Ok everything seems clear now. As Ashraf said TAC doesn't support fractional MGCP & that's why TAC Engineers go with service parameter approach (just to help customer quickly)
But CUCM support fractional MGCP & we have to manually configure MGCP on Router (Expected in CCIE level). Thanks On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 1:29 AM, Ashraf Ayyash <ash.ayy...@gmail.com> wrote: > hello All , > > well, i apologize if i got off track in disccussing this issue in the > alias ( this apology including your Kshitji ) i think ccie is getting > me aggressive > > anyway , i reason you cannot find this workaround in any of cisco doc > is the fact that we dont support this feature , mgcp is not desinged > to work in fraction connection however cisco have interduce this > feature because mgcp is more prefered for the customer as its very > easy to setup , > > i worked on a very heavy mgcp case in the past cauing me to read the > whole rfc of the mgcp and i i was in touch with the TAC expert and the > DE in charge of this feature and the discussion ended to say that TAC > doesnt support fraction mgcp and this is a temp workaround you can use > in the time being tpo avoid cal failure when the ccm will setup call > on a non-used bchannel and this feature is under study for feature > full suppor on the ccm nativly but we dont have any estimated release > or time yet , > > Thanks > > Ash > > On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Ken Wyan <kew...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Kshitij, > > > > Logically it should use next GW in RG ( & to next RG , etc..) when all 3 > > channels are full in first GW. (As per your obsevations it should be) But > > better to test as at times CUCM server behaves very strange. > > > > In fact a TAC Engineer ( from India ) told me to use this service > parameter > > to support fractional MGCP (when I opened a TAC case for fractional E1 in > > MGCP long time back). Cisco docs never say to use this service parameter > for > > fractional E1/T1 MGCP & it is for temporary busy-out of channels > > (maintenance purposes). > > > > I guess a TAC expert has guided this way to overcome a bug in a > particular > > code or to give a quick solution for fractional MGCP ( rather than > > time-consuming manual MGCP configuration) & also not to affect cisco's > PVDM > > sales volume. > > > > Thank you for your findings & if Ash can check again this with TAC > experts > > it would be very nice. > > > > Ken > > > > On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Kshitij Singhi < > martinian.ksin...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> > >> Hmm... will max out my MGCP channels on Monday and check if calls move > out > >> of the backup endpoint configured in the RG/RL. Not sure if I tested > this > >> when I was practicing but as far as I remember, I have. Will update > soon!!! > > > > _______________________________________________ > > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > > visit www.ipexpert.com > > > > Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out > > www.PlatinumPlacement.com <http://www.platinumplacement.com/> > > >
_______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
