BLF, no way to figure out on both Cisco phones and Linphone

[Enrico V.]

Hi,

I'm new to sipXcom (not to SIP) and I'm trying to appreciate its advantage over asterisk.

I've made up&running a sipXcom 15.12 (sipxcom-15.12-4037.bded3-x86_64.iso) on a Virtualbox VM with 6 GB RAM hosted on a linux machine (the VM has its own IP Address).

The pbx acts as DNS on the test network (not as DHCP, but I suppose it's not a problem) and the domain server forwards correctly all the requests coming from the clients (somewhere I read that DNS is important for BLF update packets).

I've configured a lot of services, all working well, except BLF.

On the test network I have these clients:

- Cisco 7961G with a 8.5.4 fw (configs provisioned by server)

- Cisco 7960  (configs provisioned by server)

- Linphone running on Linux desktop (tried both UDP and TCP connection)

- Linphone running on an Android Smartphone (tried both UDP and TCP connection)

The 7961 receives the speed dials from the "user groups" section of the sipXcom (via provisioning xml) where the checkbox "subscribe to presence" is checked.

On both Linphone clients I've turned on the "publish the prensence status" checkbox.

The RLS service is active.

With this configuration I can't see any status (the status icon is the "no status" icon) neither on the Cisco phones nor on the Linphone clients (grey contact icon).

I've reinstalled the sipXcom image a couple of times, starting with a new configuration but that di not fix my problem.

I've tried sipXecs 14.04. No fix.

What is wrong on my setup? What could I check more?

Thank you in advance for the support!

[Michael Picher]

BLF probably won't work.  sipXcom utilizes a Broadsoft style BLF/BLA setup.

Mike

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sipxcom-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sipxcom-user...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sipxco...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sipxcom-users.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sipxcom-users/4ef02815-41af-43b5-88e4-31c28e549dbb%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Thanks,

   Mike

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are 10 types of people in this world...  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

[Enrico V.]

8-o

I'm pretty confused...
BLF is listed among sipxcom features in the official wiki, with no declared limitations.

There is no pbx where is no BLF!
How could our secretary manage calls with our offices without BLF?

So the one compatible BLF is with polycom?
In other words you are telling to me that sipxcom is a project that lives for selling polycom hardware.

That should be clearer and explicit!!!
You cannot hide that behind the "open source" concept. Not honest!

Otherwise people like me, trying to migrate his Cisco hardware business environment to sipxcom, waste his time for nothing and get angry...

[Todd Hodgen]

You are using Cisco Phones. They are not fully compliant with the SIP standards, of course, its Cisco, they create their own.

There are other phones that work with the Broadcom standard - not just Polycom. You really shoot yourself in the foot when you come asking for help and start making wild imagined accusations.

Voice Operator Panel is software that works well with it.
Snom works with it.
Nortel works with it
Yealink works with it
Grandstream works with it
Aastra works with it (Mitel)

There are many others. I don't recall anything saying that sipXecs breaks from the standards to support Cisco's off standard phones.

Get some phones that support standards, and your issues will go away.

BTW, Polycom is compatible with over 100 different phone systems, why would anyone chose to buy proprietary phones when phones based on open standards are a much better investment.



Todd R. Hodgen
President / Founder
Sound IP Telecom
http://SIPTelecom.systems
206-432-4344 - Direct
206-390-4689 - Cell


Your Puget Sound Telcom Partner

Do you Like Snow, Rain, Sleet, Hail, Thunder, Lightning?
If you do, then you will love the Cloud!

We appreciate your business referrals!
A Division of Misiu Systems LLC

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sipxcom-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sipxcom-user...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sipxco...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sipxcom-users.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sipxcom-users/84b92d69-52e5-4e15-8b49-062bf49f2cbe%40googlegroups.com.

[Enrico V.]

I understand Cisco is partially proprietary, but for sure every phone brand has its proprietary specifications.

Asterisk BLF works well with both Cisco and Polycom. On freepbx it works out of box, everywhere.

Nothing will keep out of my mind that the cisco blf incompatibility is a developer team will.

I cannot change the phones, they are on every desk at our offices, it would have a big $$$ impact.

So I can't see sipxcom nor Polycom in our future. I'm sorry for that, because the rest of sipxcom is better than many other pbxes!

[Michael Picher]

It just follows a different BLF standard than the Cisco phones support.  We (eZuce) tried building a special SBC to mangle SIP and try to make the Cisco phones work.  We got to about 80% functionality.  The SIP on those things is just a mess.

Sell them to a recycler like Voip Supply and trade up to some better phones that work on more platforms.

Ripping sipXcom because it follows a different standard is bad form.

If you'd like to develop and contribute BLF functionality that works with those phone it would be welcomed. But that's not the only problem with them. Cisco doesn't handle refer properly, they don't work with SRV records so no HA, etc...  Like I said, they are a mess.

Mike

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sipxcom-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sipxcom-user...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sipxco...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sipxcom-users.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sipxcom-users/cca310d7-061d-4e13-861d-133f13fdb400%40googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Michael Picher, VP of Product Innovation
eZuce, Inc.

300 Brickstone Square

Suite 104

Andover, MA. 01810

O.978-296-1005 X2015 
M.207-956-0262
@mpicher <http://twitter.com/mpicher> 

linkedin
www.ezuce.com

Notice: This transmittal and/or attachments may be privileged or confidential. It is intended solely for the addressee(s) named above. Any dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmittal in error, please notify us immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Thank you. FMS

[Enrico V.]

Il giorno giovedì 28 gennaio 2016 01:04:54 UTC+1, Michael Picher ha scritto:

It just follows a different BLF standard than the Cisco phones support.

Ok, but all the cisco phones use that way, so it is a "cisco standard", and the pbx enterprise world, you know, is cisco (or avaya, but avaya is not sip). If you want to give a future to sipxcom, you can't ignore that!

 

  We (eZuce) tried building a special SBC to mangle SIP and try to make the Cisco phones work.  We got to about 80% functionality.  The SIP on those things is just a mess.

Are you saying it is too difficult to do, or it are you saying it is not so important to do?

 

Sell them to a recycler like Voip Supply and trade up to some better phones that work on more platforms.

I appreciate you proposal, but the real world is a litte bit more complicated...

Well, 

I buy 200 Polycom @ $200 --> $4000

I buy a little server @ $1000

I sell 200 Cisco @ $25 to the recycler --> $500

Operation costs $4500.

No warranty. Do you know what I mean for no warranty?

Nobody ensure to me that that Polycom model will work with the sipXcom, and continue working with further upgrades. In other words if I'll have some problems, the responsability will be mine.

Ok, I'll have no problems. CEO will ask to me "why do you want to invest $4500 for changing all the phones? What do we'll have more?"

I can "try" to explain that we will have an open source PBX and just in case we'll need some new features, we "probably" don't pay for them.

But NOW we don't need any new feature, so in fact I would change all the phones for continue having BLF.

That's have no sense in the real world.

You easy understand that it would have sense if I could leave all the phones in place, and migrate the PBX only.

That way, sipxcom would gain an installation in the business world, killing a proprietary PBX and demonstrating its power. 

 

Ripping sipXcom because it follows a different standard is bad form.

Telling this, you say half story. The half where sipxcom is perfect... Perfection don't exists.

 

If you'd like to develop and contribute BLF functionality that works with those phone it would be welcomed.

This is the same story I hear since centuries when I say to a community that its software could be improved.

"Just write down some code, and improve it, you're welcome!" they say. So I'd have to understand the code written by other (if the wiki is incomplete, I can't imagine code comments), skilling me on a programming language I don't use daily, and finally put my mess on your perfect code. That's the best way for obtaining a perfect spaghetti code! Nobody understands that a little feature is easy to implement for who look at that code every day, and do it is pure love for the project.

But that's not the only problem with them. Cisco doesn't handle refer properly, they don't work with SRV records so no HA, etc...  Like I said, they are a mess.

Not true. Almost every cisco phone has the possibility to configure up to 3 backup SIP proxy. That's HA.

(just take a look at the cisco provisioning XML tags generated by sipxcom and you will find that!)

So cisco makes HA in a different way, but this can cohabit with your elegant HA concept (apropos, congratulations, it is made really well!).

So cisco has a different BLF communication way, but this can cohabit with the other (at the end they are telegrams passed on the network!).

I don't pretend Cisco BLF compatibility, I understood that that's at the moment not exists. I would prefer that this would be clear on the documentation, so everyone should not waste his time for trying.

I recommend the Cisco BLF compatibility, for the future of the project. a project that I think deserves to move forward... Sure, if it was not born to sell polycom hardware, but if it is a real open source project and will remain open source (not like freepbx).

Take care,

Enrico.

[Enrico V.]

Sorry for my bad english further degraded by the auto correction... :-)

[Michael Picher]

inline...

Michael Picher, VP of Product Innovation
eZuce, Inc.

300 Brickstone Square

Suite 104

Andover, MA. 01810

O.978-296-1005 X2015 
M.207-956-0262
@mpicher <http://twitter.com/mpicher> 

linkedin
www.ezuce.com

Notice: This transmittal and/or attachments may be privileged or confidential. It is intended solely for the addressee(s) named above. Any dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmittal in error, please notify us immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Thank you. FMS

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 4:08 AM, Enrico V. <evaz...@gmail.com> wrote:

Il giorno giovedì 28 gennaio 2016 01:04:54 UTC+1, Michael Picher ha scritto:

It just follows a different BLF standard than the Cisco phones support.

Ok, but all the cisco phones use that way, so it is a "cisco standard", and the pbx enterprise world, you know, is cisco (or avaya, but avaya is not sip). If you want to give a future to sipxcom, you can't ignore that!

 

  We (eZuce) tried building a special SBC to mangle SIP and try to make the Cisco phones work.  We got to about 80% functionality.  The SIP on those things is just a mess.

Are you saying it is too difficult to do, or it are you saying it is not so important to do?

Both. It's not commercially important to us (as eZuce).  We put a couple man month's worth of effort and couldn't get to where it was a viable product / component.  With 80% functionality it just wasn't worth it.  You'd still have people complaining about 'why doesn't this or that work'.

 

 

Sell them to a recycler like Voip Supply and trade up to some better phones that work on more platforms.

I appreciate you proposal, but the real world is a litte bit more complicated...

Well, 

I buy 200 Polycom @ $200 --> $4000

I buy a little server @ $1000

I sell 200 Cisco @ $25 to the recycler --> $500

Operation costs $4500.

No warranty. Do you know what I mean for no warranty?

Nobody ensure to me that that Polycom model will work with the sipXcom, and continue working with further upgrades. In other words if I'll have some problems, the responsability will be mine.

Ok, I'll have no problems. CEO will ask to me "why do you want to invest $4500 for changing all the phones? What do we'll have more?"

I can "try" to explain that we will have an open source PBX and just in case we'll need some new features, we "probably" don't pay for them.

But NOW we don't need any new feature, so in fact I would change all the phones for continue having BLF.

That's have no sense in the real world.

You easy understand that it would have sense if I could leave all the phones in place, and migrate the PBX only.

That way, sipxcom would gain an installation in the business world, killing a proprietary PBX and demonstrating its power. 

 

Ripping sipXcom because it follows a different standard is bad form.

Telling this, you say half story. The half where sipxcom is perfect... Perfection don't exists.

Where did I state something was perfection?  Polycom is however our 'gold standard' for our commercial product, it's what's in our QA labs.  It's what we prove all of our features against.

 

 

If you'd like to develop and contribute BLF functionality that works with those phone it would be welcomed.

This is the same story I hear since centuries when I say to a community that its software could be improved.

"Just write down some code, and improve it, you're welcome!" they say. So I'd have to understand the code written by other (if the wiki is incomplete, I can't imagine code comments), skilling me on a programming language I don't use daily, and finally put my mess on your perfect code. That's the best way for obtaining a perfect spaghetti code! Nobody understands that a little feature is easy to implement for who look at that code every day, and do it is pure love for the project.

You don't have to write something. If it's something your company wants bad enough, write a specification, hire a contractor on freelance.com or similar site, contribute the code to the project as a gift.

Given the economics you highlight above, with only 200 phones you'd still be better off ditching your Cisco phones.

 

But that's not the only problem with them. Cisco doesn't handle refer properly, they don't work with SRV records so no HA, etc...  Like I said, they are a mess.

Not true. Almost every cisco phone has the possibility to configure up to 3 backup SIP proxy. That's HA.

(just take a look at the cisco provisioning XML tags generated by sipxcom and you will find that!)

So cisco makes HA in a different way, but this can cohabit with your elegant HA concept (apropos, congratulations, it is made really well!).

So cisco has a different BLF communication way, but this can cohabit with the other (at the end they are telegrams passed on the network!).

The Cisco phones can specify 3 IP addresses for registrar which they then use for the proxy.

We use SRV records for failover and I don't see that changing any time soon.

The only way to accomplish this compatibility would be some sort of SBC then you'd want multiple so your phones could register to more than 1.  The SBC would need to translate the IP info and route inbound to the SIP domain.

I think Acme/Oracle has a product to do this but it's not economically viable until you are into the 6000 to 10,000 handset range.  At 200 phones it's kind of hard to even justify more than a single server solution.

 

I don't pretend Cisco BLF compatibility, I understood that that's at the moment not exists. I would prefer that this would be clear on the documentation, so everyone should not waste his time for trying.

http://wiki.sipxcom.org/display/sipXcom/What+Phones+to+Choose

I updated this page with some more warnings at the top.

http://wiki.sipxcom.org/display/sipXcom/Cisco+79xx+Phones

If you have some additional notes that might help those who follow, the other way people contribute if they aren't coders is to help improve documentation.

 

I recommend the Cisco BLF compatibility, for the future of the project. a project that I think deserves to move forward... Sure, if it was not born to sell polycom hardware, but if it is a real open source project and will remain open source (not like freepbx).

Thanks for the recommendation. If it's something somebody would like to work on, we'd consider accepting. Knowing what we know about the Cisco phones and our past history in trying to make something work it's not a feature eZuce would undertake and contribute to the project.

Thanks,

  Mike

 

Take care,

Enrico.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sipxcom-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sipxcom-user...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sipxco...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sipxcom-users.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sipxcom-users/539a5f49-d18c-4be3-863b-de55b388d153%40googlegroups.com.

[Enrico V.]

Il giorno giovedì 28 gennaio 2016 10:34:14 UTC+1, Michael Picher ha scritto:

Both. It's not commercially important to us (as eZuce).  We put a couple man month's worth of effort and couldn't get to where it was a viable product / component.  With 80% functionality it just wasn't worth it.  You'd still have people complaining about 'why doesn't this or that work'.

 

[...] 

 

 

Where did I state something was perfection?  Polycom is however our 'gold standard' for our commercial product, it's what's in our QA labs.  It's what we prove all of our features against.

Ok, I realized only now that sipxcom is really in front of a commercial product. So we both know where it will end.

Now the community contributes to the code, and indirectly to the commercial product. Once a lot of installations will use sipxcom, "some features" will become paid and you will say "thanks" to the community (that develped for free for your business) and the community will say "goodbye" to you.

In the meanwhile you hope to have reached the right budget for continue mantaining the software with a software team company.

That's the FreePBX story. But FreePBX is sponsored by Asterisk (distributed with asteriskNOW by the asterisk official site).

I should have known that when you wrote about "Broadsoft style BLF". The word "broadsoft" indicates a company proprietary BLS, as well as Cisco BLF. Then please do not say "cisco is not standard" even when you are using a proprietary Broadsoft protocol.

So they say... "double standards"...

Best wishes, good luck!

[Enrico V.]

P.S.: somebody forget to tell me why BLF don't works between 2 Linphones clients. But don't matter, I don't need Linphone, it was for test only.

[Michael Picher]

The only softphone that I know that properly supports this BLF style is Counterpath Bria for Windows (their Mac version does not).

I think Digium is behind Asterisk and Sangoma now behind FreePBX.  eZuce contributes about 98% of the contributions to sipXcom.  Think what you want...

Mike

Michael Picher, VP of Product Innovation
eZuce, Inc.

300 Brickstone Square

Suite 104

Andover, MA. 01810

O.978-296-1005 X2015 
M.207-956-0262
@mpicher <http://twitter.com/mpicher> 

linkedin
www.ezuce.com

Notice: This transmittal and/or attachments may be privileged or confidential. It is intended solely for the addressee(s) named above. Any dissemination, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmittal in error, please notify us immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Thank you. FMS

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 5:08 AM, Enrico V. <evaz...@gmail.com> wrote:

P.S.: somebody forget to tell me why BLF don't works between 2 Linphones clients. But don't matter, I don't need Linphone, it was for test only.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sipxcom-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sipxcom-user...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sipxco...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sipxcom-users.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sipxcom-users/17454c81-1f87-48e5-bfbd-99f2c25c7403%40googlegroups.com.

[Matthew Kitchin]

This is exactly what we did. Sold all our Cisco phones and essentially paid for new VVX 300/400s.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sipxcom-users/CAAHujP4OwpB8ErPKsDcikshQL1yQjK07B%3DWFZMODwNiDyJp0Jw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Enrico V.]

Sure...
I missed one zero "only"...

I buy 200 Polycom @ $200 --> $40000

I buy a little server @ $1000
I sell 200 Cisco @ $25 to the recycler --> $500

$40500 cost of the project for having the same features... Crazy.

It costs like many many Cisco proprietary licenses and a lot of years of assistance...

BR,
E.

[Joe Micciche]

On 01/28/2016 03:36 PM, Enrico V. wrote:
> Sure...
> I missed one zero "only"...
>
> I buy 200 Polycom @ $200 --> $40000
> I buy a little server @ $1000
> I sell 200 Cisco @ $25 to the recycler --> $500
>
> $40500 cost of the project for having the same features... Crazy.

You're complaining about phones that are 1) old and 2) proven to Not
Work Well With Others. Those phones are designed to work in all-Cisco
environments.

You can either let your phones determine your call control platform and
what features your users will have, or be smart and ditch them once and
for all. Get phones that are practically future-proof, e.g. Polycoms, as
they work with any 3261-compliant system, so it's a 1-time shot.

I started compiling a list years ago of the RFC's Cisco's firmware does
not support, but got tired quickly:

RFC3261 - Session Initiation Protocol - REFER, headers, content-types,
record-route
RFC3263 - SRV and NAPTR for SIP
RFC3515 - REFER
RFC3891 - Replaces
RFC3856 & RFC4479 - Presence
RFC5589 - REFER and Replaces

== 79xx are not meant to work in a true SIP enviornment.

If you absolutely need to keep those dear POS phones and want sipX to do
what Asterisk does, just go back to an Asterisk distro, enable SCCP for
those things, and enjoy. Or shell out $500k for Call Manager.

joe

[Enrico V.]

On 79xx you can install 2 families of firmware:

- SCCP for Call Manager (proprietary)
- SIP for SIP servers (universal)

The SIP firmware works perfectly with asterisk, don't worry!

(BLF too)

[Tommy Laino]

200 to the recycler x  $25 is $5000 not $500.

Polycom VVX 300 sets only cost around $99 and VVX 400 sets cost around $150. Not saying it's going to be cheap but it's still about half of the $40000 you came up with.

You don't realize the years that have gone into this project by guys like Mike and the staff. Your sheer lack of respect for that is infuriating.

I've used SipXecs, now SipXcom, since the days when it was run by Pingtel and then Nortel/Avaya and finally eZuce. It's It's a quality software that is rock solid. I have one customer who is still using their 100 or so LG-Nortel 6812 sets with BLF. 

If you like Cisco so much, than have fun with FreePBX. The rest of us will hang out here.