Unity Connection SIP trunk integration vs alerting name

Hello,
I have been implementing a Unity Connecion 8.6 with a CUCM cluster 8.6 via a SIP trunk.
The previous implemention of the Unity server was set up using voicemail ports;
When users used to call the voicemail pilot number, we were able to configure an alerting name on the vm ports, saying (to VoiceMail) for example.
I am looking for a solution for the new implementation via the SIP trunk. I just want users to see 'to VoiceMail' on their phone when they call the Unity Connection system.
Thanks for the help!
Best regards,
Antoine

I have found the solution:
If you want to dispaly a name such as Voicemail, etc you can change that in Unity Connection under Port Group --> Advanced Settings --> "Remote-Party-ID"
cheers!

Similar Messages

Skype Connect SIP trunking to Yeastar U100

I am trying to get this service running for the first time. I signed up for a SIP profile through Skype Manager and followed Yeastar's setup instructions. Both ends indicate the regestration was successful. I can receive incoming Skype calls. I followed Yeastar's example to set up and Outgoing Route and I am attempting to call the Skype Echo Test at 001760-660-4690 as they recommend. All I ever hear is a recording saying that "All Circuiits are Busy". I have tried dialing other PSTN number and I get the same failure. Yeastar Support has look at the outgoing call msgs between me and Skype and they say what I'm sending looks right but Skype Connect is saying that the number I'm calling is invalid.
I have been in 3 separate Chats with Skype Business support and they have not be able to give me any help as to what is going on.

Each channel carries one phone call. So if you have 4 channels, you can carry 4 simultaneous phone calls, in any combination of incoming or outgoing.

Faxing to voicemail in Unity or Unity Connection

Does Unity or Unity Connection have the capability for callers to send faxes to the users voicemail box? Or do I need something like Cisco Fax Server to do this?
Thanks,
-mike

For Unity, there is a built-in tool that can be used for limited faxing capabilities (less than 50 users, it's called Fax Util). Outside of that, you can integrate with any number of Fax Servers. Unity Connection only supports integration with Cisco Fax Server (aka, OpenText Right Fax) for faxing capabilities.
Hailey
Please rate helpful posts!

Unity Connection not passing CallerID to CUCM over SIP Trunk

I'm trying to get CallerID working for Unity Connection Device Notification (and it seems everything else), however, when I run UC Remote Port Status Monitor and the Call-Out goes to CUCM for the Device Notification, no caller ID is presented to the CUCM SIP trunk.
06:06:02, New Call, CalledId=, RedirectingId=, Origin=16, Reason=1024, CallGuid=,
CallerName=, LastRedirectingId=, LastRedirectingReason=1024, PortDisplayName=LFC_CUCM-1-134,
[Origin=Unknown],[Reason=Unknown]
06:06:02,
Dialing '99254753'
06:06:32, Idle
06:06:33, Idle
Therefore, the out-going call to the PRI PSTN is:
10:59:01.005: ISDN Se0/0/0:23 Q931: TX -> SETUP pd = 8 callref = 0x5B03
        Sending Complete
        Bearer Capability i = 0x8090A2
                Standard = CCITT
                Transfer Capability = Speech
                Transfer Mode = Circuit
                Transfer Rate = 64 kbit/s
        Channel ID i = 0xA98397
                Exclusive, Channel 23
        Calling Party Number i = 0x0081, N/A
                Plan:Unknown, Type:Unknown
        Called Party Number i = 0xC1, '9254753'
                Plan:ISDN, Type:Subscriber(local)
*Dec 6 10:59:01.513: ISDN Se0/0/0:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PR
I've looked through my SIP trunk on the CUCM side and for Inbound Calls, Connected Line ID and Presentation Name are set to "allowed" or "default" doesn't make a difference. RTMT Port Status also shows no "caller", so I'm thinking there is some way to set or allow the calling number on the Unity Connection (8.5) side.
Oddly enough, I also noticed that in Unity Connection> Telephony Integrations > Port Group, if I change the Contact Line Name from nothing to "Unity" (or whatever), the Q931 debug outbound doesn't show ANY "Calling Party Numer - = XXXXX" and the carrier throws out the BTN as the ANI.
10:46:00.837: ISDN Se0/0/0:23 Q931: TX -> SETUP pd = 8 callref = 0x5AFF
        Sending Complete
        Bearer Capability i = 0x8090A2
                Standard = CCITT
                Transfer Capability = Speech
                Transfer Mode = Circuit
                Transfer Rate = 64 kbit/s
        Channel ID i = 0xA98397
                Exclusive, Channel 23
        Called Party Number i = 0xC1, '9254753'
                Plan:ISDN, Type:Subscriber(local)
Any ideas on where/how CallerID comes from, on Unity Connection with a SIP integration?
THANKS!!
Mike.

I did not- my work around has been to put in a name for Contact Line Name under Port Group Basics Switch configuration in Unity Connection- this for some reason keeps CUCM from sending ANI TYPE/PLAN information in the Q931 message, and my carrier then sends a default ANI of the circuit's BTN. When I have time, I'll open up a TAC ticket.
Mike.

Cisco Unity Connection - Miu SIP Integration, All lines are busy

Hi,
We have a CUCM/CUC Cluster since 2009 and we never had problems with accessing Voicemail. We configured a Secure Siptrunk between the CUCM Cluster and the CUC-Server.
CUCM 8.5.1SU4/CUC8.5.1SU1
2 weeks ago we upgraded CUC from 8.5.1SU1 to 8.5.1SU5
Since this upgrade we had at 2 times no voicemail access from the IP-Phones registered on CUCM-Cluster (reorder tone) - in the log of CUC we saw that all 144 ports become busy !!
History:
Update CUC from 8.5.1SU1 to 8.5.1SU5 on Saturday 10/26
- first outage on wed. 10/31 ; 1:48 pm
- second outage on tue 11/6 10:26 am
After restart of the CUC-Server the system works normally - I think stopping and starting Connection Manager coiuld also be a workaround, but i did not verified this :
here the log from wed 10/31
Oct 31 13:48:37 CUC1 local7 4 : 4298: CUC1.sprachdienst.fraunhofer.de: Oct 31 2012 12:48:37 PM.862 UTC : %UC_UCEVNT-4-EvtMiuBusyHere: %[AppID=CuCsMgr][ClusterID=][NodeID=CUC1]: Miu SIP Integration, All lines are busy on redirector 10.37.239.21:5061. An incoming call will not be answered.
Oct 31 13:48:44 CUC1 local7 4 : 4299: CUC1.sprachdienst.fraunhofer.de: Oct 31 2012 12:48:44 PM.931 UTC : %UC_UCEVNT-4-EvtMiuBusyHere: %[AppID=CuCsMgr][ClusterID=][NodeID=CUC1]: Miu SIP Integration, All lines are busy on redirector 10.37.239.21:5061. An incoming call will not be answered.
Oct 31 13:48:47 CUC1 local7 4 : 4300: CUC1.sprachdienst.fraunhofer.de: Oct 31 2012 12:48:47 PM.508 UTC : %UC_UCEVNT-4-EvtMiuBusyHere: %[AppID=CuCsMgr][ClusterID=][NodeID=CUC1]: Miu SIP Integration, All lines are busy on redirector 10.37.239.21:5061. An incoming call will not be answered....
the log from yesterday
Nov 6 10:26:43 CUC1 local7 4 : 14264: CUC1.sprachdienst.fraunhofer.de: Nov 06 2012 09:26:43 AM.732 UTC : %UC_UCEVNT-4-EvtMiuBusyHere: %[AppID=CuCsMgr][ClusterID=][NodeID=CUC1]: Miu SIP Integration, All lines are busy on redirector 10.37.239.21:5061. An incoming call will not be answered.
Nov 6 10:26:56 CUC1 local7 4 : 14265: CUC1.sprachdienst.fraunhofer.de: Nov 06 2012 09:26:56 AM.942 UTC : %UC_UCEVNT-4-EvtMiuBusyHere: %[AppID=CuCsMgr][ClusterID=][NodeID=CUC1]: Miu SIP Integration, All lines are busy on redirector 10.37.239.21:5061. An incoming call will not be answered.
Nov 6 10:27:03 CUC1 local7 4 : 14266: CUC1.sprachdienst.fraunhofer.de: Nov 06 2012 09:27:03 AM.147 UTC : %UC_UCEVNT-4-EvtMiuBusyHere: %[AppID=CuCsMgr][ClusterID=][NodeID=CUC1]: Miu SIP Integration, All lines are busy on redirector 10.37.239.21:5061. An incoming call will not be answered.
Nov 6 10:27:11 CUC1 local7 4 : 14267: CUC1.sprachdienst.fraunhofer.de: Nov 06 2012 09:27:11 AM.359 UTC : %UC_UCEVNT-4-EvtMiuBusyHere: %[AppID=CuCsMgr][ClusterID=][NodeID=CUC1]: Miu SIP Integration, All lines are busy on redirector 10.37.239.21:5061. An incoming call will not be answered.
Nov 6 10:27:59 CUC1 local7 4 : 14268: CUC1.sprachdienst.fraunhofer.de: Nov 06 2012 09:27:59 AM.155 UTC : %UC_UCEVNT-4-EvtMiuBusyHere: %[AppID=CuCsMgr][ClusterID=][NodeID=CUC1]: Miu SIP Integration, All lines are busy on redirector 10.37.239.21:5061. An incoming call will not be answered.
Nov 6 10:27:59 CUC1 local7 4 : 14269: CUC1.sprachdienst.fraunhofer.de: Nov 06 2012 09:27:59 AM.177 UTC : %UC_UCEVNT-4-EvtMiuBusyHere: %[AppID=CuCsMgr][ClusterID=][NodeID=CUC1]: Miu SIP Integration, All lines are busy on redirector 10.37.239.21:5061. An incoming call will not be answered.
Nov 6 10:29:33 CUC1 local7 4 : 14270: CUC1.sprachdienst.fraunhofer.de: Nov 06 2012 09:29:33 AM.475 UTC : %UC_UCEVNT-4-EvtMiuBusyHere: %[AppID=CuCsMgr][ClusterID=][NodeID=CUC1]: Miu SIP Integration, All lines are busy on redirector 10.37.239.21:5061. An incoming call will not be answered.
Nov 6 10:29:48 CUC1 local7 4 : 14271: CUC1.sprachdienst.fraunhofer.de: Nov 06 2012 09:29:48 AM.770 UTC : %UC_UCEVNT-4-EvtMiuBusyHere: %[AppID=CuCsMgr][ClusterID=][NodeID=CUC1]: Miu SIP Integration, All lines are busy on redirector 10.37.239.21:5061. An incoming call will not be answered.
Question:
do we have a bug in the software CUC 8.5.1SU5 or is there another problem ?
Any Ideas ?
regards
alex

Hi,
we opened a tac case and it seems we run into a bug which is known in Version 8.6. (We run 8.5.1SU5)
http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fetchBugDetails&bugId=CSCuc22800
Cisco already have the fix available for version 8.6.2 ES52.
Cause we can not upgrade to 8.6 (Server Hardware not supported) we will wait for the Version 8.5 Fix.
Meanwhile I will change the SIP-Trunk between the Unity Connection Server and the Call Manager Server from TLS to non-TLS (described in CSCuc22800 as a workaround)
regards
Alex

Unity Connection Integration with CS 1000 and Meridian 81 - PIMG

I have a customer who have (2) Nortel Meridian 81 and (1) CS1000 for their 3 locations along with Octal 350 servicing 2500 voicemail users today. Customer also has a Cisco UCM in their network today which is servicing their wireless phone users.
UCM and CS1000 are networked together using Q.Sig trunks today. Customer is looking at replacing their Octal solution with a new Voice mail solution.
I was looking at integration documents for Unity Connection using PIMG.
In this scenario, would I need 3 separate PIMG 's at the three remote sites and integrate it with Unity connection or Can I achieve this using just one PIMG at one of the sites, considering the three sites are trunked together using tie-trunks.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/docs/voice_ip_comm/connection/7x/integration/pimg/guide/cucintpimg090.html#wp1051831
Appreciate any pointers/ help.

Hi there,
Just to add a note to the great tips from Hailey (+5 Hailey!)
We are in the final stages of replacing our "old" Octel with Unity Connection, part of
which is integrated to our CS1000 and CUCM in a "Hybrid" deployment like yours
Centralized Voice Messaging
Cisco Unity Connection supports centralized voice messaging through the phone system, which supports
various inter-phone system networking protocols including proprietary protocols such as Avaya DCS,
Nortel MCDN, or Siemens CorNet, and standards-based protocols such as QSIG or DPNSS. Note that
centralized voice messaging is a function of the phone system and its inter-phone system networking,
not voice mail. Connection will support centralized voice messaging as long as the phone system and its
inter-phone system networking are properly configured.
Setting Up a Nortel Meridian 1 Digital PIMG
Integration with Cisco Unity Connection
Attachments:
cucwithnortel.pdf (308.1 K)
Centralized voice messaging provides voice messaging services to all users in a networked phone system environment. Connection can be hosted on a message center PINX and provide voice messaging services to all users in an enterprise assuming the message center PINX and all user PINX phone systems are properly networked.For a centralized voice messaging configuration to exist, a suitable inter-phone system networking protocol must exist to deliver a minimum level of feature support, such as:•Message waiting indication (MWI).•Transfer, which ensures that the correct calling/called party ID is delivered to the voice messaging system.•Divert, which ensures that the correct calling/called party ID is delivered to the voice messaging system.Other features may be required depending on how the voice messaging system is to be used. For example, if it is also serving as an automated attendant, path-replacement is needed as this feature prevents calls from hair-pinning.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/connection/7x/design/guide/7xcucdg050.html#wp1053538
Cheers!
Rob

Unity Connection 9.x & UCCX 7.x do not answer SIP Calls

Hi,
We have SIP Trunks between our CUCM v7.1.3 and IPC Unigy system. All test calls to and from CUCM 7.1.3 and IPC Unigy working fine but have found when dialling from IPC Unigy to either Unity Connection 9.x or UCCX 7.x, the call rings without being answered. Believe it is something to do with the out-of-band signalling either not being present, or being present when it shouldn't.
Having difficulty tracing calls in log files.
Dialling from Unigy to either Unity Connection or UCCX via public telephone network call is answered ok.
Any help gratefully received.
Thanks
James

Just wondering if you found a solution. I have a similar setup and I have not attempted it yet.

Unity Connection integration with Outlook problem.

Hello,
We deploy CUC 7.1 and we integrate it with MS exchange 2007 and outlook, and we perform the recommended configuration to make the voice mail message to be appeared in both Unity connection voice mail store and to be sent to exchange then appeared in outlook as inbox message, we perform that by choosing Accept and Rely option in Message actions tab.
The customer want when the message accessed from the outlook the MWI on turned to MWI off!!!!!
How can i perform that?
Thanks

Hi Ahmed,
What you are wanting is not available with CUC 7.x "Accept and Relay"
In Cisco Unity Connection 7.1, you can use the accept and relay action to instruct Connection to both deliver each message of a certain type to the user mailbox and forward a copy of the message to the relay address. (This is sometimes referred to as "accept and forward.") This option may be useful for users who regularly use a device that accesses a separate server for messages, such as a handheld wireless device, and want easy access to voice messages both on the alternative device and through the Connection user interfaces. If you choose this option, the user receives two copies of each message. The copies are stored in different message stores, and any actions the user takes on the relayed copy are not reflected on the copy stored in the Connection message store.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/connection/7x/administration/guide/7xcucsag170.html#wp1091330
You will want to look into CUC 8.5;
New Features for Cisco Unity Connection Version 8.5
• Unified messaging with Microsoft Exchange 2010:
• Voice messages are synchronized with the Exchange inbox.
• MWI and message status are synchronized.
• Secure, private messages, mobile client, and calendar integration for Exchange 2010 are all supported.
• You can enable unified messaging for specific users or all users.
From this doc;
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/voicesw/ps6789/ps5745/ps6509/data_sheet_c78-634096.html
Cheers!
Rob

Problem connecting two trunks to sip provider using same CUBE

We need to connect two SIP trunks from service provider to Cisco CUCM 7.1 using CUBE “Cisco 2821”, SP using the following configuration:
First SIP PSTN Link Configuration(In-Out DID/DOD 218 7700 – 218 7799)
Customer IP Address =   10.196.191.158/30
SP IP Address = 10.196.191.157/30
Protocol= SIP
SIP Port = 5060
Transport Protocol=UDP
Voice Codec= G711 A-Law
DTMF = IN-Band DTMF without RFC2833
Signaling IP address = 10.201.20.49
IP Address 10.201.20.10 (Media IP) must be visible from IP PABX
Second SIP PSTN Link Configuration( Inbound Only 920009999)
Customer IP Address =   10.196.192.94/30
SP IP Address = 10.196.192.93/30
Protocol= SIP
SIP Port = 5060
Transport Protocol=UDP
Voice Codec= G711 A-Law
DTMF = IN-Band DTMF without RFC2833
SIP server IP address = 10.201.20.49
IP Address 10.201.20.10 (Media IP) must be visible from IP PABX
When we tried to configure both links on the same CUBE we faced two problems:
-          Routing issue, as we can’t route traffic using single CUBE through two different interfaces to the same destination “ i.e we have to configure static route commend (ip route 10.201.20.49 255.255.255.255 10.196.191.157 & ip route 10.201.20.49 255.255.255.255 10.196.192.93), sip traffic coming from one link can’t be sure to send it back to the same link.
-          SIP media & signaling control binding issue, as CUBE support sip binding using one interface only “one IP Address”, if we not using binding commands on the CUBE we can’t receive any calls though any link.
We have two options:
SP to send both traffic on the same trunk link
Or
Have another CUBE for the second link.
Attached network diagram.
Any solution?????
Regards,
Ahmed Rizk

I didn't mean NAT CUCM, I meant the interface towards it. But since you're using a single interface then yes that is what you NAT. You have a lot going on in that config. Probably a lot more than you need. Like I said you should work on this in two legs. CUBE to ITSP, and then CUCM to CUBE. You're trying to make the whole thing work in one shot which is going to cause you some headaches.
Install XLite free version. In the account settings set your UserID to a generic 10 digit phone number, domain to something generic, then at the bottom set the Proxy Address to the IP of your CUBE. The media ports will be negotiated dynamically between the CUBE and the ITSP. Since you said you're not registering you will also need to give the ITSP YOUR peer IP (this is how they secure the trunk) which is whatever IP you're sourcing from when you leave your network (what you're NAT'ing the CUBE to).
For testing, reduce your config to something like this:
voice service voip
allow-connections sip to sip
allow-connections h323 to sip
no supplementary-service sip moved-temporarily
no supplementary-service sip refer
signaling forward none
sip
dial-peer voice 10 voip
description CUBE_TO_ITSP
session protocol sipv2
session target ipv4:SIGNALING IP PROVIDED BY ITSP
destination-pattern [2-9].........
codec g711ulaw
dtmf-relay rtp-nte sip-notify
no vad
dial-peer voice 20 voip
description ITSP_TO_CUBE
destination-pattern .
session protocol sipv2
session target ipv4:Eventually your CUCM IP...for now set it to your computers IP.
codec g711ulaw
dtmf-relay rtp-nte sip-notify
no vad
Use XLite to place a phone call from your PC (if you have a mic and speakers you can have audio if the call connects). This should come pretty close to getting your outward leg established. Once you get this part working you can add in more codecs and translation profiles if you want. Let me know what happens. Include any debug or packet cap results if you can.

Third Party SIP Phone Alerting name

Hello,
We are having cisco ip phones & third party sip phones in our company. both are registered to same cucm 9.X.
Now when cisco phones calls sip Phones. we are able to see the alerting name on cisco phone.
Say, Cisco Phone "Phone-A" calls Third Party Sip phone "Phone-B". So, on cisco ip Phone display we are able to see "Phone-B".
But same when we try from SIP phones to Cisco phones, we are unable to see the Alert name on the Sip Phone. only the Number we can see on the Sip phone.
Any help will be highly appriciated.
Thanks,

Hi Amod.
I'm terribly sorry cause I got what you are asking only now :(
This behaviour depends on client capability.
CUCM always send RPID ( remote-party ID) to the third party SIP client/phone on ring.
If the client is capable to update the calling number into what it receives as RPID, than you'll be able to see calling name.
I've read some release notes of XLITE and other SIP Desk phone and it seems to be not mentioned.
Sorry again
Regards
Carlo

Cisco Unity Connection 8.5 PIMG integration.

Hello Experts
My customer has PIMG integration with Cisco Unity Connection, users can access their mailboxes after creating a direct routing rule with the search scope where this users are located to send the call to "attemp sing in" conversation this part is working fine. Now subscribers do not get the user's mailbox when reaching FNA,Busy or RNA they are going to the "welcome to Cisco Unity Connection Messaging System from a... default greeting. Using Remote port status monitor I can not see the call coming in,but I am sure the call is getting to that server. I will like to know what traces I can enable to get the extension that is being sent by PIMG or what else I can check on the Unity connection server to resolve this issue?
Thanks in advance

Hi Rob
I configured the Direct Routing to send the calls to conversation "sing in" because the customer has multiple integrations and duplicated users with same extesion, he was getting "invalid username and password" everytime they try to log in, meaning that the user was in different CSS and the existing Direct Routing Rule did not have this CSS in the Search Scope.Maybe in you case you the users were not sorted out by CSS.
I am pritty sure they are using Nortel phones,but not sure what exact version.
Thank you for your response.I will try to configure a Forward Routing rule to send the calls to and specific user'extension base on the calling number to see what happens.

COBRAS Import for Unity Connection 8.5 and Subscriber LDAP Integration Status

Using COBRAS Import for Unity Connection 1.1 Build 212 with Unity 4.2 Voicemail Only and Connection 8.5(1)SU1 with LDAP Directory Integration
When I run COBRAS the old alias matches the new alias and my desire is for subscribers being moved to be LDAP inegrated. However after COBRAS runs, the radio box for LDAP Integration Status on the subscriber is set to Do Not Integrate with LDAP Directory. Is there a way for COBRAS to select Integrate with LDAP Directory when the alias matches on LDAP?

Hi ben,
If you are just importing from and not authenticating against LDAP, then the PIN comes
from the Connection Template you used to build the users;
Note that no passwords or PINs are copied from the LDAP directory to the Connection database. If
you want Connection users to authenticate against the LDAP directory, see the “LDAP
Authentication” section on page 9-7.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/connection/8x/design/guide/8xcucdg040.html
Cheers!
Rob
"Show a little faith, there's magic in the night" - Springsteen

Can i have IVR feature with ccm 6.0.1 integrated with cisco unity connection 2.0.1

Hi
can i have IVR feature with ccm 6.0.1 integrated with cisco unity connection 2.0.1.
And tell me a solution how can i go for IVR with this design.
Thanks.
veera.

Yes, you can have a basic IVR with CUC, no one can tell you how to design your CUC, that's up to you and your requirements.
All you need are call handlers, caller input and greetings.
If you need someone to do all this for you, engage with a local Cisco partner.

Unity Connection with a 2951 for analog to SIP?

Has anyone tested this out yet?
Avaya PBX with analog ports (from existing voicemails system server) to a 29XX router using FXO cards.
SIP to Unity Connection.
The diversion headers would come across correctly because these are the same analogs the existing voicemail server was using. The 29XX router would then have SIP dial peers that go to Unity Connection.
Im not sure if this is a supported configuration or if it will even work. In a pinch right now because PIMG lead times are waaaaay long.
Thanks!

Sounds like you are trying to connect in the wrong direction. If you are using a URL in remote connection of the pot object it would be a bi-directional connection. Did you try 'edit connections' from the GE object itself? Select the M register for the writable member and the pot object as the new logical connection. This method has two advantages - the remote PLC cannot change the current lookout setting for the register (which would certainly occur with a remote power fail). Also, you can use far more lookout object to control the PLC registers - objects like Expressions and LatchGates that have no remote URL position sources or writable data members.

A SIP trunking connection that scales with growth

Since delivering its first inflight Internet experience in 2008, Gogo has grown to over 800 employees in five offices around the country. With 1000s of customers thirsty for in air data connections, its crucial that Gogo is highly available to support its staff and its airline partners globally. Capacity was near its max, but the […]
Read More
This topic first appeared in the Spiceworks Community

Hi,
No as you said you have already created the Trunk between the Sonus and Lync you can use the same trunk. but in the Sonus you have to configure the outbound routes from which Trunk you have to send the calls for the new Trunk provider or the Level3.
check this
https://support.sonus.net/display/UXDOC41/SIP+Trunking+Between+SIP+Border+Elements
Whenever you see a helpful reply, click on Vote As Helpful & click on Mark As Answer if a post answers your question.

Unity Connection SIP trunk integration vs alerting name

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for