Michael, I think I got it figured it out. Though the solution is kind of strange or silly.
I tried to configure both solutions given on that doc and first none were working but I got both resolved the same way. What happened to me is that CUCM would say the capabilites between the transcoder and the mtp were not matching. I had it like (default transcoder codecs): dspfarm profile 6 transcode codec g711ulaw codec g711alaw codec g729ar8 codec g729abr8 maximum sessions 6 associate application SCCP dspfarm profile 5 mtp codec g729r8 codec pass-through rsvp maximum sessions software 50 associate application SCCP >From the theory I know, g729r8 and g729ar8 should be compatible, but for some reason CUCM didn't think so. I went and added g729ar8 to the mtp profile, and issue got solved: dspfarm profile 5 mtp codec g729r8 codec pass-through codec g729ar8 rsvp maximum sessions software 50 associate application SCCP Should have been the same to add g729r8 to the transcoder profile. Probably some people would not notice this problem as I know some people just add as much codecs they can to the transcoder profile but I usually leave it as defaults. This is nice practice. Thx for sharing! On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Michael Luo <hout...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Randall, > > Thank you for the info. > > I think my scenario is exactly like this: > > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/admin/7_0_1/ccmsys/a02rsvp.html#wp1034607 > > In the lab, the caller was in region BR1 and the IVR (UCCX with G.711) was > in region HQ. The inter-region codec was configured to use G.729. Thus a > transcoder is needed. > > The call works fine without RSVP agent (transcoded as expected). > > When MTP RSVP agent was added to the MRGL, the call failed. Per the link > above, it should work as my MTP was configured as required in the link: > > dspfarm profile 2 mtp > > codec g729r8 > > codec pass-through > > rsvp > > maximum session software 4 > > associate application sccp > > Thanks! > Michael > > > On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Randall Saborio <ill2...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Michael, I can only contribute to your last question. In my opinion, MTP >> is more scalable because you can always have a lot more MTP software >> sessions than transcoder, which is always hardware. MTP can be software on >> IOS and use G.729 and can have way more sessions limited only by the CPU on >> the router. >> >> I haven't tried what you say from lab 10 but sounds interesting. Will try >> to do some labbing on that tomorrow to understand. >> >> Cheers. >> >> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Michael Luo <hout...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I was reading IP Expert CCIE Voice Volume 1 Proctor Guide page 531 of 645 >>> (Lab 10.1). >>> >>> Quoted from the page "At this stage we would have broken our >>> inter-cluster calls". I was trying to understand why adding the MTP RSVP >>> agent would break the transcoding. >>> >>> I did multiple tests. Even I had XCode and MTP in the same MRG, the call >>> won't invoke the XCode and thus a codec mismatch fails the call. If I >>> remove MTP (RSVP agent) from MRG, it'll work again. >>> >>> But why is that? Why MTP would break functionality of Transcoder? Is >>> there a way to make them work together? >>> >>> Another thing I don't quite understand was - the proctor guide said we >>> could user transcoder as RSVP agent but MTP is more scalable. Why was that? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Michael >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please >>> visit www.ipexpert.com >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Randall "da ill" Saborio >> CCIE Voice Wannabe #10054675811 >> >> > -- Randall "da ill" Saborio CCIE Voice Wannabe #10054675811
_______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
