New User Propagation to GDMS


#1

Hello All,

I’ve got a 6510 setup and connected to GDMS. Way back when I first set this up, all the accounts were pushed into GDMS and, I don’t recall why but, there was some issue with them at the time so I ended up just recreating all 80+ accounts. However, the original accounts, that were pushed to GDMS when I connected the phone system are still there.

I’d like to start using the auto propagation on the system so I can start editing changes in just one place (the phone system). It’s my understanding that, I should be able to make a change on the phone system and see that change show up in GDMS at some point. However, my tests have shown no change.

Any idea if there is something I need to do to tell the system to sync / update GDMS? Is there a timer somewhere?

On the phone system. Looking at System Settings -> GDMS Settings -> Connection Status shows Authentication success in green.

It’s been an hour. But, no update to GDMS.

As I’m typing, I’ve noticed the Display Name in GDMS isn’t what’s setup on the phone system, is greyed out and non-editable. It’s just the Caller ID Number. That doesn’t seem correct. Any idea how to change this? Maybe I should just stick with having to update accounts in multiple places for now :frowning:


#2

Display Name are not synced to GDMS on the 6200/6500 series. Only the 6300.

As for updating the list, disable and re-enable the sync. It’s the only way I found to force it.


#3

Okay. I’m not setup to test on my own at the moment but, do you know where the display name is actually pulled from on the phone? If it’s not sync’d, which clearly there’s something goofy, what name actually shows?

Thanks!


#4

It just doesn’t set one. The Display Name stays empty, and Account Name is the extension number.

It sucks.


#5

Dear users,

Thank you for using GDMS platform! Users can assocaite UCM63xx to the GDMS platform and synchronize the Display Name to the GDMS platform. However, the user can only synchronize the SIP accounts to the GDMS platform if the user is using UCM62xx or UCM65xx. We currently do not have plans to implement this feature for UCM62xx and UCM65xx in the GDMS platform, but I will pass your feature request to our GDMS platform developing team for future evaluation. Thanks for your testing!

Thank you!


#6

Okay, thanks. Any thought why the account changes made on the phone system are not being synchronized?


#7

Dear user,

Thank you for your feedback! The design method of the GDMS platform is users can configure and provision devices through the GDMS platform, and this is depending on the settings in the GDMS platform. The reverse sychronization is not that necessary, and it may cause some errors. We offered the device configuration sychronization feature from the device to the GDMS platform just resolve the device settings initialization issue for some users. Thanks for your testing!

Thank you!


#8

Reverse Synchronization? Maybe there’s some miscommunication on my part but, sometimes it seems like, whomever you are at GS, you don’t read my comments or, your answers are written by an engineer who runs it through google translate a couple of time to different languages until it’s completely unclear.

Again, this could just be me mis-reading this.

  1. The UCM6510, after I entered the info into the UCM6510, pushed all the accounts to GDMS.

Is that clear? Is it understood by you that fact is not in debate or in question by me? That’s just a statement of fact. There is no question yet.

  1. If I make a change in the UCM6510, such as changing the Caller ID or account name, it’s not updating GDMS with the changes I made in the phone system.

If the initial synchronization was from the UCM to GDMS then I would assume reverse synchronization is from GDMS to the UCM but, that has not been asked or even brought up. Do you see my confusion?

Is the UCM going to push changes to the accounts it originally pushed to GDMS? If not, why push the accounts to begin with? If there is no reverse syncronization, what can’t I edit the account that are pushed by the UCM?

Thanks in advance.


#9

Dear user,

Thank you for your feedback! Sorry for the misunderstood! Per talking with our developing team today, this feature is not supported in UCM62xx and UCM65xx, and this feature has been supported in UCM63xx. For the accounts which were sychronized to the GDMS platform, if the user changes the accounts settings it originally pushed to the GDMS platform in the UCM, the changes will be synchronized to the GDMS platform either. Thanks for your testing!

Thank you!


#10

Which feature is not supported? Seriously, it reads like your saying something will happen then you tell me it’s not supported!!

I’m not asking about a feature. I’m telling you what happened. I’m not asking you to add a feature or do anything new. How can it not be supported if this is fact?

You carry on to tell me “if the user changes the accounts settings it originally pushed to the GDMS platform in the UCM, the changes will be synchronized to the GDMS platform either.” The last word, either, makes no sense in this context. Will this work or won’t it?

If this won’t work. Will it? Is it on the road map? If not, it’s absolutely stupid that you push the accounts to begin with in a non-editable manor? If you’re going to push them to GDMS, at least let me edit them.

If you’re trying, and failing, to tell me that any changes I make in the UCM will be pushed to GDMS, then I go back to my question asking why GDMS is not updating. I’ve made changes on the UCM but they are not showing up in GDMS.


#11

Dear user,

Thank you for your feedback! Please see my comments inline:

Which feature is not supported? - For UCM62xx/UCM65xx, these models will not synchronize “Display Name” option to the GDMS platform. Once the UCM62/65 SIP accounts are synchronized to the GDMS platform, this filed will be empty and users cannot edit the option in the GDMS platform. Only UCM63xx model can synchronize “Display Name” option to the GDMS platform since UCM62xx/UCM65xx models are not fully compatible with the GDMS platform.

Will this work or won’t it? - Sorry to make you confused. I mean if the user changes the account settings in the UCM Web UI, the changes will also be sychronized to the GDMS platform. For example, your UCM extension A’s Display name is “GDMS”, and you change extension A’s Display name to “GDMS1” in your UCM Web UI, then you go to GDMS platform VoIP account settings to check the sychronized extenison A’s Display name, it will show “GDMS1” as the current Display name. This is the expected behavior in UCM63xx. However, since UCM62xx and UCM65xx are not fully compatible with the GDMS platform, both models will not synchronize “Display Name” option to the GDMS platform. For other account settings, if the user makes changes for account name in the UCM device, UCM62xx/UCM65xx/UCM63xx will synchronize the changes to the GDMS platform.

If you’re trying, and failing, to tell me that any changes I make in the UCM will be pushed to GDMS, then I go back to my question asking why GDMS is not updating. I’ve made changes on the UCM but they are not showing up in GDMS. - If you are using UCM62xx/UCM65xx, the “Display Name” option cannot be pushed to the GDMS platform, but other account settings changes should be able to be pushed to the GDMS platform from UCM62xx/UCM65xx. In your test case, if you already changed the account name in your UCM62/65, and the account name changes should be synchronized to the GDMS platform (actually, users can modify the account name from the GDMS platform for accounts). If not, it should be an issue in this test scenario, I will pass this issue to our developing team for evaluation.

Sorry about making you confused, please feel free to let me know if you have any further questions. Thanks for your testing!

Thank you!


#12

Basically, @costwisewpg, the display name isn’t synced and they won’t add it because they didn’t think the 6200 needed it.

Don’t use the sync. Just import manually, this way you can actually put the name yourself.


#13

Thank you @fmarcoux96.

Oddly. I think I just needed to hear something phrased as succinctly as you phrased it.

I can’t say why, after defending GS as much as I have, this became the thing I felt demanded justice. But, it’s just so absolutely stupid. They did all the programing in the system and on GDMS and, what happened, someone get some deep, sick desire to just drive people crazy? Some sick twisted person at GS pulled the plug on the last 5 minutes of programming?

@GSSupport74 don’t bother replying with some corporate statement thanking me for anything. Don’t bother trying to make me feel better about this because this is totally stupid. Don’t bother replying at all unless you have something meaningful to say telling me this will be fixed. GS either screwed up releasing this total failure of a tool or GS is even worse because they plan on leaving this embarrassment in the software.


#14

Dear user,

Thank you for your feedback! I fully understand your concern and request. I apologize for the inconvenience. I have created a bug about display name synchronization feature for UCM62xx/UCM65xx and I will raise the priority about this issue. And also, I will talk with our developing team and push to implement this feature. Thanks for your testing!

Thank you!


#15

Dear user,

I also passed this issue to our UCM62xx/UCM65xx developing team today, and I will try my best to push to improve this issue in the UCM62xx/UCM65xx future release. I also stressed the importance of this issue, and we will give you a satisfactory response. We will try to add improvements of this issue in the UCM62xx/UCM65xx future release sooner. Thanks for your testing!

Thank you!


#16

Dear user,

Our UCM62xx/UCM65xx developing team has fixed this issue in the latest internal test firmware of UCM62xx/UCM65xx, and you will see the improvements in the next release version. Thanks for your testing!

Thank you!


#17

Thank-you. That’s amazing.


#18

Dear user,

Thank you for your feedback! I will let you know once the new firmware version of UCM62xx/UCM65xx pass our full test and get ready to be released. Thanks for your testing!

Thank you!