Officedocs-skypeforbusiness: Incorrect documentation

[oradcliffe]

TenantID is not a valid parameter on Set- or New-CsHostedVoicemailPolicy. Tenant is available, but throws an error when you try to use that with your tenant ID from AAD.

---

Document Details

⚠ Do not edit this section. It is required for docs.microsoft.com ➟ GitHub issue linking.

• ID: ec8b8afb-b9ca-8136-b907-5bbff4c9dcf1
• Version Independent ID: d4f68818-6fe6-5bb7-f108-e26a643f2cc7
• Content: Configure Cloud Voicemail service for on-premises users
• Content Source: Skype/SfbHybrid/hybrid/configure-cloud-voicemail.md
• Product: skype-for-business-itpro
• GitHub Login: @dstrome
• Microsoft Alias: dstrome

[scanum]

@oradcliffe Thank you for submitting feedback and contributing to the docs. We are currently investigating this.

[dewaltk]

Is there any update on this? I am trying to setup Cloud Voicemail for a Skype for Business Server 2015 environment instead of having to go through the process of first going to UM online and waiting for Microsoft to move over to Cloud Voicemail next year.

[ablanken]

I'm also trying to configure Cloud Voicemail with Skype for Business Server 2019 without success. Please review this documentation ASAP.

[ablanken]

I'm using SFB 2019. I don't have the 'TenantId' or 'Tenant' parameters available with the 'Set-CSHostedVoicemailPolicy' command.

When modifying the HostedVoicemailPolicy, I left out the Tenant parameter, enabled a test user for Cloud Voicemail and it worked anyway after a couple of minutes...

Other things I noticed: The command help for Set and New-CSHostedVoicemailPolicy included the 'Tenant' parameter which wasn't available for use in practice. The 'Tenant' parameter was available for use with the 'Grant-CSHostedVoicemailPolicy' command. I was going to try that next but didn't need to.

[dariomws]

Hi @oradcliffe, @dewaltk and @ablanken,

Thanks for your feedback.

I have been trying in my labs and I can see this:

• With SfB 2015, -Tenant parameter exist on Set/New-CsHostedVoicemailPolicy
• With SfB 2019, -Tenant parameter appear on Grant-CSHostedVoicemailPolicy

I will try to get more information about that. Thanks again.

@dstrome maybe you can help here? Thanks!

[dariomws]

@oradcliffe, @dewaltk and @ablanken,

Have you tried without -Tenant? I think that the use of -Organization could be enough.

[oradcliffe]

I have tried just using org, but no dice. It created the policy and I
applied it to users but it didn't actually work.

On Fri, Oct 4, 2019, 12:34 PM Dario Woitasen [e-mail]
wrote:

@oradcliffe https://github.com/oradcliffe, @dewaltk
https://github.com/dewaltk and @ablanken https://github.com/ablanken,

Have you tried without -Tenant? I think that the use of -Organization
could be enough.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/OfficeDocs-SkypeForBusiness/issues/2957?email_source=notifications&email_token=ACROFDMOOPFZEHHHMF7SQ4LQM55DPA5CNFSM4IULNQR2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEAMLWAY#issuecomment-538491651,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACROFDLEEXUVIMKSZCO3GBDQM55DPANCNFSM4IULNQRQ
.

[dariomws]

Thanks @oradcliffe, I will try to get more help/information.

[SanguptaMSFT]

i guess the concern is only in SfB server 2019 from CU1 where there is no -Tenant switch.

SfB 2019 RTM version has the switch.
SfB 2015 never had the switch and i can confirm CVM works fine.

[dariomws]

Thank you @SanguptaMSFT.

I can see it in my lab:

[SanguptaMSFT]

@dariomws306 this is what i was talking about..

RTM Version

SfB 2019 CU1 HF1
Doesn’t have the tenant id parameter..

SfB 2015

[dariomws]

Oh ok, you are talking about -TenantId, you have written "-Tenant" in your first comment.

I think TenantId should be added or maybe there is another way to configure it. I'm waiting for more information.

[SanguptaMSFT]

ok :)
yeah Tenant id is missing from SfB 2019 CU1.
i have raised the concern with Skype for business Product group. hoping to hear back soon..

[scanum]

@oradcliffe Thank you for submitting feedback. We understand that this issue has been resolved.
Please feel free to re-open this issue if there is a specific area of the docs that we can improve or make better. Thank you.