March 2008 - Posts

• Planning Tool for Office Communications Server 2007

  Microsoft has released a tool to assist in the design and layout of your OCS implementation.  It will create topology designs and give recommended hardware requirements for your deployment. Planning Tool for Office Communications Server 2007 Posted Mar 13 2008, 07:00 PM by randallneth with no comments

• Exchange UM connected to a PBX

  3/7/2008 Exchange UM with a PBX When setting up exchange um some things need to be considered. on the initial setup page for the dial plan with in exchange there are sevral options. And if you are not careful and select the wrong option UM will not work. it is important to understand the options. In the URI type you have a choice for  telephone extension Telephone extension is what you want to use when connecting to a PBX directly or a sip gateway directly. this may not always be the case but if you know what it is looking for then it will help you decide. for telephone extension it is simply looking to match the extension numbers. and that is all. E.164  E.164 looks to see an e.164 number coming from the pbx or gateway. Which can be used in conjunction with a gateway that normalizes to e164 or in locations that already pass e.164 to the gateway. Sip URI  Sip URI looks to match to a sip URI. (this is usually used when setting up OCS to exchange UM)   So to begin with when you create a dial plan you have the ability to select the URI type. In most cases if this is direct to the pbx or to a gateway it will be Telephone extension. If you select sip URI or tel URI it is possible for you to have some problems because of the way information is passed from the pbx. i.e. 6554@10.1.1.1 which is how the pbx may send the information in the sip invite. with 10.1.1.1 being the address of the PBX.  if you select sip uri or sip tel uri exchange will not be able to find this extension or person because the exchange sip uri's will not have the IP of the PBX in them (or at least they should not) your sip  uri should be your primary email address for best practice (even though some do not follow this) and your tel uri should be an e.164 number i.e. +19139559555 or +19139559555;ext=6554. and since neither will match the previous address with the PBX IP in it. Then the exchange server will return SIP/2.0 302 Moved Temporarily. So for pbx to exchange you should select extension. so where does the secure verses non-secure come in. your next selection allows you 3 options unsecured, Sip Secure and Secured. in most cases when you are configuring exchange UM to a pbx or gateway and not through OCS this will be set to unsecured. Realize that when you set it to secured or Sip Secured you CANNOT HAVE THIS CO-LOCATED on the cas role or hub transport. Posted Mar 11 2008, 09:00 AM by mitchroberson with no comments

• Call forking update

  Call forking and Simultaneous ring are pretty much synonymous. Posted Mar 05 2008, 10:05 PM by mitchroberson with no comments

• Call Forking and Simultaneous ring are they the same?

  in a previous post I talked about call forking. So this week some presentations I went to started talking about simultaneous ring. Whet  I discussed this with the presenters I found that sometimes these 2 terms are synonymous. However some times they are not.   from My understanding True Simultaneous ringing is where you have 2 devices with totally different numbers. When someone calls your extension or DID it comes into the PBX and then your desk phone rings and your cell phone rings near simultaneously. the big key to this is that the numbers are different. for Call forking it generally is referred to in situations where you have a desk phone and another device with the same phone number. i.e. desk phone and Microsoft Office Communicator. Both the desk phone and the MOC client have the same extension. The PBX forks the call to both devices at the same time and when one is picked up the other is released.   Now it all depends on who you talked to as to the definition. I will try to find more detail over the next couple of days.   thanks Posted Mar 05 2008, 10:02 PM by mitchroberson with 1 comment(s)