.uwl.uwl_iview
For Path1 UWL iview is opening in a new Window with out Portal Frame Work page(i.e with out TLN and DTN).But if click on any task , the respective task information popup is opening with Portal Frame work page , TLN,DTN. The Task information is Showing in Content Area Part.
Path2 : --> http://xxx:50xxx/irj/portal?NavigationTarget=pcd:portal_content/every_user/general/eu_core_role/com.sap.uwl.home_core_ws/com.sap.netweaver.bc.uwl.overview/com.sap.netweaver.bc.uwl.uwl_page/com.sap.netweaver.bc.uwl.uwl_iview
For Path2 UWL is opening in a new Window With Portal Frame Work Page(With TLN ,DTN), but if i click on any task , the respective task infomation popup is opening in Simple Task infomation Window With out any Portal FrameWork Page(No DTN,TLN)
I wanted to know what is the Difference between these two portal paths? Which Property is Controlling the Portal Frame work page for these Popup's.
And also How to give the path in the Portal-app.xml [ property name ="xxx" , value = "pcd:portal_content/----
While we retrive with profile.getProperty(" xxx ").
Please Specify any prefixes we need to mention in the Portal-app.xml Value attribute ????
My Requirement is to task Information Popup Not to open with Portal FrameWork Pages (i.e wtih Masthead, TLN, DTN)
Thanks in Advance
Ganesh

Hi GLM ,
Thanks for your response, but still i didn't get the answer for my query??
If i open the UWL iview with path1 --> http://xxxxxx:50xxx/irj/servlet/prt/portal/prtroot/pcd!3aportal_content!2fevery_user!2fgeneral!2feu_core_role!2fcom.sap.uwl.home_core_ws!2fcom.sap.netweaver.bc.uwl.overview!2fcom.sap.netweaver.bc.uwl.uwl_page!2fcom.sap.netweaver.bc.uwl.uwl_iview
In the UWL iview , if i click on any task , task information popup with portal framework page is having the below path
http://xxxx:50xxx/webdynpro/dispatcher/sap.com/ess~lea/LeaveRequestApprover;jsessionid=(J2EE18708900)ID0119451551DB00027146301853284939End?sap-ext-sid=c4SpjkIxw3oBtgYJAM21A--DLq8JAHogHUEDoyoN1_KA--&sap-wd-cltwndid=WID1252057673082&sap-wd-tstamp=1252057673240&sap-locale=en&sap-accessibility=&sap-rtl=&sap-ep-version=7.00.200902051510&sap-cssurl=http%3A%2F%2Fxxxxl%3A50100%2Firj%2Fportalapps%2Fcom.sap.portal.design.urdesigndata%2Fthemes%2Fportal%2FBekaertBranding%2Fur%2Fur_ie6.css%3F7.0.18.0.2&sap-cssversion=7.0.18.1.0&sap-tray-type=PLAIN&sap-tray-padding=X&wi_id=000008952152
If i open the UWL iview with path2 ---> http://xxxx:50xxx/irj/portal? NavigationTarget=pcd:portal_content/every_user/general/eu_core_role/com.sap.uwl.home_core_ws/com.sap.netweaver.bc.uwl.overview/com.sap.netweaver.bc.uwl.uwl_page/com.sap.netweaver.bc.uwl.uwl_iview
UWL Iview is Opening in Portal Framework page window, if click on any task , task information popup(without framework page)
is having the below path.
http://xxx:50xxx/webdynpro/dispatcher/sap.com/ess~lea/LeaveRequestApprover;jsessionid=(J2EE18708900)ID0863376650DB00007048691018306318End
If u clearly observe both the paths, its different.
Please Suggest me how both pcd paths are giving different views. I need to display my task information popup window with out any portal framework page.
Thanks in Advance
Ganesh

How to set user checkbox permission with pcd api.

Hello,
I want assign group permissions to PCD objects, with the PCD API. I could create ACLs but can't set the User checkbox for the new created ACLs. Any ideas how to manage this.

The end user check box is the same as setting 'Pcd.Use'. The role assignment is the same as 'com.sap.portal.pcd.roleservice.roles.Assign'. I'm not sure if these are official! I just use them in some of my own code...

Problems with Pcd Content after restore EP Portal with online Backup

Dear Colleagues,
We have problems to show Pcd Content (Browse and Search) of the Content Administration tab of the EP Portal after restore with a online Backup during Disaster Recovery Test.
Restore has become on a mirror system of Production environment. Ours EP Portal is a cluster system with the following configuration:
Production landscape:
Node 1
Disk K:\ SAP SCS directory. (Clustered)
Disk E:\ SAP Central Instance directory (Local)
Node 2
Disk E:\ SAP Dialogue Instance directory (Local)
Disk M:\ SQL Datafiles. (Clustered)
Disk L:\ SQL Logfiles. (Clustered)
Disaster Recovery landscape:
Only a Node
Disk K:\ SAP SCS directory. (Clustered)
Disk E:\ SAP Central Instance directory (Local)
Disk M:\ SQL Datafiles
Disk L:\ SQL Logfiles
Portal Version
J2EE Engine = 6.40 PatchLevel 105424.313
Portal = 6.0.18.0.0
After restore, the data base as the SAP application starts
correctly but when logon in the Portal, the Pcd Content of Content Administration tab
and to other tabs with similar information is not shown.
After restore it can be necessary to reactivate some type of configuration, links, etc?, for this type of restore is better to make a backup offline instead of online one?
We are thankful for any information on the matter.
Thanks,
Regards.
Rafa R.R.

The issue was solved with a offline backup.

KMC didn´t work with pcd write-protect mode

Hello,
I have activated the write-protect mode for the PCD in our Portal. Everything is working fine.
After restarting the portal-server, the kmc-component didn´t work anymore. After disabling the write-protect mode and restarting the server, kmc works again.
I read a sap-note (1148777), that this problem was fixed with SPS 15 KMC-Patch 1. Our portal is on SPS 15 with latest patch-releases.
Any idea ?
Thx for your reply!
Oliver

The concurrent mark sweep collector you get with -Xincgc isn't a compacting collector. It doesn't move objects. So while it can grow the heap if needed, it can't give those pages back to the operating system, as you want by turning -XX:MaxHeapFreeRatio= down that far.

Problems with IP Phones registration to CUCME on SG200-50P

Problems with IP Phones registration to CUCME on SG200-50P
System setup:
- Router Cisco 2811 with IOS 12.4(24)T5 Advanced IP Services, CUCME 7.1, DHCP Server
   with HWIC-4ESW
- Switches:
   - old - SLM224P
   - new - SG200-50P (SLM2048PT), OS v1.3.2.02
- IP Phones 7911 and 7931, OS v8.4.2
One VLAN (for desktops and IP Phones) and one IP subnet, no voice VLAN.
Network diagram:
C2811---HWIC-4ESW---SWITCH---IPPhones
Problem description:
1. In the old setup with SLM224P everything works fine.
   Connected phones almost immediately (1-2 sec. after power up) get ip address, configuration and registers to CUCME.
2. When switch is changed to new SG200-50G:
   - ip phones get their ip address and tftp configuration very slowly - about 10-20 seconds
   - ip phones cant register to CUCME at all. On the router with SCCP debugging turned on there is no sing of registration attempt
   - after reconnecting the old SLM224P situation backs to normal
Things that have been checked or tried without success:
- ports speed and duplex auto, correct detection - although not tested with manual settings
- CDP/LLDP on/off
- smartport mode auto and most static settings, also with disabled smartport
- power cycle / reset
- spanning tree and port security settings
- solutions from that post - https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/2232161
None of the above methods worked.
The only action that allowed ip phones to register was changing smartport role to static IPPhone + Desktop.
After that when phone was disconnected and then reconnected the problem exists again - no registration (IP Phone status DECEASED in CUCME). Same with power cycle/reset.
Please advice.
Thanks in advance.

1 - You have created the voice vlan?
Nope, flat network, one ip subnet (10 hosts and 10 phones)
2 - Have you set a phone on an untagged access port for the voice vlan to see if it works?
Yep, phones are connected to untagged access ports of the one and only vlan
3 - Have you tried to set the auto voice vlan on the switch so it dynamically assigns the role for ip phone + desktop?
Not sure about auto voice vlan setting, although there was no triggers to AVV - no static voice vlan, no CDP/VSDP advertisements of voice vlan.
We've tested static and auto smartport roles (independently of auto voice vlan feature) with successful auto-detection.
The switch was pretty much in default out-of-the-box config (beside management parameters).
4 - When rebooting the switch, you did ensure to save the start up to running config?
Yes, running to startup
5 - Have you manually set spanning tree PORT FAST for the phone ports?
No, we haven't tested that. But portfast should be set automatically for the desktop and ip phone smartport roles.

LDAP Synchronisation with CUCM with multiple forest

Hello,
We have CUCM 10.5.
We want to add in CUCM multiple forest (we have multiple company with different domain name) using LDAP authentification so all the user/password sync with CUCM.
We have as distinguished name CN=xxxx,CN=Users,DC=xxx,DC=local and for search base CN=xxxx,CN=Users,DC=xxx,DC=local.
Can we add in the distinguished name and search base the information for multiple forest using the same username/password?
If it not possible is there an easy way to achieve that?
Any help would be appreciate.
Thank you

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/srnd/collab10/collab10/directry.html#pgfId-1133454

Mitel System With Trunk To CUCM DTMF Not Recognized.

Hello,
Not sure if this is correct forum but maybe someone has seen this. Overview is that DTMF is not being recognized by CVP from the greeting. Call flow is such.
Mitel 5000 --siptrunk---CUCM9---siptrunk---CVP9
Currently the DTMF type on all trunks is RFC2833. And verified the Mitel is RFC as well. I think the problem is that for payload Mitel is sending 96. But on the Cisco CUCM the trunks are using the default of 101 for both the trunk to Mitel and CVP. Here is the invite in from Mitel you can see it sends payload of 96.
INVITE sip:[email protected]:5060 SIP/2.0
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.254.20.32:5060;branch=z9hG4bK2312043656-10065
Max-Forwards: 70
Allow: NOTIFY,REGISTER,REFER,SUBSCRIBE,INVITE,ACK,OPTIONS,CANCEL,BYE
User-Agent: Mitel-5000-ICP-5.1.0.56
P-Asserted-Identity: "Laura B." <sip:[email protected]>
From: "Laura B." <sip:[email protected]:5060>;tag=Mitel-5000_2312043669-10065
To: 72799 <sip:[email protected]:5060>
Call-ID: 2312043591-10065
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Contact: "Laura B." <sip:[email protected]:5060>
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 266
v=0
o=Mitel-5000-ICP 169457268 1404250460 IN IP4 10.254.20.31
s=SIP Call
c=IN IP4 10.254.20.31
t=0 0
m=audio 6770 RTP/AVP 0 8 96
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
a=rtpmap:8 PCMA/8000
a=rtpmap:96 telephone-event/8000
a=ptime:20
a=maxptime:30
a=cdsc:1 image udptl t38
5:16 PM
here is 200 ok
5:16 PM
5:16 PM
Jay Schulze:
SIP/2.0 200 OK
Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 10.254.20.32:5060;branch=z9hG4bK2312043656-10065
From: "." <sip:[email protected]:5060>;tag=Mitel-5000_2312043669-10065
To: 72799 <sip:[email protected]:5060>;tag=10585346~dfbf10b3-6c69-4443-852f-cbf609935a6f-42551743
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2014 21:34:24 GMT
Call-ID: 2312043591-10065
CSeq: 1 INVITE
Allow: INVITE, OPTIONS, INFO, BYE, CANCEL, ACK, PRACK, UPDATE, REFER, SUBSCRIBE, NOTIFY
Allow-Events: presence, kpml
Supported: replaces
Supported: X-cisco-srtp-fallback
Supported: Geolocation
P-Preferred-Identity: <sip:[email protected]>
Remote-Party-ID: <sip:[email protected]>;party=called;screen=no;privacy=off
Contact: <sip:[email protected]:5060>
Content-Type: application/sdp
Content-Length: 238
v=0
o=CiscoSystemsCCM-SIP 10585346 1 IN IP4 10.38.246.136
s=SIP Call
c=IN IP4 10.38.246.166
b=TIAS:64000
b=AS:64
t=0 0
m=audio 23956 RTP/AVP 0 96
a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
a=ptime:20
a=rtpmap:96 telephone-event/8000
a=fmtp:96 0-15
This is the invite over to CVP. Still sending 96. I'm pretty sure I can fix this by setting the payload type to 96 on both trunks on CUCM. I was able to test with it afterhours. After reading through Mitel docs there is no way to change payload type on their side. The question is really would there be anything else this could maybe break on the CVP side?

Well that did not work. What I found was it was going through 96 all the way to CVP. However when CVP returned a label to the VXML. The VXML sent back the 200 OK with 101.
If I changed the the rtp payload-type nte 96 on the VXML dial-peer it did work. However it broke any other call flow to CVP from being able to recognize DTMF.
I wonder if this is some type of bug on VXML. Because it was my understanding by having the command 'asymmetric payload full' under SIP. It would pass the payload type from one call leg to the other.

Is UCCX - 8.5.1.11001-35 (8.5.1 SU1) compatible with CUCM - 8.6.1.20000-1 (8.6 1a)

Hi,
I am referring the UCCX 8.5 compatibility matrix:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/crs/express_compatibility/matrix/crscomtx.pdf
Per the above document, UCCX 8.5.1 SU1 is compatible with CUCM 8.6.1, it doesn't specify whether it is compatible with CUCM 8.6.1a.
Can someone shed some light, is it safe to assume that CUCM 8.6.1a is also compatible?
Thanks in advance,
inner_silence

Su's are also supported.
Here are 2 examples which will answer both your questions.
If CUCM 8.5(1)SU1 is qualified with UCCX 8.5(1), then all ES of CUCM 8.5(1)SU1 is considered qualified with UCCX 8.5(1).
If CUCM 8.5(1) is qualified with UCCX 8.5(1), then all SU of CUCM 8.5(1)SU1 is considered qualified with UCCX 8.5(1).
Hope this clarifies.
Shirish

Is UCCX 8.5(1) compatable with CUCM 8.6

I just checked the Cisco Unified Contact Center Express (Cisco Unified CCX) Software and Hardware Compatibility Guide and CUCM 8.6 is not listed yet.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/crs/express_compatibility/matrix/crscomtx.pdf
CUCM 8.6 addresses quite a few bugs specific to running CUCM on UCS was recommended to me by TAC.
If its not compatible yet, is there a timeframe when the compatibility guide will be updated to reflect CUCM 8.6 ?
Will it be with the upcoming SU2 for UCCX 8.5(1) ?
Thanks

Bvanbenschoten,
CUCM is not listed currently on the internal guides even for SU2. It is possible this may get updated, but it will be a while before we know this. CUCM certification generally lags the release of the product if for no other reason then it is such a quickly released product. If you would like, you can post this question back in about 2 months and hopefully we'll have some news. If I see something before then, I'll certainly let you know too.
Regards,
Robert W. Rogier
CSE -- TAC, UCC

Cisco BE6k with CUCM 10.X integration with Siemens with Hipath 3350 and 3550

Dear Experts;
We have one requirment from customer.
They have 4 branches with Siemens Hipath 3350 and 3550 PBX and they want to integrate with cisco CUCM 10.x.
The Head Quater with complete CUCM as IPT and branches with with Hipath 3350 and 3550 PBX.
CIsco TAC says interoperability doc is not available and also I can see tehre is no doc.
TAC Reply As below.
We do not have any documents about CUCM integration with Hipath 3350 and 3550 on our interoperability portal. This means that their integration with CUCM was never properly tested. So we can not confirm that all features will be working. But from CUCM perspective this is third-party device that can be integrated using SIP or ISDN (with Voice Gateway between them).
Link for interoperability portal:
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/enterprise/interoperability-portal/networking_solutions_products_genericcontent0900aecd805b561d.html#callmgr10
Regards
Debashis

If the Siemens supports SIP or H323 you can attempt to simply create a trunk between the systems and route calls via it. If IP integration is not an option then as pointed by TAC integrate via PRI circuit (preferably QSIG). From CUCM side it will be just another GW, similarly from Siemens side. You'll need to select which side is going to be ISDN network (I always use Cisco side) and then make the other side user.

CUCM 8.6.2 to 10.5 with pcd

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for