VoIPNorm's Unified Communications Blog

Lync Server 2013 Call Park Retrieval Issues From CUCM 8.x

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Mon, 13 May 2013 16:36:00 +0000

The last few days I have been helping out a peer do some troubleshooting around Lync Call Park. We managed to work out a few different issues that may arise when using the Lync Call Park Service with CUCM (Cisco Unified Communications Manager). I am glad to say that there are resolutions to these issues though. I was lucky enough to find these issues because of changes and configured items in my lab but all of them seemed relevant. Had my lab not been such a mess I may have not discovered they were issues. So, here's to having a lab in a mess, who says it doesn’t pay to be unorganized : )

Issue – Normalization and call routing

The Call Park orbit numbers are typically 3 or 4 digit numbers which is fine for normal call routing within the Lync environment but when dialing from a PBX or CUCM this may cause a issue with inbound normalization. Last thing you need is one of your inbound normalization rules to append + or other digit by accidently using the wrong normalization rule. Call orbit numbers can not utilize the + which means that they can not be in E.164 format. They can how ever use other prefixed digits like a * which is my preferred digit for this service.

Solution

Use the * prefix on your orbit numbers as shown below. Now this doesn’t mean that a user has to dial the star as you can normalize client side but it gives you a unique set of numbers that you can create inbound normalization rules for when your dialing from a external PBX.

Below I created a inbound normalization rule that adds the * digit to inbound calls from CUCM. So the CUCM user doesn’t have to dial the * they just need to know the 3 digit orbit number. Of course if that’s all to confusing you can just allow a normalization rule that passes the star coming inbound from CUCM as well. Adding the * in the normalization rule will require a customized rule. You can not add the * through the normal UI rules. You can use *$1 as the translation rule using the edit button on the UI page.

Issue – Lync Trunk to Trunk Call routing stops Call Park orbit lookup

With trunk to trunk call routing enabled (which is new in Lync 2013) external inbound calls to the call park orbit numbers will not be forwarded to the call park service. So basically if a person tries to retrieve a parked call from a CUCM (or other PBX) phone it will fail. Instead Lync will attempt to lookup possible route patterns after the usual reverse number lookup occurs. I am not sure the reason why call park orbit numbers are skipped over but this is the current behavior. In Snooper the call trace will show a 403 forbidden or a 404 not found depending on you call routing setup. The 403 occurs when you do not have a matching outbound route but have PSTN usage records applied to your trunk. The PSTN usage records applied to the trunk prevent the call orbit lookup.

A 404 may occur when the call does indeed have a matching route. The call is passed back to CUCM and it does not have a matching route, rejecting the call with a 404. In this case you may see traffic backwards and forwards between Lync and CUCM.

Solution

The most obvious solution here is to have a trunk that has no PSTN usage records applied to it as shown below. That may mean that if you require trunk to trunk routing that you may need to build a separate route to CUCM for the purposes of allowing inbound calls to the call park service. The good thing is that with Lync 2013 this is not all that complicated.

Issue – Refer Enabled

This issue is a little tricky. Even though the OIP page mentions refer is support for CUCM 8.5 and above it will cause issues with retrieving a call from the call park service from CUCM. The behavior is a little odd in that once a call is parked and you attempt to call into the service from a CUCM endpoint it seemingly makes a connection but then drops. The result is a 486 busy here.

Solution

Disable refer. It’s a simple fix but runs in the face of the OIP page which mentions that Refer is supported as of 8.5.

See below for the PowerShell and UI changes for turning off Refer to the CUCM trunk.

Set-CsTrunkConfiguration –Identity <see example> -EnableSessionTimer $false –RTCPActiveCalls $false –RTCPCallsOnHold $false

I noticed a few comments in various forums around accessing the Call Park service for the purposes of retrieving calls from external PBX’s. Hopefully this will help someone out. I did not find a single reference to these issues anywhere else on the web even though TechNet mentions that call retrieval is possible from a PBX. I am not sure if its because its not widely used or because these issues seldom occur but for what ever reason I thought it was important to document them.

VoIPNorm

Updated: Important Settings to Know When Integrating Lync Server 2010/2013 with Cisco ISR’s

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Wed, 08 May 2013 21:56:00 +0000

This is an update to an update to a previous post with new ring back information. By far one of the most referenced posts I have done to date on interoperability with Cisco. I have come across a number of important settings that are a must know for this interoperability scenario. One thing to keep in mind is that while Cisco ISR’s are a supported gateway they do only provide basic functionalities. Behaviors for basic gateways can differ from that of an enhanced gateway. Support for SIP Refer is a good example.

Some of the information below has been taken from other posts on topics concerning this interoperability situation.

By far the most common issue with Lync to a Cisco ISR is ringback. With later releases of the Cisco IOS a lot of these issues have been addressed. Read on below to find out how.

How do I set comfort noise on the ISR for interoperability with Lync?

There are two ways to configure comfort noise on the gateway. First off you can disable Voice Activity Detection all together on the outbound dial peer. The second option is to change the payload type for comfort noise to the compatible format. It’s pretty common for people to turn VAD off by default so some people may not have realized this issues existed. Previous Cisco documentation for OCS R2 has VAD enabled which it is by default so people migrating to Lync hoping to take advantage of media bypass might be caught out.

Option 1

dial-peer voice 1999 voip
tone ringback alert-no-PI
description TO Lync
destination-pattern 55555
session protocol sipv2
session target ipv4:192.168.1.250:5068
session transport tcp
dtmf-relay rtp-nte
codec g711ulaw
fax protocol none
no vad

Option 2

How do I configure for ringback issues?

There is some really good info around on ringback issues with both CUCM and ISRs on both my own blog and others. But seeing as this is just a ISR post I am going to just focus on that for now.

For PRACK issues disable rel1xxx

voice service voip
sip
rel1xx disable

Ringback with or without 183 SDP?

The first option presented is typically the normal way to ignore session progress 183 coming from Lync. This will cause the gateway to ignore 183 messages and signal the caller system to play local ringback rather than create a early media session with Lync. Lync does not provide early media for remote ringing.

dial-peer voice 1999 voip
description TO Lync
voice-class sip block 183 sdp present
destination-pattern 55555
session protocol sipv2
session target ipv4:192.168.1.250:5068
session transport tcp
dtmf-relay rtp-nte
codec g711ulaw
fax protocol none
rtp payload-type comfort-noise 13

Here is a big “well” you might also want to try the following if you get limited ringback or just one ringback and the sdp present command doesn’t solve your issues. CCME in particular this command seems to work better as the 183 messages do not have SDP information coming from Lync because the initial invite from CCME does have SDP information. So there may be some variation depending on SDP initiation. A simple “debug ccsip message” on the router should point you in the right direction on which command to use.

dial-peer voice 1999 voip
description TO Lync
voice-class sip block 183 sdp absent
destination-pattern 55555
session protocol sipv2
session target ipv4:192.168.1.250:5068
session transport tcp
dtmf-relay rtp-nte
codec g711ulaw
fax protocol none
rtp payload-type comfort-noise 13

Update. I have another consideration and a new twist. What if you have a call forwarded back to the PSTN with no ringback. The below command should help solve that issue

dial-peer voice 1999 voip
description TO Lync
voice-class sip block 181 sdp absent
voice-class sip block 183 sdp absent
destination-pattern 55555
session protocol sipv2
session target ipv4:192.168.1.250:5068
session transport tcp
dtmf-relay rtp-nte
codec g711ulaw
fax protocol none
rtp payload-type comfort-noise 13

Similar to a 183 message a 181 message coming from Lync will not have SDP information. This command may solve this issue of forwarded calls not having ringback seeing as Lync wont generate ringback for remote endpoints.

SIP/2.0 181 Call Is Being Forwarded
FROM: "Norman, Christopher"<sip:+12065555555@10.10.10.46>;tag=3846A278-5CC
TO: <sip:12065555556@10.10.10.58>;epid=E9EAEE5866;tag=d9ed9a43f5
CSEQ: 101 INVITE
CALL-ID: 64096B15-29C211DD-840A9822-A319A9A1@130.42.18.46
VIA: SIP/2.0/TCP 10.10.10.46:5060;branch=z9hG4bK9721D8
CONTENT-LENGTH: 0
SERVER: RTCC/3.0.0.0 MediationServer

How do I disable SIP refer on a Cisco Router and in Lync for Media Bypass?

Cisco Router configuration to disable SIP refer -

Router(config)#voice service voip
Router(conf-voi-serv)#no supplementary-service sip refer

There are two options to disable SIP refer in Lync the first is through the Lync Control Panel and the second is in PowerShell. In this case disabling Refer in PowerShell is probably the easiest since you will need to do a few other things while you are there.

Disable Refer in Lync Control Panel:

Disable Refer in PowerShell:

Set-CsTrunkConfiguration –Idenity <Xds Identity> -EnableReferSupport $false

To find your trunk identity:

Get-CsTrunkConfiguration

Below is a screen shot of the full command parameters.

How do I disable RTCP and session timers in Lync?

Disabling RTCP and its timers are required for similar reasons as they were in OCS R2. I wrote a blog article outlining the reasons for disabling RTCP and session timers for OCS R2 a while ago and while the product has changed into Lync the reasons for disabling both of these are still the same.

http://voipnorm.blogspot.com/2010/07/kb-article-981218-rtcp-timer-confusion.html

Disabling both of these will remove 30 minute call drops due to RTCP incompatibilities between the two platforms. I am not going to go into a whole RFC thing of who’s right and wrong so just know this is something you have to do otherwise you will run into call drop issues.

Below is a screen shot of what the trunk will look like when you run the Get-CsTrunkConfiguration command before you change the required settings. By default both session timers and RTCP are enabled.

Below shows disabling the required settings:

The full command is:

Set-CsTrunkConfiguration –Identity <see example> -EnableSessionTimer $false –RTCPActiveCalls $false –RTCPCallsOnHold $false

Hopefully this will save someone from having to call support to set up this configuration.

VoIPNorm

Device Review: Jabra UC Motion and Speak 510 MS

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 18:59:00 +0000

In my previous post I talked about the new offerings from Plantronics. Well it wasn't long before Jabra sent me their latest and greatest with the UC Motion and Speak 510. Between the two different offerings from each vendor there are some differences and depending on what you want I am sure there is a solution available for what you need. I am not going to compare the sets of devices from the different vendors here. I really like products from both vendors and they have both come a long way in the last couple of years with some great offerings.

Jabra UC Motion

Jabra’s new Bluetooth headset has a lot going for it. It really is packaged great and although the travel case is a bit bulky in your pocket it is sturdy and will protect your investment. In my book a sturdy case is a good thing because my laptop bag gets thrown around while traveling. I also think that the case is a good size to add more features to in the future like a battery backup charge. What impresses me even more though is how they put the inside of the case together to be a complete place to store everything and also act as a stand.

The ear piece is well put together. I have found it pretty comfortable and the fact that closing the boom turns the device off is smart. The only thing I have issue with is the volume slider. Its kind of odd and although it works just fine I do find it a little difficult to adjust the volume with at times. The dongle for plugging into the PC is, well a dongle:) I do like the LED indicators to show your on a call and its probably one of the smallest I have seen.

I like this device a lot and have used it with Lync and my cell phone and both have worked great. I believe this is their best headset yet across all headset classes and competes well with Plantronics similar offerings. Nice job Jabra.

Jabra Speak 510 MS

I do and always have had a preference for the Jabra Speak 410. The Speak 410 was a great device and I think what Jabra did to improve on this device was smart and appropriate. The Speak 510 MS adds a nice Bluetooth capability but still kept the ability to use the USB cable connection as a way to utilize the device and not just as a charging port. Good choice in my opinion.

The 510 is going to be the device to beat in this category. For a small compact speaker phone I have used it in meeting rooms that can seat 16 people successfully. Although microphone extensions would be handy, its such a great device that in most circumstances they really are not required.

I have used the Bluetooth option paired to my cell phone and with Lync on an iPad and both worked flawlessly. It really is a leading class device that keeps getting better. This is one device that I cant say anything negative about. I carry one with me everywhere I go.

Overall Jabra has done a great job on these devices and in my opinion their build quality and comfort for the wireless headset has improved considerably over previous offerings. I am looking forward to what they can do to keep improving these already impressive products.

VoIPNorm

Frustrated by Jolly Roger 1

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:05:00 +0000

I was checking out the latest iteration of the Jabber iPad app and this was the first review that came up. Interesting read. I promise everyone I did not write this and I have no idea who the author is.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/cisco-jabber-for-ipad/id540243083?mt=8

------------------------------Customer Reviews------------------------------------------------

FRUSTRATED!

by Jolly Roger 1

I spent about 3 to 4 hours of my precious weekend time trying to figure out this product, as well as other Cisco products.

I have the WebEx Meeting account for up to 3 people. My online WebEx account indicates what my "Jabber ID" is. In Jabber for iPad, I input my Jabber ID...didn't work. Then I put in my email...didn't work. I was brought to a screen to select my product. I selected WebEx Meeting. Then it asked for my email again. This time it worked.

This is where things got much worse. I discovered that there appear to be MULTIPLE accounts and/or apps that interact with each other, instead of a simple "one app fits all." Jabber appears to be simply a portal. For instant messaging, you need another account. I guess I'm using Web Ex Meeting for this. Then, you need to have a THIRD Cisco product/account for audio and video (see more below). Then, for meetings, you need to use a FOURTH app...I'm using WebEx Meetings. What a nightmare!!

So, then, the app asked me for the account I use for video and audio. I thought it was my WebEx Meeting account since that has video...didn't work. You can then click "Jabber for Telepresence" and it asks for a user name and password to create this account...doesn't work. I just get an error message that the user name or password is invalid or that the account has been deactivated.
Then I spent hours trying to figure out what "audio and video" product by Cisco will work. The "help" file was no help at all. There were multiple products by Cisco on the website, many replaced by other ones, to make it even more confusing (as if that wasn't enough). Trying to find out HOW to get these products was equally as confusing and frustrating.

I THINK I may have found a way to obtain Jabber for Telepresence, which I THINK might work. I just didn't have any more time or wits to open up another dang account and spend more time on something that MAY work.

WHY HAVE ALL THESE ACCOUNTS NECESSARY???!!! It should be easy enough to simply create something akin to a Skype account...maybe call it "Jabber by Cisco." And have ONE email (user name) and password for BOTH instant messaging AND audio and video!! And, if you are using a desktop device, like a Mac or PC, that same user name and password should be used there as well.
Either I'm missing something, or Cisco needs to wipe the slate clean and create ONE app that does everything where you need only ONE account. I believe Cisco also needs to make the navigation of their website MUCH easier, in addition to being able to easily acquire a product of interest. Just terrible!

Additionally, adding contacts is broken. I had a contact I was trying to add, and I sent him an invitation through the app. This contact did the same for me. Prior to installing Jabber, I had added this person as a contact on WebEx Meeting in my account while using a PC. Jabber created two entries for this person and when my contact installed Jabber on his iPad, the entry of him using my PC showed him as "available" and online. The contact entries on both our ends that were created from within the Jabber app showed "waiting for confirmation." But, we never received any request, in the app, by email, etc.! With the entry created by the PC, we were able to instant message each other. When I clicked "call," it rang on his end, but the app did nothing when he tried to answer. He couldn't call me at all.

There is also a way to create customized statuses, such as "out to lunch," "be right back," etc. Great. I like that. But, when you do this within Jabber you can't select the color. For example, when I created "Be Right Back," I feel it should be yellow. Jabber automatically made it green. However, in my WebEx Meeting account accessed by my PC, I could select the color (either green, yellow or red).
It's a shame. The interface of Jabber looked promising, but there are more bugs and issues in this app (and in Cisco) that make using it impractical if not impossible. Time to go back to the drawing board, in my opinion!

--------------------------End of comment ----------------------------------------------------------

For those that want to check out Lync 2013 for iPad:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/microsoft-lync-2013-for-ipad/id605608899?mt=8

VoIPNorm

Device Review: Plantronics Voyager Legend UC, C710 & C720

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 17:29:00 +0000

I am not sure what's going on at Plantronics these days but they have some serious product development going on right now with some great new offerings. As every regular reader knows by now I am by definition a device junky. You name it, at one point or another I have listened to it or put it in or on my ears from every device manufacture. Some devices I liked and blogged about and others, well they collect dust on my shelf under the never to be talked about.

What's in my laptop bag(s)?

Recently Plantronics have sent me some of their new releases that have impressed me. The Voyager Legend UC, C710 and 720 have some neat new features. I have basically built my self 3 laptop bags that I rotate though, each with different devices so I can sample them all. I also vary the computing devices as well with my laptop bags. It looks something like this:

Bag 1 - The meeting/travel bag- Used mainly when traveling or doing meeting work and I don’t need to demo much. I don’t have VGA converter for my Samsung device but I probably should as it would make my life a lot easier.

Computing device – Samsung Series 7 tablet – Windows 8

USB devices – Voyager Pro, Jabra Speak 510

Bag 2 – Serious computing bag – I can run a complete environment to demo Lync 2013 from this bag. I also use this bag when I am required to demo the desktop client mainly because of my previously mentioned lack of a VGA converter for my Tablet devices. I should get clever and remote into my home lab but there is nothing like the security of taking your lab with you on the road sometimes.

Computing device – HP Elitebook (I call it the beast because it has 32gb of RAM, 8 core CPU and weighs 7 pounds) – Windows 8 64bit

USB devices –C710 or 720, Jabra Speak 510

Bag 3 – The demo bag – This more a secondary bag that I use when I can’t fit everything in another bag. Usually when I need to demo a bunch of different devices. As you have guessed by now I do a lot of demo’s.

Computing devices – Surface RT/iPad V2 – Windows 8 RT and iOS

USB device – C435,C620, Jabra Speak 510

I am constantly switching out devices and changing things up. So if you ever wondered how I manage to test different devices that’s how I do it. I build complete laptop bags and just take the one I need for the day or possibly two depending on what I am demoing. I am in the process of building an Apple bag with a full MAC and iPad setup to demo Lync’s cross platform capability but that’s a work in progress, mainly because I have no bag for it. I also have my home setup which varies quite a bit depending on what I have available to test. Right now the BCC950 from Logitech has been my main stay device at home but I just added a new Logitech 910 webcam and the Plantronics C720. I also have one of the new Logitech headsets which I am looking forward to trying out.

C710 and C720

Obviously the C710 and C720 are similar. The only difference is one is single ear and one is dual ear but I have been testing both to see if there is any difference in comfort, which there isn’t.

Cool things to note are:

Bluetooth capable – You can pair a Bluetooth capable Smartphone with the headset
Smart Sensor Technology – Automatically answers the call when you pick up the headset
Carry Case – not quite a hard case but not a soft case either. Takes up a little room in your laptop bag but does a great job of protecting your investment.

Like other USB Lync certified devices it functions as you would expect with device enablement in Lync 2013. The Plantronics Spokes Software will add more functionality but its not a requirement to use this device.

Of course most importantly what does it look like while wearing. See below, I am wearing the dual eared version pictured:

Okay, so I wont be gracing the pages of Vanity Fair any time soon but you get the idea.

I really like this device, it does a good job of blocking out background noise and is super comfortable. I also like the Bluetooth option. Seem like this really has become a standard option on the more feature rich devices. Music sound quality is great and while its not going to compete with purpose built music headsets it still does a good job. The build quality is also very high on this device but at $149 retail I would expect so. Overall it’s a solid device with great sound and build quality.

Plantronics Voyager Legend UC

When I first got this device I was a little set back by the case. I wasn’t really sure what to make of it and being as I am not a big smartphone headset guy, even though people try to convince me to be otherwise, I didn’t really use this device much. That was until I was stuck one day and this happened to be the only headset in my laptop bag. So I grabbed it and plugged it into my Samsung Win 8 Tablet. It worked great and I was super impressed with the quality.

So much like other headsets on the market in this price range it supports pairing with PC and smartphone but with the Plantronics Spokes software you can add functionality. As an example showing your presence as on a call when on a cell phone in Lync. It also has voice commands and a bunch of other features that really I don’t use but they have them if that’s your thing. I just wanted to focus on things that caught my eye.

There are two areas that I thought were unique to this device and showed that Plantronics is really thinking about design. First is the case. The case will charge your device as well as give a visual indicator of how much charge is left on your device. Super smart. I am constantly forgetting to charge gadgets and the first time I needed this device I actually hadn't charged it in weeks and it had been just sitting in my laptop bag. I pulled it out and it worked without a hitch. I can’t say the same for some other devices I have had that I have forgotten to charge (Cisco Flip I am talking about you). See below to see the case. I have highlighted the charge indicators.

The second thing I really like was the physical on and off button. Doesn’t sound very fancy but I hate those devices with soft buttons that you need to press two buttons to turn it on and off. This one I can see and its done I don’t need to worry about draining the battery.

All up this is a great device that I really liked. If you find your self constantly forgetting to charge you headset this might be the device for you. It retails around the $199 price so for what you get its not a bad deal even at full retail.

Logitech, Jabra and Plantronics keep exceeding my expectations around devices. All three companies are doing exceptional work and its great to see them going head to head as it keeps the innovation in this area alive and well. I also appreciate the support that each of these companies have shown me over the years with making sure I have the latest and greatest to show and test.

VoIPNorm

Lync Server 2013 Multiple Direct SIP Trunks to CUCM and the Alternate Media IP Setting

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Tue, 26 Mar 2013 18:17:00 +0000

Lync 2013 has changed this configuration quite a bit but in a good way. My original post on this subject can be found here. While this method of configuration will still work just fine there are better ways to complete this configuration with Lync Server 2013 but not all of it is as straight forward as looking at the topology builder. As we step through the process you will notice that some settings will require PowerShell. Even though the configuration at first isn't straight forward, it is in essence simpler to manage.

I have also expanded this post to include the configuration required to add remote alternate media IP to a remote site trunk within Lync Server 2013. I thought this was an important configuration to highlight as it is a little bit hidden. Setting the alternate Media IP in Lync Server 2013 requires the use of PowerShell which is new for 2013. For those not familiar with what this is here is a quick overview.

Alternate Media setting in Lync and CUCM MTP relationship

For those new to CUCM and Lync interop here is a post I wrote way back that talks a little about the use of MTP’s with OCS. Little has really changed in relationship as to why you need them and in reality all VoIP vendors have a Media Termination Points of some description in their environment their just called something a little different. As it relates to Lync, Lync has no awareness of MTP’s location or IP address of another system. So for CUCM that has defined a SIP trunk and a set of MTP’s that can be either as software on the CUCM or on a router, Lync has no knowledge of this. Hence the alternate media IP setting under the Lync gateway configuration.

Out of the box Lync assumes that the media and signaling path for a SIP trunk are one and the same just like a gateway. If you have not located the MTP on CUCM Lync has no knowledge of this and by setting the alternate media IP setting in Lync, Lync can effectively ensure that media bypass will work in the correct manner because as we know CAC and media bypass are determined through sites and subnets.

Okay, now we are done with the basics lets move on.

Reasons for Multiple SIP trunks to the same CUCM cluster/Subscriber

There are a couple of reasons to have multiple SIP trunks between Lync to the same CUCM subscriber or cluster. These are:

Remote site MTP control. For a remote site that has its own MTP resources keeping traffic local to avoid hair pinning and sending unnecessary traffic over WAN links. By creating a separate SIP trunk for a site you can control the alternate media IP for media bypass. This means that using a remote MTP doesn’t require any local Lync resources at that site. So no Mediation Server or SBA required at a remote site.
Calling Search space control on the CUCM side. Each trunk can have its own CSS so adding the ability of call authorization from the CUCM platform even though calls are coming from Lync.
Redundant SIP trunks with dedicated MTP resources.

Previously in Lync Server 2010 the main hurdle with configuring multiple SIP trunks to the same gateway or in this case CUCM cluster is the ability to create multiple gateways with the same IP address in the Topology Builder. The work around to this issue was to use DNS records that resolve to the same IP address. This was a pain if you had lots of remote sites. Imagine managing 150 DNS records all pointing to the same object. Pretty easy to mess up. Well this has improved with Lync Server 2013 and is no longer a requirement.

In my example scenario I have three SIP trunks to my CUCM cluster but my focus will be on RemoteSiteX which is my new Branch site.There are four steps involved in setting up my new site and establishing the remote media termination points to allow media bypass to stay local in Lync. The Cisco UCM configuration really has not changed and so I wont be discussing it in this post. Just know for the remote site you will need to configure its own MTP with a Media Resource Group and List that needs to be applied to the remote site SIP trunk in CUCM.

Step 1 – Define the Trunk in Topology Builder

You will notice I have three trunks defined but only one gateway. This new setting for Lync Server 2013 makes configuration a lot easier to manage. While it still means you need to create multiple trunk objects you no longer need to create new DNS records for every new trunk. You may have noticed I have specified a different Port for the trunk. This is still a requirement and if you refer to my diagram it shows the same DNS record being used with different ports.

Step 2 – Configure the Trunk for Media Bypass in Lync

Now we can setup the trunk inside the Admin UI and enable media bypass. Pretty straight forward not that much has changed here. Take note: Centralized media processing is selected to enable media bypass even though we plan to use an alternate media IP. I have made the mistake of thinking this is not a requirement but it is.

Step 3 – Identify the Trunk ID in PowerShell

This is where we start to add some new configuration. First step is to identify the trunk ID in PowerShell. You’ll notice I said trunk but the ID shows up as a PSTNGateway. Don’t be deceived. Lync builds a gateway object for the trunk because in essence the trunk is performing the functions of a gateway and under the hood it remains a PSTNGateway object. See PS command below:

get-cstrunk : FT Identity

Step 4 – Configure Media IP address for new Trunk

Lastly we need to set the alternate media ID which is the remote MTP defined in CUCM. If you are setting the Alternate Media ID this should be done for all trunks defined under the gateway you are configuring.

Set-CSPSTNGateway –Identity PSTNGateway:RemoteSiteX –RepresntitiiveMediaIP “192.168.0.13”

If you have multiple MTP’s for the site, you only need to define one and Lync will work out the rest through sites and subnet to ensure media bypass will function correctly.

Verification

Once its all said and done you may want to verify your changes.

get-CSTrunk | FT Identity, RepresentativeMediaIP

Hopefully this change in 2013 will make life a little easier for some of you out there.

VoIPNorm

Remove Content from Lync 2013 Persistent Chat Room

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Tue, 19 Mar 2013 18:52:00 +0000

This is a really common question which in previous versions was seemingly impossible unless you knew SQL really well. Well in Lync Server 2013 it’s a very different story and you can now use PowerShell to remove content from a room. I am just now waiting for someone to write a scheduled script to run this command with the right date set. If someone has something like this already written please let me know if your willing to share.

Extracts from TechNet:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj204976.aspx

Clear-CsPersistentChatRoom

Removes all the content from a Persistent Chat chat room beginning with the oldest item in the room and continuing through the specified end date. This cmdlet was introduced in Lync Server 2013.

VoIPNorm

Lync 2013 iPhone and iPad Apps Released–Video on the iPad

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Tue, 12 Mar 2013 21:08:00 +0000

So the good times keep on rolling with the release of the new Lync 2013 iPhone and iPad clients today. Below are some screenshots of the new client for the iPad. Names, URL’s and personal info are removed but you get the idea. I haven’t covered ever feature but really focused in on the new video and desktop sharing capabilities.

As with all the new mobile apps, even though this feature has always been part of the iPad client, we have the days calendar with Lync enabled meetings highlighted blue. When selecting a Lync meeting your presented with a similar screenshot below:

Once you launch into the meeting you get the active speaker listed in the screen:

Launching video is pretty simple:

Here is the active speaker video with my preview from the iPad in the lower right-hand corner. The active speaker in this case in the Lync Web App I have running on my home PC (sorry you only get the side of my head) :

WP8 and Lync 2013 Mobile App Video Experience

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Mon, 11 Mar 2013 21:08:00 +0000

The Lync 2013 Mobile App is finally here. With that comes some cool new features namely voice and video. I have been testing the WP8 Lync 2013 Mobile App on my HTC 8.x WP for a little while now and I think people will really enjoy the new features. Video over Wi-Fi and LTE works really well. The screenshots below were taken while I was on my home Wi-Fi but LTE works equally as well. I was using my home PC to generate the main video feed via the Lync Web App in a meeting and I then joined from my WP8 on Lync mobile. So even though you may see my face in both camera views they are on different devices that are part of a meeting.

The top shot (excuse my messy hair) is full screen landscape view and the second shot down is with the call controls available. With the camera controls you have the ability to switch between front and rear cameras on the phone. The one PIP down on the right hand corner is my rear facing camera pointed at my laptop.

Below are some more screenshots of the meeting join experience (I had to sanitize a little to hide names, numbers and URL’s but you get the idea). One of the great new features is the in app calendar view for the day. So rather than having to swap between apps to join a meeting it all occurs within the Lync 2013 Mobile App. Lync enabled meetings are highlighted in blue.The video is in portrait mode along with the camera controls for starting and stopping the camera and switching camera’s. If you follow along with the screenshots this gives a pretty good flow of what a scheduled video meeting might look like.

I didn’t want to go through every feature and there are some screen shots available in the Windows phone store for other features. Also the Lync Team has published some more screenshots of new iOS Lync Apps here which are due to release shortly.

Lync 2013 Mobile Client Compatibility Confusion

I have noticed that there is some mobile client confusion. This mainly stems from the fact that the Lync 2013 desktop client can register and function with Lync Server 2010. The Lync mobile clients are a little different. A Lync 2013 mobile app can not register with Lync Server 2010 or Lync Server 2013 pre CU1 but the Lync 2010 mobile apps can register with Lync Server 2013 that has had CU1 installed. Confused yet.

While this may sound confusing, from the user standpoint they will not be able to sign in with Lync 2013 mobile until you have the right pieces in place which means they will not see new features and buttons that wont function. So from an end user perspective this will alleviate confusion over what's supposed to work and gives admins some feature release control.Not something I am sure your users want but something that most engineers need to have to orchestrate the required configuration and ensure ancillary pieces like training and helpdesk scripts are in place. All the things that go into an enterprise grade service offering.

See more below:

Lync Server 2010 with Mobility Service

Lync Server 2013 (prior to CU “1” update)

Lync Server 2013, CU “1” – Mobility Enabled

Lync Server 2013, CU “1” – Mobility Disabled

Lync 2010 mobile clients

Notification to upgrade to the latest version of the mobility client.

Error: “Can’t sign in because you are not setup to use Lync 2013. Please contact your support team.””

Lync 2013 mobile clients

Error: “You can't sign in with this version of Lync. Please install Lync 2010.”

Error: “Can’t sign in because you are not setup to use Lync 2013. Please contact your support team.””

BTW, I used the native screen capture feature in WP8 to get the screen grabs above. Just press the 'Power button' and 'Start' icon together and briefly. You hear the camera shutter sound, and it's saved in the 'Photo' section in an album called 'Screenshots'.

VoIPNorm

Lync 2013 Recent News and Releases

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 23:54:00 +0000

There has been lots of news and announcements from the last few weeks during the Lync Conference. I think people are really getting a sense of where this is all going now and Microsoft has answered some lingering questions.

With that there are loads of blog posts, announcements, new releases and general chatter going on. Here are the best resources and links to all the information I could find. Most of the wording below has been taken from the respective links shown so please make sure to check them out if you haven't already.

Tony Bates re-humanizing communications

Keynote video’s

http://www.lyncconf.com/media.aspx

Tony’s blog post on Key announcements

http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_blog/archive/2013/02/19/re-humanizing-communications-from-the-living-room-to-the-boardroom.aspx

Lync 2013 Mobile

From Tony’s blog post - Mobile app availability. Lync 2013 mobile apps for Windows Phone 8 and iOS will be available in early March, with Android coming roughly a month later. We’ve added VoIP and video over IP to all of the apps, and added the ability for iPad users to view shared desktop and application content in a Lync meeting. We’ve built these apps with real users’ needs in mind—and have even designed in features that preserve mobile battery life.

See the keynote media at these points (thanks Curtis)

Windows 8 Mobile: 31:43 (min:sec)
Android: 36:51 (min:sec)
iPhone: 38:52 (min:sec)
iPad: 40:40 (min:sec)

Curtis Johnstone does a nice job capturing a lot of the new mobile features in his blog post also:

http://blog.insidelync.com/2013/02/new-lync-2013-mobile-clients-voip-have-arrived/

Lync Room System

From the Lync Team blog: Lync Room System is a meeting room solution consisting of integrated hardware and software delivered by our partners and optimized to join Lync meetings. With Lync Room System you can join an online meeting with one touch and be ready to collaborate with remote attendees in seconds. It has all the equipment you need for great meetings:

1. High definition touch displays (1080p) for showing video and enabling collaboration. Lync Room Systems are available with 1 or 2 front of room touch displays depending on your room size

2. High definition video camera for capturing the room in full 1080p resolution

3. Wideband audio for clear sound from the room and to the room

4. Table-top touch meeting console to enable the meeting controller to manage the meeting without distracting the other attendees

It’s all brought together by the Lync Room System Edition software, which is a full Lync client optimized to bring the immersive meeting experience to a meeting room setting. It makes joining meetings as easy as on your PC and breaks down the barrier between in-room and remote attendees. Being able to see content and high definition video side by side makes remote collaboration more effective.

http://blogs.technet.com/b/lync/archive/2013/02/19/the-lync-room-system-lrs.aspx

LRS partner announcements:

http://www.crestron.com/about/press_room/press_releases/show_release.asp?press_release_id=1801

http://www.smarttech.com/Home+Page/Solutions/Business+Solutions/SMART+room+systems?utm_source=redirect&utm_medium=redirect&utm_campaign=SMARTRoom

http://www.bloomberg.com/article/2013-02-19/aHAUzerPVk6U.html

Lync Server 2013 Web App

Although this isn't really new at the conference it was highlighted during the keynote and in every demo I have done has been seen as a major improvement:

http://blogs.technet.com/b/nexthop/archive/2013/01/14/lync-2013-the-new-lync-web-app.aspx

Here is a nice overview and some great screenshots of the Lync Server 2013 Web App from the UK Premier Team:

http://blogs.technet.com/b/mspremuk/archive/2012/12/09/lync-server-2013-the-new-lync-web-app.aspx

Skype-Lync integration

Just a ton of items around what's coming here.

From Tony’s blog post - Lync and Skype connectivity. We’re proud to announce Lync-Skype connectivity for presence, IM and voice will be available to all Lync users by June. This move will begin to enable what we call B2X. B2X places the focus of business communication on enabling human interactions. B2X puts people first and looks at communications in a unified way, not as disparate technology silos focused on one task or protocol.

Follow up interview with BJ Haberkorn from the Lync Product Marketing. BJ answers a lot of great questions and really dissolves a lot of myths in the interview. Its worth a read:

http://redmondmag.com/articles/2013/02/22/lync-2013-interview.aspx

The Lync team just added this new info:

http://blogs.technet.com/b/lync/archive/2013/02/28/lync-skype-connectivity-arriving-by-june-2013.aspx

General media

I liked this story below the best, not only because of the story but the comments by Ross Camp from Cisco and the follow up comment by a reader. See below:

http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-to-begin-connecting-skype-and-lync-by-june-2013-7000011488/

Ross Camp trolling for some Cisco love it seems:

Considering All the Options

Thanks for your insightful story. Whether it’s cloud, voice and video quality and reliability, or support, Cisco would heavily encourage your readers to consider a variety of factors when choosing collaboration solutions and vendors. We think Microsoft is playing catch up in these areas. Yesterday, Cisco executives Rowan Trollope, Carl Wiese and Richard McLeod posted some frank blogs on this topic and we're excited about the conversation that's progressing. We’d welcome your readers to join the discussion. The blogs can be found at http://blogs.cisco.com/. Regards, Ross Camp, Director, Corporate Communications, Cisco

Angry readers comment back:

Really?!

Are you serious? As a Cisco UC customer (using UCM 7.1.5 and Presence 8.6), I can tell you that I have very mixed reactions to Cisco's UC experience. On the phone and voice side, yes, Cisco is king of VoIP. I love using UCM and their phones. However, Cisco's IM/Audio/Video products are a joke, and WebEx is great but expensive. I absolutely HATE using Cisco Jabber... even more than I hate Skype. Lync, on the other hand, is what Skype and Jabber wish they could be in terms of performance and quality, and so much simpler with better integration into Office. I'm STILL waiting on proper integration of Jabber and Office 2010.
I've been dying to move away from Presence/WebEx to Lync on a permanent basis.

General Partner Announcements

Partner

Type

Press Link

Acme Packet

Press release

20-Feb

Acme Packet Expands Capabilities for Microsoft

http://news.acmepacket.com/articles/279222/acme-packet-expands-capabilities-for-microsoft/

AudioCodes

Press releases 18-Feb

AudioCodes Announces Availability of 400HD IP Phones for Microsoft Lync

http://www.audiocodes.com/press-releases/audiocodes-announces-availability-of-400hd-ip-phones-for-microsoft-lync

AudioCodes

Press releases 11-Feb

AudioCodes Reports Over 70 Partners Joined One Voice for Microsoft Lync Program

http://www.audiocodes.com/press-releases/audiocodes-reports-over-70-partners-joined-one-voice-for-microsoft-lync-program

Crestron

Press release

19-Feb

Crestron Takes Microsoft® Lync® to the Conference Room

http://www.crestron.com/about/press_room/press_releases/show_release.asp?press_release_id=1801

Jabra

Press release

19-Feb

When on the move - Jabra Motion follows

http://www.jabra.com/CP/US/PressReleasesArchive/2013/Press%20Release%2019-02-2013

LifeSize

Press release

19-Feb

LifeSize Announces Microsoft Lync Room System

http://www.lifesize.com/en/company/news/press-releases/2013/20130219-lrs-announcement

LifeSize

Press release

19-Feb

LifeSize Delivers Industry-Leading Multiparty Calling Experience Through Its Enhanced Software-Based Bridge

http://www.lifesize.com/en/company/news/press-releases/2013/20130219-uvc-multipoint-enterprise

Logitech

Press release

13-Feb

Logitech Takes Desktop Video to the Next Level with Its Most Advanced Webcam for Business

http://news.logitech.com/press-release/logitech-business/logitech-takes-desktop-video-next-level-its-most-advanced-webcam-bus

Logitech

Press release

19-Feb

Logitech Delivers Best-in-Class Desktop Video and Audio For Microsoft Lync 2013

http://news.logitech.com/press-release/logitech-delivers-best-class-desktop-video-and-audio-microsoft-lync-2013

NetSocket

Press release

19-Feb

NetSocket CEM and Microsoft Lync Solutions Assure Exceptional Enterprise-Class Unified Communications

http://www.netsocket.com/pages/posts/netsocket-cem-and-microsoft-lync-solutions-assure-exceptional-enterprise-class-unified-communications-130.php

Plantronics

Press release

19-Feb

Plantronics Goes Beyond Audio and Delivers Contextual Intelligence through a Portfolio of Products for Unified Communications

http://press.plantronics.com/us/plantronics-goes-beyond-audio-and-delivers-contextual-intelligence/

Polycom

Press release

19-Feb

Polycom Expands Microsoft® Lync™-Enabled Portfolio with New Dedicated Room System for Lync 2013, a Breakthrough Content-Sharing Application and Additional Qualified Solutions

http://www.polycom.com/company/news/press-releases/2013/20130219_3.html

Sennheiser

Press pre-release announcement

17-Feb

Sennheiser unveils two newly Optimized for Microsoft Lync high-end Bluetooth and wired headsets at Microsoft Lync Conference

Email Morten Siglev for a copy of this pre-release and more information

Snom

Blog: snom Channel Americas

19-Feb

snom News: snom UC Edition Portfolio of Desktop Phones Now Qualified for Microsoft Lync Server 2013

http://www.snomchannel.com/voip-blog/snom-news-snom-uc-edition-portfolio-of-desktop-phones-now-qualified-for-microsoft-lync-server-2013/

Spectralink

Press release

20-Feb

Spectralink Celebrates Independence and Moves Back to its Roots

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/spectralink-celebrates-independence-moves-back-150000904.html

Spectralink

Press release

21-Feb

Revived Spectralink seeks home in Boulder http://www.bcbr.com/article/20130221/NEWS/130229989

Westcon Convergence

Press release

19-Feb

Westcon Group Achieves Microsoft Gold Communications Competency in EMEA

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/westcon-group-achieves-microsoft-gold-communications-competency-in-emea-2013-02-19

Roadmap for the next 18 months

From Tony’s blog post - Microsoft is also committing to additional product delivery in the next 18 months:

Lync online/server updates. Lync Online updates will be delivered quarterly to enable rapid customer adoption, and we will release a new Lync server version in Q2 of 2014.
Enterprise voice in the cloud. Add enterprise voice support to Lync Online/Office 365.
Lync meetings. Add structured meeting support to Lync Online and the next version of Lync Server enabling remaining Live Meeting customers to fully transition to Lync.
Video connectivity and interoperability. Make rich video more pervasive and accessible by adding video to Skype + Lync connectivity and native interoperability between Lync and 3rd party VTCs.

New tools just released for Lync Server 2013

Lync Server 2013 Resource tool kit

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=36821&WT.mc_id=rss_office_allproducts&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Lync Server 2013 Planning tool

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=36823&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MicrosoftDownloadCenter+%28Microsoft+Download+Center%29#tm

Lync Server CU1

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=36820#system-requirements

Office 2013 Visio stencil

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=35772

Lync 2013 Stress and performance tools

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=36819

Hopefully this has been a helpful list of items for everyone.

VoIPNorm

Lync Server 2013 Planning Tool Now Available

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 19:45:00 +0000

Download now from the link below:

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=36823&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MicrosoftDownloadCenter+%28Microsoft+Download+Center%29#tm

VoIPNorm

CUCM SIP URI Dialing to Lync 2013–New options and updates

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Sat, 23 Feb 2013 00:12:00 +0000

I created the original post for this configuration back in July of last year and its seen quite a bit of traffic and had some great comments. I just thought with the release of Lync 2013 and some new interesting developments it would be worth adding new info and refreshing some of the content to better speak to Lync 2013.

What's this post all about?

While I am not about to promote the use of Cisco’s mobility feature to dual ring a Cisco phone and Lync, there is an interesting feature that could make your life easier if you insist on using it. Its called SIP URI dialing. This isn't a new feature as its been around since 7.x days or possibly earlier. It sparked my interest back in 2008 but I never really investigated it further until 2012.

SIP URI dialing is really a pretty basic concept. Instead of using a normal DID route pattern to designate a destination you use a SIP URI such as lyncuser1@contoso.com. By specifying @contoso.com as your SIP route you assign a SIP trunk that points to Lync. Its actually pretty simple and works with Cisco’s mobility feature used in Remote Destination Profiles.

There are some caveats with this feature though and its not terribly flexible. It does require some special configuration but could possibly make dial plans and migrations a little easier. Also you can remove the issue of requiring unique DID’s on both systems because now that your ringing between systems with a unique SIP URI using the same DID on both systems is much less problematic. So users don’t have to change numbers or use a new number for Lync, it can be the same as their Cisco IP phone.

To make things a little easier to understand, in this post I am referencing the To field in a SIP message when I am talking about Tel URI or SIP URI. I am using Tel or SIP to define trunk routing behavior even though both are configured as SIP trunks when configured in CUCM. Its just the routing behavior based on the address format I am trying to better define. Hope that’s not to confusing.

Why use it?

While working in the field I get a lot of questions from engineers around how do I make my Cisco phone and Lync ring at the same time. As I have covered here on my blog there are a couple of ways to do this from either CUCM, Lync or even potentially from a gateway. But there is a level complexity in regards to how to configure DID’s and how to make DID’s unique enough so that you can route between the two platforms. Well using SIP URI dialing instead of DID’s this simplifies this portion of the configuration and leaves Lync’s Sim Ring feature open for users to configure it for their cell phones. Using Sim Ring as the tool to ring a Cisco desk phone in my opinion is a waste of an easy to configure end user setting. I strongly believe this feature is better used to ring a cell phone or other devices self administered by the user.

The interface for configuring Cisco Remote Destination Profiles is potentially very intimidating for normal users. There are settings and timers that if set incorrectly can cause issues. That’s why in my opinion RDP’s should be configured by an administrator and Sim Ring on Lync is a better choice for self service by the average user. There is only one timer and phone number fields can be prepopulated making the users phone number selection easy. Also Sim Ring has the ability to use the business hours set in Outlook where as Cisco’s RDP requires this to be recreated under the RDP profile.

From a self service point of view Lync allows the user to set Sim Ring and Business hours which are inherent in Outlook straight from within Lync. Timers for voicemail forwarding are available but other timers are system controlled and not exposed to users removing the potential to create issues. Sim Ring can also be changed by the user from all the mobile apps which is a nice add.

I am sure there are fans of the way Cisco does RDP and Single number reach but I am not one of them. Allowing users to change anything but the most simplest of timers has the potential to cause issues and is best left to an admin in my opinion.

Caveats for SIP URI dialing?

The single biggest caveat for SIP URI dialing is that when you create a SIP Route pattern in CUCM it does not allow assigning a route group to it. You have to directly assign a trunk to the route pattern. The main issue is that once assigned to the SIP route pattern you can no longer assign the same trunk to a route group which limits your options. The best way to deal with this is to have a SIP trunk just for SIP URI routing. In CUCM 8.6 you can have multiple endpoints (in our case mediation servers) assigned within a SIP trunk which means that this isn't a redundancy problem. Its more a configuration issue on the CUCM side but since this configuration is for a specific purpose I don’t consider this a show stopper.

With Lync 2013 this trunk can now have its own port within the Lync trunk configuration. This means we can create a trunk with its own rules on either system. It really doesn’t mean that its simpler but certainly more configurable from a call control point of view.

How to set it up?

The easiest way to do the setup is to follow this guide with a few alteration which I will call out below. This is the Microsoft produced guide which I prefer over the Cisco guide. In the Microsoft guide they make use of Calling Search Spaces (CSS) which gives a more complete picture of the settings required. In the Cisco guide there is no call authorization setup so unless you know which CSS to configure you could easily miss a setting as there are multiple places to set CSS on various pages. The one that caught me out was the rerouting CSS on the Remote Destination Profile.

What's needed for Lync?

The SIP URI trunk is for inbound use only. This means that setup on the Lync is pretty simple if you already have a SIP trunk setup for your CUCM deployment. As long as your CUCM servers are already added to the topology as gateways you are already done. Just make sure that the inbound SIP URI trunk to Lync is using already established ports.

In Lync Server 2013 we can take the configuration a little further than 2010. We can define individual trunks for each dialing type. Like I said earlier this doesn’t make it simpler to configure but it can make the configuration clearer to understand. Now we have two well define trunks to the same gateway and we can name it accordingly so we have a clear understanding of the configuration.

If creating two trunks in Lync 2013 the individual trunks are identified by the inbound port on the gateway side of the configuration (in our case CUCM).

The trunk configuration is then completed in the Lync Control Panel or PowerShell. Below are a couple of screen shots for the configuration I completed in my lab but for more complete details on setting up a SIP trunk to CUCM refer to this document http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?displaylang=en&id=26800. Although this document refers to Lync 2010 a lot of the same rules apply to 2013. Also keep in mind there are variances in the exact setup according to the version of CUCM you are using. In my example lab REFER is support by CUCM 8.6 so I left it as enabled but other versions this will differ. Use this link to match your CUCM version setting requirements http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/lync/gg131938.aspx.

Trunk settings for encryption, enable media bypass and REFER for CUCM 8.6.

The last time I posted this info Alex Lewis asked the question about “You say the DID can be the same in Cisco and in Lync but if I'm in Lync and dial another user then only their Lync endpoint will ring.” Well thanks to an Anonymous tipster I believe that we have somewhat of a solution to this. There is an attribute that can be added to the users Tel URI that will stop Lync from doing the usual RNL behavior. This means that any call to the users extension can be routed to CUCM regardless of whether its configured in Lync as the user line URI while allowing the RDP in CUCM to ring the Lync client. Now this is by no means a perfect solution. There is potential hair pinning of calls through Lync to CUCM and back to Lync. While this has the potential to consume some extra resources its not going to be life threatening in most cases. Its just a matter of planning for it and understanding call flows in your environment.

What you potentially end up with is a Line URI that looks like this:

tel:+12345678;ext=5479;ms-skip-rnl

The ms-skip-rnl is what will cause Lync to pass the call directly out to CUCM rather than follow normal reverse number look up behavior for calls to be routed to users. This attribute is actually used else where in the product for certain functions such as CAC and RCC so its not a total mystery of its existence but this is not its normal use.

Lastly I just want to mention, use this configuration at your own risk. This is not the usual configuration that one would follow in setting up Lync. When calling in a support ticket this attribute may be required to be removed if you are having issues. As my friend and college Doug wrote to me in an email exchange “The mechanism that it leverages will probably remain in the product forever but, if they called support, the engineer would probably go, “huh?”. I think you get the idea now.

How do I configure CUCM?

In my testing I was using CUCM 8.6 so your settings may vary depending on the version you have.

SIP Trunk

The thing with this configuration is that you are creating a SIP trunk for one purpose and that is to ship messages with headers that have the “to” field with a SIP URI format to Lync. So LyncUser1@contoso.com as an example.

Your Tel URI and SIP URI SIP trunks can share the same SIP Security Profile and outbound ports to Lync but you will need to use different DNS/SRV names or IP address DNS name combinations. So as an example:

SIP URI Trunk – FQDN – 2013-lync-fe.contoso.com

Tel URI SIP Trunk – IP Address 192.168.0.170

Below is my trunk configuration for my SIP URI routing with a FQDN for my Lync 2013 Mediation Server.

SIP Profile for calling out a specific listening port:

In my case I used a IP address on one trunk for Tel URI calling and the FQDN on the SIP URI trunk. Now if you are not that fixed on configuring route groups and route lists for the SIP trunk connecting to Lync you can configure the trunk directly on both DID and SIP URI route patterns and just have one trunk. I tried both in my lab and it worked either way.

In this 2013 update I changed around my configuration somewhat to route to separate trunks that have separate port numbers as well. Like I said earlier this give the ability to create more control at either end of the trunk on either Lync or CUCM.

SIP Route

Probably the new piece of configuration to most people will be the SIP route itself. Its pretty easy to configure. See below. I created a domain route to contoso.com to route my SIP URI traffic that I setup for my users on their Remote Destinations.

User Setup

As far as the user setup goes the only variation between the standard setup mentioned in the guide I referenced earlier is to configure the user with a SIP address to route calls in the Destination Number under Remote Destination configuration. In my case I used garthf@contoso.com as my destination number rather than a DID or other number.

This configuration is probably one of the most important interoperability pieces I have written in a while. I can see this alleviating quite a few issue I have come across in the field and hopefully this article will get good circulation so more people know about it. If I look over all the possible ways to do interoperability between Lync and CUCM (RCC, Plugins etc, etc) this really does give the best of both worlds without sacrificing one for the other unlike other methods like plugins which ruin the Lync UI experience. There are some complexities for the initial setup but at the end of the day your using the features available of both products without the use of third parties or additional servers. Call it the biggest bang for your buck if you will.

If folks need more explanation please feel free to post your questions. Cisco’s Unified Mobility can be a pain to setup first time around but funnily enough the Microsoft guide does a really good job of walking through the configuration. I can’t say the same of Cisco’s.

VoIPNorm

Lync Conference Keynotes Now Available

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 16:39:00 +0000

If you missed the keynote yesterday from the Lync conference its now available online.

Lots of great first time demos like:

- New mobile apps for iPad, iPhone, WP8, Windows RT all with voice and video.

- New Lync Room System

- Connectivity with Skype

Catch the keynote here : http://www.lyncconf.com/media.aspx

VoIPNorm

Northwest Microsoft UC User Groups Portland, Seattle and Boise Upcoming Meetings

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Wed, 13 Feb 2013 16:21:00 +0000

What’s Your Unified Communications Strategy?
Come to hear other’s strategies as well!

We are a forum for computer professionals in the Portland, Boise and Seattle areas who are interested in gaining and sharing knowledge in Microsoft Unified Communications technologies through networking and education.

The presentation starts around 11:00am.

Come when you can, and leave when you must. (We are an informal groups)
Interested in joining our group - just attend a meeting! That is it. There is no fee to join just your enthusiastic participation is requested!

Agenda is as follows:

10:30am - 11:00am	Welcome
11:00am – 11:45am	How to select the correct endpoint – Logitech and Plantronics
12:00pm – 12:30pm	Lunch
12:30pm- 1:30pm	Lync 2013 What's new
1:30pm – 2:00pm	UC discussions: Lync 2010, tips and tricks, challenges, solutions, Future meeting topics.

Seattle March 5th

Date: March 5th

Time: 11:00 – 2:00pm

Location: Microsoft 320 Westlake Ave. North; Seattle, WA 98109

Seattle - Register Here

Boise March 6th

Date: March 6th

Time: 11:00 – 2:00pm

Location: Microsoft Boise Office

401 West Front Street

Boise - Register Here

Portland March 7th

Date: March 7th

Time: 11:00 – 2:00pm

Location: Microsoft

1414 NW Northrup St

Suite 900

Portland OR 97209

Portland -Register Here

Come and take part in our first User Group meetings of the year and catch up on what's happening with Lync 2013.

Hope to see you there.

VoIPNorm

Lync Mobile Connectivity Analyzer (64 bit)

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 18:29:00 +0000

I have people mention or at least seen mentioned about having troubles getting the new Windows 8 Lync App to work. Well now there is a tool to help with that. See below:

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=36535

“Microsoft Lync Connectivity Analyzer helps Lync administrators find out if the deployment and configuration of their Lync Server environment meets the requirements to support connections from Lync Windows Store app for Windows 8 and Windows RT and from Lync mobile apps. “

Enjoy!

VoIPNorm

Voice Migration Strategies: Step-by-Step Guide for Moving to Lync 2013 from Cisco Unified Communications Manager

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 23:10:00 +0000

This is a common topic that I get really excited about because there some great new options with Lync 2013. Whether your going the full hog or only part way, there are steps you can take to get where you want to go. If you haven’t already seen the Lync OIP interoperability page yet CUCM is supported for direct SIP IP-PBX support. See the excerpt from the page below. While there hasn’t been a lot of updates for Lync 2013 yet, early deployments have shown a lot of the same configurations still apply.

Support for various options for the purposes of SIP trunking vary by version so make sure to check the configuration notes based on your version of CUCM.

Back in 2009 I wrote about a similar topic with OCS R2. There were four significant changes in Lync 2010 that made migrations and interoperability less challenging compared to my original post . They were

1. Media Bypass,

2. Outbound number translation on the mediation server,

3. 1: many Mediation Server to gateways and

4. Mediation Server collocation.

In Lync 2013 the improvements continued. Outlined below are the major new features that make the most challenging environments easier to migrate.

1. Multiple trunks to the same gateway support

2. Inter-trunk routing

3. Calling and called ID manipulation

So what migration or interoperability scenarios does Lync present? Well there are quite a few but for the sake of doing something different I will break them down into steps as a possible way to move forward from the initial interoperability to the final conclusion of removing CUCM from your environment. My example environment is a pretty simple setup but the general ideas that make up the steps can be applied to any sized deployment. Of course not everyone is planning to remove CUCM and there is a step in here where you may choose to stop.

This isn't a set of hard and fast rules that are meant to be followed in order either. Think of this more as a discrete set of steps that can be used to design a migration that meets your requirements. I just put this order in place as a possible way to add some logic to something that could be otherwise overwhelming to the new voice person.

Step 1 Direct SIP

Pretty straight forward. Direct SIP from Lync to CUCM with media Bypass to the MTP. This is really a starting point for most organizations. Establishing the Lync deployment as a subtending PBX is a good way to get the Lync migration underway. CUCM has the capability to allows a combination of Single Number Reach to a Lync client to ring both the Cisco handset at the same time as well as the Lync client or in the case where the user no longer requires a Cisco handset port the DID to Lync. If you port the DID to Lync CUCM becomes a tandem PBX being used for traffic management rather than endpoint termination.

One common comment I often hear is I don’t want to manage two dial plans. Or users don’t want to change their DID. Well there is a couple of ways to make this transition easier without the heartache. This early step really doesn’t require a huge dial plan in Lync. In fact its more than likely you will only have one or two routes in and out of Lync, hardly rocket science.

Once engineers are over the fact that the dial plan isn't a big deal, managing DID’s is probably the next consideration. I wrote an article a while back that takes a lot of the issues faced with provisioning the same DID in both platforms out of the picture. There are a few ways to manage this:

1. The cold hard cut over. Swap in the new system and remove the old. This can be jarring on the end user but certainly a commonly used option.

2. Gradual migration through redirection of inbound DID. So basically you are leaving the Cisco phone on the desk for a while but it will not ring as the primary DID and call routing now points to Lync. Call it the equivalent of a safety blanket for users.

3. An alternate answer is to use SIP URI’s and CUCM’s remote destination profiles to ease user pain while making the transition from the CUCM environment to Lync.So now when an inbound call reaches CUCM for users that still want a hard phone, Lync will ring at the same time but without the cumbersome confusion of requiring unique DID’s in both systems.

Using a SIP URI to mange inbound traffic to Lync has some clear advantages.

1. It keeps CUCM transition dial plan changes to a minimum. Routing via a SIP URI typically only takes one SIP Route to Lync along with the SIP trunking configuration.

2. The requirement that DID’s in each system have to be unique is no longer relevant. I can be 425-555-5555 in CUCM and in Lync I can be +1425-555-5555 and neither system cares because traffic resolving between the two system is using my SIP URI with remote destination profiles. Only voipnorm@contoso.com is passed making number transitions much easier. The added benefit now is in Lync I have my real DID so when I get comfortable and want to make calls from Lync it has my real DID which is also used for conference authentication.

The final consideration is that of caller and calling ID manipulation. Most PBX’s do not support E.164 and those that do most are not configured in that manner. I would guess that 99% of CUCM deployment in the US today are not using E.164 to do call routing. In OCS days this was a big problem and caller ID manipulation was down at a gateway level. In Lync 2010 this got a little easier but still had some limitations with outbound caller ID. In Lync 2013 this is now fully configurable both for inbound called number and outbound called and calling numbers. Albeit that inbound and outbound are configured in slight different fashions there is now absolutely no reason not to configure Lync with E.164 while maintaining full control of the dial plan in Lync 2013.

STEP 2 Adding direct SIP connectivity to gateways

Seems like another simple step but adding a direct SIP trunk from the gateway to Lync once you have a numbers of users taking advantage of Enterprise Voice can make interoperability a little easier. A user could also use Sim Ring from Lync to ring a Cisco Phone. Call it a substitute to using Cisco’s Single number reach or Remote Destination Profiles feature in CUCM which some see as a complex feature to setup.

This configuration also allows calls from the PSTN direct access to the Lync conferencing service rather than going through CUCM. My theory is the less you have transition through other systems the easier interoperability becomes. In this case you can really start to treat the trunk between CUCM and Lync as a simple tie trunk for interoffice calls rather putting every call through CUCM to get to Lync.

In the case of an ISR shown in the diagram this can be done with dial peers placed into a hunt group. The caveat here is that Lync has to have the highest priority for it to work effectively otherwise the calls will still all be routed via CUCM. If a Call comes into Lync that does not have a user associated to the DID, Lync simply can reject the call. This is the simplest call treatment although Lync can do other things but for the purposes of rerouting back to the gateway using the default logic is the simplest.

If you haven’t already noticed I am trying to avoid any IP-IP GW/CUBE functionality as this will add to your overall cost due to CUBE licensing. Although this feature has its place, interoperability with direct SIP between these platforms no longer requires the use of the CUBE feature.

STEP 3 Trunk to trunk routing in Lync to become the primary call routing platform at Corporate HQ

So now your out of voice pilot mode and audio conferencing is now running on Lync. In a traditional legacy migration moving over trunking meant physically moving cables from one PBX trunk card to another or onto a VoIP gateway system as more companies moved towards VoIP. This is still very true in a lot of cases as the number of companies that still have a traditional legacy PBX is surprisingly very large. When swapping between VoIP Systems though this is a lot easier from a gateway perspective because its more about changing a route over an IP network rather than having to physically move cables between systems.The real question becomes how do you move routing logic between systems.

So below is our original setup. Pretty simple, few routes that is more than likely used for a POC or audio conferencing. This may be where some companies stop so they can ride out their Cisco investment and utilize Lync Enterprise Voice for remote workers or other end user scenarios that don’t require a IP handset.

But for those that plan a full replacement and add more sites to the mix it more than likely going to start looking like the picture below. Lots of dual connected sites to gateways that may even have connectivity to other legacy PBX’s

This is a natural progression as sites are migrated to Lync. In Lync 2010 this is where you would unplug CUCM. This means that to remove CUCM all services now have to be off of CUCM to enable that decision. Well in Lync 2013 with the new capability to do trunk to trunk routing or inter-trunk routing CUCM can be positioned as a subtending PBX while the remaining services are transferred to Lync (see below). This means you can remove some of the gateway complexity as you make the transition. This is also a great option for legacy PBX migrations, rather than deploying analog gateways the legacy PBX can be used to support analog while you migrate other services to IP.

This also keeps the routing core logic centralized, minimizes supporting two dial plans where you have basically reversed the roles of Lync and CUCM.

Below is high level view of the new inter-trunk routing process for Lync 2013. This makes the process of migrations a lot easier as you move between platforms.

STEP 4 Migrating the Branch

Lots of options, so little bytes to write them on. Below I will talk about what I have actually seen myself and also what's possible. I am not going to go into great depth because there is a lot involved in the configuration and dial plan options. I just want to give a high level view of what's being done and what's possible.

I have seen remote branches completed during varying stages of a migration. From the being the very first sites to leaving all the branches till last. There is no rule in my book on when and where branches are deployed in the migration cycle. One of the first companies I worked with started doing branches first before they did the main user campuses because they had new greenfield sites coming online. So even though I have listed branches as step 4 they really can go anywhere in the migration cycle once you have Lync in place.

1. No Survivable Branch Appliance (SBA) – dual connected WAN site - Cisco or other gateway used for PSTN connectivity. This is a very real option that I have seen used in production in a large company. Typically this is used at smaller branch sites of 5-10 users but I have seen some larger ones with 100 users also have this deployed. FXS ports with Analog phones are used for 911 fall back to a PSTN service in the case where a total WAN outage is experienced. Of course this is not for everyone but its an option that allows the use of existing equipment and keeps maintenance to a minimum.

2. SBA either in a Cisco router or other Partner qualified gateway – there are literally a bunch of different options here, from putting the SBA on a Cisco gateway module to using an AudioCodes gateway with embedded SBA software and data routing capabilities.

3. Survivable Branch Server with Cisco or other qualified gateway.This could be an option for the large branch but with new DR options for Standard Edition I would suggest that a large branch of more than a 1000 users could be better served with a paired SE deployment. This not only gives local assets for conferencing but makes the larger site highly independent. I will get into the value of SE on another day though as it deserves a post of its own.

STEP 5 Removing CUCM

The last stage is the most obvious and that is removal of legacy PBX’s. Basically turning off CUCM and removing the configuration to support it. Not sure there is a lot to explain here other than ensuring that all services removed before the plug finally gets pulled.

Even though what I have discussed here is a pretty basic setup voice migrations can be a long and complicated process with larger companies taking years to complete. Moving from one VoIP system to another is a lot easier though than moving between traditional TDM legacy systems which is one thing to be grateful for. If you have never done a migration like this before I hope this has been helpful.

Comments welcomed.

VoIPNorm

Windows 8 and Client Hyper-V

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:36:00 +0000

If you haven't already seen this its one more reason to switch to Windows 8 if you’re an IT pro. Hyper-V now runs on Windows 8 extending previous virtualization capabilities of Windows 7.

There are some requirements to get it running though. Hyper-V requires a 64-bit system that has Second Level Address Translation (SLAT). SLAT is a feature present in the current generation of 64-bit processors by Intel & AMD. You’ll also need a 64-bit version of Windows 8, and at least 4GB of RAM. Hyper-V does support creation of both 32-bit and 64-bit operating systems in the VMs.

I am using it to run a virtual Lync Server 2013 environment so I can test out new server features and have a demo environment. I am currently using a HP EliteBook 8570w to run Windows 8 which among other things has 32GB of SDRAM. So lots of horse power and memory to support VM’s.

For an IT pro supporting Lync Server this is a welcomed new feature. You no longer need to download VMWare Player or other virtualization platform to build a Lync server environment. Very cool.

VoIPNorm

Cisco’s Take on Open (Cisco) Standards

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Tue, 15 Jan 2013 22:15:00 +0000

Recently Stacy Melillo Spognardi from Cisco blogged about using standards based implementation to lower cost of UC. I love seeing Cisco blog posts that take a stab at the industry. Partly because no matter how informed they seem to be on the industry they ignore their own heritage and the capabilities of their competitors. I guess you can call it a case of selective memory. The same thing your other half accuses you of when for not remembering to pick up some milk on the way home but you can replay the entire Muppets Manamana song in your mind as if you were listening to it. Your humming it right now aren’t you? But still can’t remember that milk.

Let’s take a look at Stacie’s blog and with a broader sense of where we are as an industry and with Cisco’s history of standards in mind.

“One thing that stays constant in this industry is change, especially when it comes to devices. Let’s take a walk down memory lane and see if you can remember any of these once “have to have” mobile devices. The Nokia 9000, The Motorola “Flip phone” and The “Razor”, Palm Pilot, dare I say the Blackberry and of course at the start of 2007 the IPhone came on to the market — and we all know how that is playing out — this being a rarity. More recently, Samsung is challenging Apple with the Galaxy and DROID OS is becoming more prevalent than IOS. Last I checked, there was an estimated 1.3 million Android activations per day. Android is now the #1 mobile OS.”

I personally don’t think it really matters who is the leading smart phone manufacture to a UC provider? There is an expectation from companies that all major mobile OS’s are supported and this does include Windows Phone. The fact that Cisco doesn’t support WP shows that the Post PC marketing message is more important than reality of expectations around the enterprise space limiting a users choice of handset.

“The examples I have shown are mobile devices, but I could argue the same point for any endpoint like tablets, personal video endpoints, IP Phones etc. The point I am making is that over time devices come in and out of favor (some last longer than others) and employees’ preferences change very rapidly as new products promise novel and exciting features and functionality. IT Managers need to be able to adapt to these changes in preference, but also minimize any negative impact they may have on their networks and costs. The bottom line is people want to collaborate with each other using whatever device they choose and frequently the first adopters of new devices are those in the executive suite. Given these influencers are also those that approve IT budgets, it seems prudent to be open to their needs.”

To me this message seems confused. I thought the value of a platform was to be open to the needs of the organization, not just to the needs of employees or executives so they approve budgeting to a project. Helping companies drive new revenue streams and lower costs seem to spring to mind but that doesn’t seem to rate a mention. This sounds like something a sales person would say and not a trusted advisor to the organization. At the end of the day platform choice and deployment varies widely between companies and where they are in their technology lifecycles. Believe it or not, there are companies that want to have a say in what they deploy and support and not just give into consumerization wholly and solely. A trusted adviser needs to be able to be flexible in their approach adjusting to the needs of an organization and not just sell a marketing message to executives.

“IT managers need to weigh heavily the impact of standards when choosing a collaboration partner and strategy and they need to be mindful of the impact that multiple devices on that decision. Some questions to consider are: How will non-standard based end points communicate with each other? What will happen as new devices du jour enter the workplace? Will I be able to support them with minimal effort? What added infrastructure needs to exist to make this happen? Will new code have to be written to enable third party devices to work together and function as intended with a great user experience?”

Considering Cisco’s own history in this space this statement makes a strong case against Cisco’s own technology investments. Namely the use of Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP) and Skinny Call Control Protocol (SCCP) which most Cisco voice networks still heavily depend on. I could name a dozen large Cisco VoIP networks that rely on CDP for voice VLAN discovery and most likely establishing port trust for QoS. By default Cisco phones and networks run CDP and depending on what IOS and phone firmware LLDP as well. Over time Cisco are slowly moving more to standards based protocols but most deployments still rely heavily on their proprietary protocols. Overall this has helped to ensure customers have a hard time converting to more standards based deployments and securing Cisco’s voice and network deployments. So is the message to dump Cisco’s voice networks that rely on this technology or spend money upgrading their propriety technology to more standards based versions? I am not sure. Just a hunch, I bet it’s the latter.

“Let’s say that I am the IT manager for a medium sized business that is in the process of expanding all over the world. Some of the global offices are in locations that have limited bandwidth availability and I’m looking into a VoIP deployment but would also like to have IM, presence, and web and video conferencing capabilities. I am considering vendors that offer both proprietary as well as standard-based CODECs.
During my research phase I made some discoveries. In my case, I will have some locations that will be operating on very minimal bandwidth. With Audio CODECs such as G.729, a standards-based low bandwidth audio CODEC, you know what your payload size will be and you have a high likelihood of being interoperable at the CODEC level with other devices. Your network will be very predictable. In some cases, there are CODECS which are tuned for the internet and are “flexible”, using more bandwidth to compensate for lost packets, as well as increasing bandwidth to try to improve quality. These CODECS, while great on the Internet, are not predictable and often use much more bandwidth than is expected as a result of their “flexibility”. Codecs which are both flexible and proprietary not only are unpredictable but do not “play well with others”.”

Interesting. G.729 maybe a standard but it is not free and has to be licensed which means it’s proprietary even though widely used (Sipro Lab Telecom is the authorized Intellectual Property Licensing Administrator for G.729 technology and patent pool). It also suffers from poor quality when there is minimal packet lose over uncontrolled networks so you better make sure you spend a lot of time and money on your network to make sure it’s predictable. Now I am not going to disagree that having a predictable architecture for quality control over your network isn’t desirable but codec alone won’t get you there especially one that was designed for TDM networks. The suggestion that organizations should just disregard the trend of people working from home (which I am doing right now) for the sake of using standards is a weak concept. How about using a platform that meets the needs of an organization whether in the office or remote. Now that’s a concept.

“Add video and sharing capabilities to the mix and the bandwidth requirements become even greater. As an example, in some cases a desktop share between two people swells from 300k to over 1.5M per person when a third person is added — with no ability to limit or control bandwidth usage. This will result in a sub-par experience including but not limited to dropped calls, latency, and jitter and adverse effects on other flows and applications. How do I fix such a problem? I will need to increase bandwidth. In some locations this isn’t even an option. And as much as bandwidth costs are going down, it is still a formidable cost especially in remote areas of the world.
Looking at the Video CODEC part of the equation, standards-based CODECs like H.265 are much more bandwidth efficient than other proprietary video CODECs. In fact, H265 can save up to ½ of my bandwidth. When I choose to adopt standards based codecs, I also vastly improve my interoperability with existing video units and reduce hair-pinning through transcoders, which costs even more bandwidth.”

H.265, I am not even sure where to begin. It is possible that H.265 could be a great future solution but right now it buys you nothing. Considering that the industry in general is moving more towards H.264 SVC and AVC as standard implementation codecs Cisco’s push of a draft codec is premature. It is more indicative of Cisco trying to create exclusive Cisco only video network making it harder for customer to leave for another vendor if they choose. At the end of the day does it matter if it’s a standard if no one else uses it? Nope. While other video vendors are at least trying to come to terms on a standard implementation of a video codec Cisco is heading off in a direction of its own. I have yet to see other companies committing to the same Cisco flavor of H.265. Is this just a Cisco problem? Nope, it’s actually an industry problem that forums like the UCIF are trying hard to solve but it seems Cisco is just happy to tout how it uses standards.

“Remember, in this example we are focused on a medium sized organization. If I were to expand this example to an enterprise environment using a proprietary solution — the network can be crippled and the bandwidth cost would be MUCH greater. Why would I spend my IT budget on more bandwidth if it can be avoided with a standards-based solution that offers a better experience?
So, what about SIP? Using a proprietary secure SIP implementation for call control is recommended by some vendors as a security measure by encrypting the SIP call control traffic. But, it also has limitations by preventing intelligence in the network that helps route traffic more efficiently. Using other security methods in my network like tunneling, VLANs or VPNs still ensures network protection, but does so without encrypting the SIP call control traffic. These methods enable the network to see the SIP call control traffic and allow many enhancements to call flow resulting in a potential reduction in bandwidth and cost savings by re-routing traffic. It also allows me to integrate disparate call control platforms, since most call control systems that implement security use completely different key exchange mechanisms, rendering them non-interoperable.”

The suggestion that secure encrypted signaling (standards based encryption was never mentioned, so I can only assume all encrypted signaling is bad) is less desirable than VPNs and tunneling certainly pushes at the notion that Cisco are trying place network integration higher in the priority list over security. The fact most modern UC systems can turn off encryption to allow SIP interoperability if encryption methods differs even if only over a trunk seems over looked. The answer is leave it all unencrypted and let the network do that. Seems like a great solution for Cisco, not so great if you a customer concerned about security. The fact that VLAN’s and security are even mentioned together in the same sentence kind of makes me shutter a little. In the end it may be a combination of methods that leads to the ideal solution but suggesting that security is sacrificed for network routing is self-serving to say the least. Meanwhile Cisco’s Wi-Fi competitor Aruba seem to be able to identify network traffic while it’s still encrypted. Wait a minute, didn’t Cisco say that wasn’t possible?

“Beyond bandwidth concerns, proprietary solutions cannot communicate with standards-based solutions. In order for this to happen I would need to purchase a number of gateways to facilitate the transcoding or signaling translation. This poses two major problems. First, it introduces a much greater level of complexity as you deploy gateways your network. Second, it adds additional capex to my reduced budget in this current economic environment.”

If my Cisco deployment runs G.729 (which at times Cisco has had issues with, see here to understand Cisco’s G.729 pre-standard implementation wows) and I want to interface to the PSTN that uses G.711 don’t I need a gateway and transcoders? Yep. Gateways, transcoders and media termination points (Cisco term but in some form every vendor has them) are a part of all vendor ecosystems and sometimes the use of standards does not negate this. Video in particular is an evolving technology and the final state of industry standards is moving at a rapid pace. Even the inclusion of WebRTC seems to be throwing a new wrench into the works for video evolution so to conclude that the world will live on without gateways is misinformed to say the least.

“Lastly, some companies that offer collaboration solutions manufacture their own IP phones/end points based on proprietary technology. If I choose this route and purchase these proprietary endpoints, I am surprised when I discover that …guess what? They don’t talk to other standards-based end points. What does that mean? It means you are forced to remain exclusively tied to these end points, or you need to buy 3rd party end points that have written this proprietary code directly into the end point itself. This limits your choice, as there are few vendors that choose to tailor their products in this way. If I do decide to change manufacturers over time, I will have no investment protection whatsoever. What will happen when new devices come on to the market? How long will it take the manufacturer to write code to support these proprietary implementations if at all? Do you really want to limit your options when you don’t have to?”

Is taking a Cisco Phone upgrading it to SIP then registering it with anything but CUCM even supported, how about registering a third party handset to CUCM? It may work sure but what about the user experience? Even on the Cisco developer page it’s referred to as Cisco SIP. If I look at Cisco’s developer documents it refers to proprietary and nonstandard SIP headers and identification services. Are you telling me even Cisco has proprietary extensions inside SIP on the line side? But I thought this is what the blog was advocating against. Right? Does that mean to get full use of a generic SIP phone I may have to code specifically for CUCM line side SIP specifications? Wouldn’t SCCP fall into this category along with Cisco Phones that are closely tied to the network through CDP? Sounds like a case against Cisco and not for it. While Cisco has made efforts to move toward SIP the blog post disregards where they have come from, the fact they use their own proprietary SIP extensions and where most Cisco voice customers are still today.

In the end I am not sure if large competitive over sights or lack of self-analysis is more disturbing about this blog post. Cisco has come to the conclusion that using common standards (SIP), marginally adopted drafts (H.265), home grown standards (IME, TIP), proprietary technology (SCCP, CDP) mixed with network based security (VLANs, VPNs and Tunneling) somehow qualifies them to judge the rest of the industry. Stacie’s final recap says it all:

“Let’s recap. What does implementing proprietary technology get you — more complexity, more infrastructure to deploy, manage and troubleshoot, more capex, more opex cost, less scalability and less end point choice.”

I guess that counts out Cisco.

VoIPNorm

MSPL Script: Blocking Federated Presence

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 21:59:00 +0000

Ever wanted to stop another company your federated with seeing your presence but still wanted to do IM and all other UC functions. Well there is a way. As with all the scripts I post on VoIPNorm someone much smarter than me came up with the script. Thanks to Brad, I owe you a beer.

The script is in two parts.First part is the MSPL script which you install on the Lync Edge server and the second part is a text document which you could post on accessible file share to the Edge or straight on the Edge Servers themselves. The text document contains a list of domains your blocking presence for.

MSPL script text:

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<r:applicationManifest xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" r:appUri="http://sip.yourdomain.com/BlockFederatedPresence" xmlns:r="http://schemas.microsoft.com/lcs/2006/05">
<r:allowRegistrationBeforeUserServices/>
<r:serverFilter roles="ALL"/>

<r:requestFilter methodNames="NOTIFY,BENOTIFY,SUBSCRIBE" strictRoute="true"/>

<r:scriptOnly/>

<r:file name="AllowedPresenceDomains"
    path="C:\MSPLScripts\PresenceFilter\AllowedPresenceDomains.txt" delimitedBy="comma"
    keyColumnName="Domain" static="false">
    <r:column name="Domain" />
    <r:column name="Action" />
   </r:file>

   <r:splScript><![CDATA[

     function AllowedDomain(strURI) {
    bolIsAllowed = false;
    arrStrURI = Split(strURI, "@");
    foreach(strValue in arrStrURI) {
        strDomain = strValue;
    }
    if (strDomain == "yourdomain.com") {
       bolIsAllowed = true;
    }
    else {
       if(AllowedPresenceDomains[strDomain].Action == "allow") {
          bolIsAllowed = true;
       }
    }
    return bolIsAllowed;
     }

     skipScan = true;
     foreach(s in GetHeaderValues(StandardHeader.Event)) {
       skipScan = !EqualString(s, "presence", true);
       break;
     }

     if (!skipScan) {
    if (sipRequest) {
       fromUser = GetUri(sipRequest.From);
       toUser = GetUri(sipRequest.To);
    }
    if (sipResponse) {
       fromUser = GetUri(sipResponse.From);
       toUser = GetUri(sipResponse.To);
    }
     }

     if (!skipScan && ContainsString(sipMessage.Content, "<category name=\"state\"/>", true)) {
       if (!AllowedDomain(fromUser)) {
          newContent = "";
          foreach (element in Split(sipMessage.Content, "<")) {
            if (element!= "") {
              if(!ContainsString(element, "category name=\"state\"/>", true)) {
                newContent = Concatenate(newContent, Concatenate("<", element));
              }
            }
          }
          sipMessage.Content = newContent;
       }
     }

     if (!skipScan && ContainsString(sipMessage.Content, "<availability>", true)) {
       if (!AllowedDomain(toUser)) {
          newContent = "";
          foreach (element in Split(sipMessage.Content, "<")) {
            if (element!= "") {
              if(!ContainsString(element, "availability>", true)) {
                newContent = Concatenate(newContent, Concatenate("<", element));
              }
              if(ContainsString(element, "/availability>", true)) {
            newContent = Concatenate(newContent, "<availability>1800</availability>");
              }
            }
          }
          sipMessage.Content = newContent;
       }
     }

     if (sipRequest) {
       ProxyRequest("");
     }
     else if (sipResponse) {
       ProxyResponse();
     }

]]></r:splScript>
</r:applicationManifest>

Format for text file:

domain1.com,allow
domain2.com,allow

Download both from here.

VoIPNorm

My Favorite Things from 2012

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Thu, 27 Dec 2012 00:54:00 +0000

Just like Oprah, I to have a list of my favorite things. There are a few exceptions, I don’t have a screaming manic audience and I am not going to give away everything in my list. Last year about this time I came out with my favorite things from 2011 and just like last year I am going to expand my list beyond Lync.

Microsoft Surface - The long awaited Microsoft answer to the iPad. I have been using my Surface with Windows RT for the last few weeks and even though I have been on vacation I have to admit the Surface experience has been great so far. I am looking forward to using it more in a work environment and giving the Lync App a work out. Highlights for me so far have been the touch cover, Netflix App and IE 10. I am actually writing this blog on my Surface inside a browser.

Windows 8 - I have been using Win 8 for about 7 months now. I really love it. Using machines with Windows 7 seems like a step backward. The secret in my opinion to Windows 8 is search. Once you understand how to use search its a whole new experience. I have heard people mention the missing start button but I have never found that to be an issue. There are developers that have made apps to bring the start button back but I have always found using search more effective and useful than the start button even in Windows 7.

Plantronics Calisto 620-M - I consider this Plantronics's answer to Jabra's Speak 410 which has been a very popular device. From what I have seen from the 620 so far it certainly has a lot going for it. Being Bluetooth enabled certainly has some great advantages. I always felt limited by the USB tether of other speaker phones so being able to throw the speaker out to any location in the room with Bluetooth is pretty slick. I am looking forward to see what Jabra responds with.

Logitech BCC950 - I have been using this device for a while now and just love it. Its a great low cost conference cam option. It works great with Lync 2013, particularly the new HD capabilities.

AMC's TheWalking Dead - Season 4 is living up to all expectations. As a long time fan of the horror movie genre the new rise in horror shows such as The Walking Dead and American Horror Story have been welcomed new arrivals over the usual reality TV that seems to dominate a lot of the TV networks.

Seattle's 2012 summer - Seems like an odd thing to include but this year Seattle's summer was dry and long. A big change from recent years. This also meant my gardening efforts paid off big time. I hauled in over 100 pounds of produce from out tiny 500 square foot garden. Below is a mid season photo.

I haven't blogged to many posts recently due to time limitations. Hopefully 2013 I can get back to more frequent posts.

Happy Holidays everyone.

VoIPNorm

Lync 2013 Reference Topologies on TechNet

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 20:27:00 +0000

Looking for a Lync 2013 reference topology for your organization?

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg398254.aspx

Now posted up on TechNet are three reference topologies that cover the most commonly used scenarios for Lync 2013.

VoIPNorm

Lync 2013 Visio Stencil

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 19:48:00 +0000

Visio stencil is now available:

http://download.microsoft.com/download/E/8/F/E8FB742E-788D-4019-ACC3-E2E0D7C9473A/FLEX_Stencil_112012.vss

VoIPNorm

Lync Server Autodiscover and the Windows Store Lync App

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Fri, 09 Nov 2012 21:36:00 +0000

I have seen this catch a lot of people out. The new Lync App requires the Autodiscover Service to be up and running. Read more below:

http://blogs.technet.com/b/nexthop/archive/2012/11/09/understanding-lync-server-autodiscover-to-support-the-lync-windows-store-app.aspx

VoIPNorm

Lync 2013 Enabling the Conversation Translator

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 20:43:00 +0000

Some of you may be wondering how to get the conversation translator functionality working now that you have upgraded to Lync 2013. Until there is an official release here is a quick fix. Copy the following text into a text editor and save as a .reg file. Then merge it into your registry and you should have the functionality back up and working like before. Make sure to restart Lync to affect the registry changes.

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Office\15.0\Lync\Addins\{2b26edf9-92e0-4d9c-9d7a-f772fcd4f31b}]
"Name"="Lync Conversation Translator"
"Parameters"=""
"ExtensibilityApplicationType"=dword:00000000
"ExtensibilityWindowSize"=dword:00000001
"DefaultContextPackage"=dword:00000000
"InternalURL"="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=68810&Lync=y"
"ExternalURL"="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=68810&Lync=y"

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Office\Lync\Security]

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Office\Lync\Security\Trusted Sites]

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Office\Lync\Security\Trusted Sites\conversationtranslator.cloudapp.net]
"http"=dword:00000001
"https"=dword:00000001

VoIPNorm

Training Resources: Lync Ignite Guided Labs

noreply@blogger.com (Chris Norman) — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 20:29:00 +0000

This is a very, very cool training aid. The Lync labs are simulated step by step labs that step you through the Lync deployment process. Does it have all the answers? No but it’s a good start if you are new or upgrading to Lync 2013.

http://officeignitelabs.cloudguides.com/Lync%20Labs.htm

Make sure to check it out.

VoIPNorm