Friday, March 7, 2014

RESOLVED: An attempt to route to an Exchange UM server failed and OWA/IM integration with Lync Server 2013 and Exchange Server 2013

I recently worked on an engagement where the integration of Exchange Server 2013 and Lync Server 2013 was performed including all the new bits like Unified Contact Store, Archiving, etc. During the course of the engagement we struggled with OWA IM integration configuration and found discrepancies in the guidance from Microsoft and other bloggers out there.

So I'd like to take the time to share my experiences on two fronts; in resolving the error(s) associated with Lync/UM integration, and the OWA IM integration debacle.

So first, UM integration...

Everything was working fine from a UM perspective until we started messing with OWA IM integration troubleshooting. During this effort we decided to remove the trusted application pool representing the FQDN of the mail environment (i.e. mail.contoso.com) and all the trusted application servers within the pool. Topology was published and no issues were found, however this also didn't solve our OWA IM integration issue by the way.

One issue I did see was that the Lync environment wasn't discovering Exchange correctly and had removed the servers from it's internal "Trusted Servers" list. As a last troubleshooting step I restarted the front-end service on the primary Lync Standard Edition server however this again didn't resolve the OWA IM issue. So I added the trusted pool and servers back, published topology, restarted the front-end service on the primary Lync server, and validated they were back in the "Trusted Servers" list again.

I dropped the troubleshooting effort for the night only to realize the next morning that UM was broken across the board except for users homed on the primary Lync Standard Edition server. The only "change" made earlier that night was the topology change but how could this affect UM?

The following error was observed from my local Lync client when testing UM:
ms-diagnostics: 15030;reason="Failed to route to Exchange Server";source="lync01.contoso.local";dialplan="dp01.contoso.local";pstnreroutingenabled="false";appName="ExumRouting"
Server: ExumRouting/5.0.0.0
 The following error showed up on the Lync server:
An attempt to route to an Exchange UM server failed.
The attempt failed with response code 504: mb01.contoso.local.
Request Target: [dp01@mb01.contoso.local], Call Id: [0d493c0beac55e4d1938b96d9f0488dc].
Failure occurrences: 27, since 2014-03-07 8:15:44 AM.
Cause: An attempt to route to an Exchange UM server failed because the UM server was unable to process the request or did not respond within the allotted time.
Resolution:
Check this server is correctly configured to point to the appropriate Exchange UM server. Also check whether the Exchange UM server is up and whether it in turn is also properly configured.
Additionally, I found the following error through CLS Logging trace:
TL_ERROR(TF_CONNECTION) [se01\se01]08E8.0CFC::03/07/2014-18:05:22.538.000002E9 (SIPStack,SIPAdminLog::WriteConnectionEvent:SIPAdminLog.cpp(389)) [3492250981] $$begin_record
Severity: error
Text: The peer is not a configured server on this network interface
Peer-IP: 10.222.10.69:55561
Transport: TLS
Result-Code: 0xc3e93d6a SIPPROXY_E_CONNECTION_UNKNOWN_SERVER
Data: fqdn="se01.contoso.local"
Voicemail was working fine for users on the one Lync server but not for users on the SBS or secondary Lync Standard Edition server. Could the removal of the trusted application servers and pool from topology break UM? Well as a step to fix this I ran the ExchUcUtil.ps1 script to integrate the two environments together again and triple checked all the configuration in UM to see if something was missed or changed by accident. None of this worked.

Even though I had reverted my change related to the trusted application pool and servers being removed from topology builder, I had to restart the front-end services on the secondary Lync Standard Edition server AND the SBS for voicemail to start working again.

So the moral of the story, even though you don't think the change you're making is conceivably a client impacting event, it could be. I should have tested EVERYTHING before calling it a night.

Now onto the OWA IM integration issue...

TechNet (http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj688055.aspx) claims there is no need to create a trusted application server or pool (if more than one E2013 FE) if the 2013 front-end/back-end roles are collocated and if you have a SIPURI dialplan in UM. In every case where I've configured this type of 2013 to 2013 interoperability, I always need to define the trusted application pool. In other words, the autodiscover from Lync to Exchange never works correctly. Once I populate the trusted application pool, OWA IM lights up!

It seemed obvious to me the linkage between the "Trusted Servers" list identified by the Lync server in Event ID 33022 had something to do with OWA IM not working. Adding it back into topology was reflected by Event ID 33022 and the functioning OWA experience.

Anyway, I invite your comments and feedback on these. Cheers!

Friday, November 23, 2012

Lync Server 2013 HA Design Changes and Considerations

Lync Server 2013 introduces new capabilities for recovering from a single server or pool failure and failing over between pools of servers; either Enterprise or Standard Edition.

This post discusses these capabilities, demonstrates their use, and offers suggestions for organizations wondering which path to choose.

Lync Server 2013...what's changed?
  1. Enterprise Edition pools now are recommended to have a minimum of three, yes THREE front-end servers. This is due to the "Windows Fabric" replication architecture based on Azure. The back-end SQL database is no longer the store for real-time data.
  2. (subject to change) Enterprise Edition pools use a quorum model similar to Exchange Server 2010/2013 in that a Majority Node Set (MNS) quorum leverages a tie-breaker for pools with even-numbered front-end servers. In the case of Lync Server 2013 this is the pool back-end SQL server.
  3. Enterprise Edition pools no longer support SQL Server clustering for HA.
  4. SQL Server mirroring is now the supported method of providing back-end database resiliency.
  5. For automatic failover of a SQL mirror, a SQL witness is required; this can be SQL Express. Collocation of other services, software, etc. are subject to further testing.
  6. Lync Server 2013 uses a Web Application Companion (WAC) server (aka Office Web Apps) to stream PowerPoint meeting content including full transition support and embedded videos.
  7. Lync servers can be "paired" with like-infrastructure (Enterprise to Enterprise and Standard to Standard) to ensure resiliency in the event of a site outage (DR). This pairing activity ensures replication of critical pool/server data and must be invoked by an administrator via manual PowerShell commands.
  8. Multiple Federation routes can be applied to the topology. For example, a Boston Standard Edition server can use a Boston Lync Edge server as its Federation route whereas a Seattle Enterprise pool can use a regional Seattle Lync Edge server/pool for Federation.
Now that Enterprise Edition pools can be paired with other EE pools, and Standard Edition servers can be paired with Standard Edition servers, this changes how we design Lync solutions in certain cases. I talk to customers who often suggest they need "High Availability" (HA) in their Lync infrastructure and this often comes from those who are implementing IM&P only. Instead of trying to meet some kind of unrealistic expectation or design to a requirement which centers around a term like HA, drive the conversation toward Recovery Time Objective (RTO) and Recovery Point Objective (RPO). These two factors, along with an Service Level Agreement (SLA) percentage (i.e. 99.9%) should drive the outcome. Anyway, here is the rule of thumb I use personally today:

If the organization suggests they need HA are they willing to accept a Recovery Time Objective of >1 hour? If so, and the per-server user count does not exceed ~5000, use Lync Standard Edition. Two Lync Standard Edition servers could even be used to split the load of 5000 users in a location where 2500 are homed on each server and both servers are paired (backup for each other). The build list would look something like this:

2 x Lync Server 2013 Standard Edition servers (paired with each other in the same site or stretched between a primary and DR site)
2 x Lync Server 2013 Edge servers
2 x Office Web App servers (WAC)

If the organization insists they cannot incur downtime for Lync components contained within a single site, and they insist "high availability" is a requirement, the infrastructure looks something like this:

3 x Lync Server 2013 Enterprise Edition servers
2 x Lync Server 2013 Edge servers
2 x Office Web App servers (WAC)
2 x SQL Standard or Enterprise Servers
1 x SQL Express, Standard, or Enterprise (witness)
2 x File servers using DFS
2 x Hardware Load Balancers (for the EE pool and WAC servers)

But wait....I need DR!
If the organization also insists they have a plan for Disaster Recovery, a second "warm" site would house the following minimum infrastructure:

3 x Lync Server 2013 Enterprise Edition servers
2 x Lync Server 2013 Edge servers
2 x Office Web App servers (WAC)
2 x SQL Standard or Enterprise Servers
1 x SQL Express, Standard, or Enterprise (witness)
2 x File servers using DFS
2 x Hardware Load Balancers (for the EE pool and WAC servers)

That's 24 servers to build a site redundant Lync Server 2013 Enterprise environment. This may seem a bit ridiculous however the point I'm illustrating is the value Standard Edition now brings in Lync Server 2013. Additionally, I haven't found an organization yet who would dedicate server hardware or VM's in this manner. You can collocate many of the roles and scale back on things like WAC and SQL mirroring. Lastly, organizations might suggest their DR infrastructure would accommodate lower user counts which may drive a design lacking redundancy at the "warm" site.

Hold on....what about Persistent Chat?
Okay, so you want a Persistent Chat pool as well....we need to add dual redundant servers at each site raising the total to 28 servers.

As you can see the case for paired Standard Edition servers quickly becomes favorable from a cost and complexity perspective albeit sacrificing availability in the event of a single server outage. The fact that hardware load balancers can be completely eliminated also tells a great story around simplicity. To date I have yet to see a successful implementation of OCS or Lync where hardware load balancers are in the mix at all. This is mostly due to lack of knowledge, lack of understanding on how the solution works, or in some cases simple reluctance to work together.

What if I have more than 5000 users at a single site and need DR?
Consider placing multiple Standard Edition servers paired with similar servers at your backup sites. You can split users homed between servers (i.e. 3000 on ServerA in SiteA and 3000 on ServerB in SiteA) to meet your capacity requirements.

What are the drawbacks to Lync Standard Edition anyway?
Well the first point people typically jump on is no "high availability". This is obviously due to the lack of a shared common data store whereby multiple front-ends connect and relate to. Here are some of the more important drawbacks when considering this approach:
  1. Restoration of service is a manual effort resulting in users being left with "Resiliency Mode" until this action is taken.
  2. Your Edge proxy to 'next hop' internal server can be only one SE server even if you have several of them. An outage to this next hop server results in an outage for all remote users' traffic. It is important to note as well that if Edge cannot contact the next hop, clients will not attempt to sign into another Edge proxy even if another exists (without manual intervention at each client system).
  3. Response Groups and Call Park are a manual effort to switch over.
  4. Assignment of users to a collection of SE servers takes thought and proper assignment so as to not overload a single server. In the case where you have two servers, decide if you're going to run them active/active or active/passive as this will change your user placement behavior. This can also be scripted for ease of user placement automatically.
  5. You could argue this is more complex to manage however the same argument is made for the HLB/SQL infrastructure required.
  6. Your PSTN conference DID is homed to a single server. If this server is down, the DID is as well. I have not yet tested the behavior of a pool failover whether this DID is restored on the backup registrar or not (TBD).
  7. Exchange OWA/UCS integration has a single point of failure due to the lack of multiple server definitions in the Exchange 2010/2013 CAS setup.
Certainly you will have to weigh your own requirements against what is both supported and recommended. This article is intended to keep us thinking on our toes when designing Lync solutions for our customers. Enjoy!

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

Easy way to meet pre-requisites for Lync Server 2013 on Windows Server 2012

I build VM's with Lync Server 2013 every few days now testing failover and rebuild scenarios so I have everything worked out in my thick skull...

Until recently I used to memorize the requirements of the OS including IIS sub-feature components and often missed one item along the way. Since working with Windows Server 2012 I've found an easier way to meet the pre-requisites for Lync Server 2013 which I'm sure you'll find just as easy.

The process involves modifying a configuration XML file, and running a PowerShell command.

Step 1: Download (and rename) the XML file from my SkyDrive site
This file contains the Windows Server 2012 roles and features required to set up Lync Server 2013's basic feature-set.

https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=D6DA5D3A463728DA!947&authkey=!AJQgC9sDTF_36Ow (updated on September 4, 2012 @ 3:11PM)

Step 2: Modify the XML file
Open the XML file in Notepad and perform a find/replace on the "lync2013-02" name and type the name of your local server. Save the file to a location on your server making note of the path and file name.


Step 3: Open PowerShell as an Administrator
Right-click the PowerShell icon on the taskbar and choose "Run as Administrator"



Step 4: Run the PowerShell command
Next, type: "Install-WindowsFeature -ConfigurationFilePath C:\lync2013\lync2013pre-req.xml -Restart"


Once the roles and features have been installed, the server will reboot and will be ready for Lync Server 2013.

 NOTE: My lab environment required access to the Internet for the setup to complete otherwise it failed with an error indicating it couldn't connect to the source files. Not sure of this was an anomaly or what...



Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Lync Server 2010/2013 and Cisco/Nortel/Avaya integration

I suppose the article name is somewhat misleading as the following information is really pertinent to just about any Lync Server 2010/2013 implementation involving a PBX. New Lync Server 2013 features notwithstanding, I'll provide a few scenarios for implementing the more common (Cisco/Nortel/Avaya) PBX systems on the market today and demonstrate what I believe is the perfect compromise between world domination and exile.

I'm engaged with customers on a regular basis who have an existing legacy PBX (i.e. Nortel/MITEL) or have completed a new implementation (i.e. Cisco/Avaya) of an IP telephony solution. As an afterthought they have visions of a perfectly integrated Unified Communications strategy involving multiple vendors including Microsoft's Lync Server platform. Some of the common questions I hear are:
  1. We've just completed our Cisco Call Manager installation, have deployed IP phones, and we simply don't like their desktop software story. We want Lync on the desktop but don't want to lose our investment in IP telephony. Can you make them work 'together'?
  2. We like what Lync has to offer but we simply can't remove our PBX yet due to call center integration and feature limitations. We want users to keep their identity and voicemail platform on the PBX. How can you integrate Lync with our existing systems?
As an advocate for the Microsoft UC platform, I used to consider anything short of a full Lync IP telephony deployment a failure. After realizing we can't win them all...I've softened up a bit and since then have come up with a solution I believe is a great balance between ripping out the PBX and losing a Lync deal.

Before we get started you need to forget one of the most important rules you've learned; you won't be using E.164 format for the LineURI in Lync. The purpose of using E.164 as a numbering standard is because your dial plan is exposed across the AD forest. In other words the LineURI needs to be globally unique enough to prevent collision with another number.

So let's start with common customer requirements. In some cases customers will want voicemail to remain on the PBX and are strictly against Exchange UM for compliance or political reasons. In other cases customers want voicemail both tied to the IP phone and the Lync user. I'll outline options for both scenarios.

Customer requirements:
  1. We need Lync users enabled for Enterprise Voice (EV).
  2. EV-enabled Lync users must keep their IP phones.
  3. IP phones should have voicemail homed on the PBX.
  4. Calls to IP phones must also ring the Lync user (sim-ring).
  5. Caller ID for calls from Lync to PBX or PSTN should represent the PBX DID. Additionally, users authenticating to a Lync PSTN conference need to authenticate with their real DID and PIN.
  6. Lync to Lync calls via click to call (contact card DID) or simply keying in the user's DID must ALWAYS leave Lync and ring the PBX first.
To many who design Lync environments this can be a difficult list to adhere to. In many cases the most difficult requirement is the last one because of "Reverse Number Lookup" (RNL) in Lync Server. For those who don't know what RNL does, it is a process by which Lync Server will perform a lookup of the dialed number (the "A-party") and if a match is found it will ring the user's SIP URI. This often results in a call destined for a user's IP phone being handled exclusively by Lync which breaks several of the requirements.

Let's focus on requirements #4, #5, and #6 as they are most relevant here.

Scenario: Alice is using her IP phone (7805551234) to call Bob's IP phone (7805553001) where the call is forked to Bob's Lync identity (SIPURI: bob@contoso.com and LineURI: +7805553001;ext=3001). Let's look at the requirements again:

4. Calls to IP phones must also ring the Lync user (sim-ring).
The PBX really needs to own this feature however we need to ensure we work with the telecom teams to design a solution which will work with Lync. In the case of Cisco, the Mobility feature must be used to sim-ring the Lync number and in cases where Nortel is used, PCA licenses may be required for the same purpose/feature-set.

Similar to the RNL feature in Lync, other PBX systems need a unique number represented by the sing-ring so as to not cause a loop or sim-ring call to end up directed at voicemail instead of Lync Server. For this purpose I'd recommend using a steering code (prefix called party with a series of digits). For example, if Alice (7805551234) calls Bob (7805553001) we need the PBX to fork the call to a third number for Bob (89+7805553001). The PBX adds the "89" steering code which is used in their routing engine to send the call to Lync via Direct SIP or a Gateway.

To simplify the configuration we need Lync to strip the steering code so the number can match Bob's LineURI attribute in Lync.

NOTE: Common mistakes are to set Bob's LineURI to "897805553001" which breaks requirement #5 or to use a phantom non-DID such as "3001" which also breaks #5 and #6.

Don't use the gateway to this work as it only complicates the solution. Within Lync Server create a pool-based dial plan tied to your IP gateway object and within it create a normalization rule to strip the steering code. For example "^89(\d{10})$" translates to "$1". This means Lync will attempt to perform RNL against 7805553001 specifically.

NOTE: Another common mistake I've seen is Lync administrators writing inbound normalization rules to handle the 'non-DID' formatted number (with the ;ext= attribute). You don't need to worry about this as a call to 7805553001 will match both 7805553001 and 7805553001;ext=3001. Beware however that if you have a base number of 7805553001 assigned to a Lync user along with extensions off the same base number such as 7805553001;ext=1301 and 7805553001;ext=1302, etc. This will result in a failed call as it is too ambiguous (SIP/2.0 485 Ambiguous).

So now that Lync receives a call for 7805553001 and matches Bob's LineURI which is 7805553001;ext=3001 we have met this requirement. Both Bob's IP phone and Lync will ring. The only real change to a typical dial plan is that we've removed the country code (North America=1). Again going back to my E.164 discussion above, by removing the "1" we've potentially made the number less unique however I would submit to you that in 100% of the cases I've seen this isn't an issue because we're using the ";ext=" attribute to gain uniqueness again. In other words if you have a collision in your dial plan as a result of "7805553001;ext=3001" not being unique enough come talk to me!!

5. Caller ID for calls from Lync to PBX or PSTN should represent the PBX DID. Additionally, users authenticating to a Lync PSTN conference need to authenticate with their real DID and PIN.

Since we've given Bob a LineURI of +7805553001;ext=3001 his caller ID to the PBX from Lync will be displayed correctly. In Lync Server 2013 you can optionally build trunk de-normalization rules to strip the ;ext=3001 from the caller ID if necessary.

Bob's LineURI also permits him to authenticate to Lync PSTN conferences using his PIN and even his 10-digit number if necessary. Never give Bob a 'fake' LineURI as this only adds confusion in the Dial-In conferencing page and with his experience in authenticating to the bridge.

6. Lync to Lync calls via click to call (contact card DID) or simply keying in the user's DID must ALWAYS leave Lync and ring the PBX first.

So this is often the most tricky to achieve not only because of RNL but also because of "Global Numbers". What are Global Numbers you ask? Lync will never use client-side or server-side normalization rules for numbers prefixed with a "+" sign. This is very important in click to call scenarios as you would possibly expect +17805556009 follow client-side normalization. It will not as it assumes the number has been pre-formatted already on purpose.

So the challenge is....when a Lync user selects a user's desk phone number from their contact card, how can we bypass RNL so the call leaves Lync and rings the PBX? Well the secret again is in the LineURI format.

NOTE: I've seen people hack away at the Address Book normalization rules to present a different number format in the contact card; don't do this! Remember....contact card is also visible to federated users as well and if you're representing a number only relevant to you, this will break their click to call scenario. Leave your address book normalization rules as they should be and normalize to E.164 format ALWAYS. Secondly, if you've enabled Call Admission Control and a situation occurs where your call is blocked due to a CAC policy, we need the LineURI number for PSTN reroute.

When Bob clicks on Alice's contact card to call her DID on the PBX it shows up as +17805551234. Since Alice is also a Lync user with Enterprise Voice, her LineURI is +7805551234;ext=1234. This will result in a failed match by RNL and Lync Server will then route the call to the PBX. Optionally you can use trunk de-normalization rules to strip the "+1" from the called party ID.

A word about voicemail...
In many of these cases customers are interested in trying out the features of Exchange UM to the point where we install a server as a pilot initiative. The issues we face with integrating Lync and Exchange with another PBX or IP telephony solution often circle back to Lync's limited integration with 3rd party voicemail platforms. Said another way, you cannot connect Lync to any other voicemail platform than Exchange UM. This certainly isn't a dig against Lync as the amount of engineering gone into the 'better together' story of Lync and Exchange is simply staggering. I understand the investment and need to protect that. So the real question is....what's the best way to make this all work?

Let's start with what your options are, describe the pros and cons of each, and I'll provide my recommendation.

Option 1: Keep voicemail with the PBX
In this scenario the IP phone will remain paired to the voicemail platform in place today and the Lync EV user isn't UM-enabled. Since we're sim-ringing into Lync, a call gone unanswered will divert to the PBX voicemail platform. In an environment politically charged with fear of job loss due to VoIP in general, the upside is people feeling more comfortable about the solution and overall simplicity. The theme is "Lync is simply a 'bolt-on' and I'm not going to lose my job because of it". The downside is Lync to Lync calls will end after 20 seconds.

NOTE: Keep in mind you will want to introduce a GPO for Lync to turn off the feature to "Save call logs in my email Conversation History folder" as this will result in a missed call notification for every call answered by the PBX on a sim-ring into Lync.

Option 2: Keep voicemail with the PBX and enable the Lync user for UM.
Enabling the Lync user for UM will resolve the downside issue in the previous example so we consider this to be a pro. However there is an argument to be made about complexity as call routing scenarios could result in missed calls going to one of two voicemail platforms adding confusion to the user experience. Add to this the ability for a Lync user to sim-ring, call forward, or team-call a series of other Lync users and the call routing/destination could be any one of hundreds of possibilities.

Consider the following: Bob, a PBX user with voicemail is set up to sim-ring his Lync account which is also UM-enabled. Bob set up sim-ring in Lync to ring his cell phone at the same time. While out of range, or with a dead battery, Alice calls Bob. What happens to the call? The answer is....Bob's cell phone voicemail will. Confusing? Maybe not for someone who understands the solution but to Bob it most certainly could be. You could resolve this by disabling call forward and sim-ring via Voice Policy in Lync however at this point the added complexity to neuter Lync seems like a lost cause.

Additionally, this method is a little more tricky as you not only need to take the above GPO setting into account, you also need to turn off missed call notifications in the UM dial plan.

Option 3: Move voicemail from PBX to UM and enable the Lync user for UM.
This one seems to have the most promise but comes with a significant "con". The biggest advantage here is that users have a consolidated voicemail platform between the two systems which reduces confusion and complexity.

In this scenario we have an IP-PBX configured to use Exchange UM as the voicemail platform for Bob's IP phone. Bob is also a Lync EV user who we'd like to provide voicemail for sim-ring calls and/or Lync to Lync calls. The solution here involves the enablement of a secondary dial plan for Bob.

Here are a couple of things to consider:
  1. You must enable the Lync user for UM first.
  2. Then add the secondary dial plan which uses the IP-PBX as a UM IP Gateway.
  3. In this scenario the voicemail light (MWI) on the IP phone will not light up even with Exchange 2010.
At first glance the obvious "con" is the lack of a Message Waiting Indicator light on the IP phone could spell disaster. I have to say that it really depends on the organization you're dealing with. If you explain how Lync will show new voicemail in the system tray, in the client, and Exchange will show voicemail in the inbox, users typically have smartphones these days so they know immediately if they have voicemail even when they're away from their desk.....and on and on....sometimes its enough to convince them....sometimes it isn't.

Secondary Dial Plan Reference: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff629383.aspx

Recommendation: Option 3 some of the time...
Believe it or not I honestly can't say I've seen one solution work 'better' over another. It really comes down to customer requirements, their ability and willingness to test and take on new challenges, and maturity from an Exchange/Lync perspective.

Hope you all find this useful. I'll update and modify this article as I come across anything new or if someone reports an issue/error in the content.

Remember....Keep Calm and Chive On!

Thursday, August 16, 2012

Determine client versions with Lync Server 2010/2013

I've seen several posts on this subject including tools, scripts, and some really great information on how to retrieve client version information out of Lync. Formerly with OCS you used to be able to click the Database tab in the MMC and view client version summary in a nicely displayed table. With Lync Server 2010 this feature doesn't exist ---or does it?

Lync Server 2010 introduced the idea of user registration happening on the front-end servers (in an Enterprise Pool) instead of the pool database back-end. Standard Edition servers also record user registration in a 'front-end' instance of SQL called the "RTCLOCAL" instance. If you look at the Services MMC snap-in for an Enterprise Edition front-end server you'll notice a SQL Server service for the RTCLOCAL instance.

This instance is where user registrations are held, more specifically they are stored in the "rtcdyn" database within this instance.

To obtain client version data we can actually use the Snooper utility which ships with the Lync Server 2010 Resource Kit Tools. This tool can be found under C:\Program Files\Microsoft Lync Server 2010\ResKit\Tracing. Simply run this tool and select "Reports", then "Conferencing and Presence" from the menu.



In the "SQL Backend" text box type the name of one of your front-end servers if you're using Lync Server 2010 Enterprise Edition followed by "\rtclocal". If you're using Standard Edition, type the server name followed by "\rtclocal". For example:

Change the report type to "Diagnostic" and click the "Generate Report" button. Scroll down to the client version summary section to view the results.


To view client version information for other front-ends in the pool, simply change the server name and query them individually.

Good Refernce:

Doug's Blog on retrieving users and versions: http://blogs.technet.com/b/dodeitte/archive/2011/06/15/how-to-get-a-list-of-client-versions-and-the-users-logged-into-them.aspx

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

RESOLVED: Denied by Policy Module 0x80094800, The request was for a certificate template that is not supported by the Certificate Services policy

I was recently engaged at a client site where we used Lync Server 2010's UI for generating a private certificate for the customer's Edge server. The request was sent to their internal PKI environment and came back with the error:

Denied by Policy Module 0x80094800, The request was for a certificate template that is not supported by the Certificate Services policy.

The customer's Windows certificate server used a custom template based on the default WebServer template shipped with the OS. The template "friendly name" contained spaces such as "Contoso - Web Server v2" however the "short name" removes these and is referenced as "ContosoWebServerv2".

During the certificate request process in Lync Server 2010 you can specify an alternate template to use for signing the certificate. During this process I had specified the friendly name and not the short name which resulted in the error.

Once I changed the Lync Server 2010 certificate request template name in the wizard to the short name, the CA issued the certificate just fine!

Thanks to Dev for this one!

Thursday, May 17, 2012

RESOLVED: Lync iOS Mobile ERROR: Can't connect to Exchange Web Services. You can try again later.

Consider the following:

An organization uses two different DNS records for their Exchange Web Services URL:



The internal URL is not registered in public DNS. You sign into the Lync Mobile client from an iOS device. The client signs in but you receive an error shortly after indicating “Can’t connect to Exchange Web Services. You can try again later”.

Upon viewing the iOS logs we see the device receive only the Internal URL through the Exchange Autodiscover process. The External URL is never queried by the device and it’s unknown at this point if this parameter is given to the client or not.

What IS known is that the iOS client will only use the Internal URL parameter, in this case https://exchange.contoso.com/ews/exchange.asmx.

Additional Notes:

1.       A common misconception out there is that the iOS device cannot connect to UAG when it’s used to publish the Exchange Web Services, Autodiscover, or Outlook Anywhere URL’s. There is an issue where UAG is used to publish the Lync Mobility URL’s (lyncdiscover and external web farm fqdn).
2.       You MUST enable Outlook Anywhere on your Internet facing CAS servers for the Autodiscover URL’s to be given to clients (iOS/Lync 2010) on the Internet. However, you don’t have to publish the “/rpc/*” path through UAG/TMG.
a.       The same applies to the Lync 2010 client when it queries for conversation history or voicemail from Exchange when signed in remotely.
3.       You CAN use UAG to publish Exchange URL’s with TMG publishing the Lync URL’s.

Resolution:

1.     Publish your internal EWS FQDN in public DNS and make sure your TMG or UAG server has a certificate matching the public name you're using. If you have a wildcard certificate you're fine.
2.      Consider making the Internal and External Web Services URL's the same.