Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Route List redundancy - Stop Routing on Unallocated Number

[J. Peralta]

Vik,

I restarted the router. Calls through my MGCP gw work now and if I
shut down the port completly, the calls goes out the alternate path.
Weird.

Thanks guys!

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Vik Malhi  wrote:
> What is your second choice gateway? If it is H323 check using debug voip
> dialpeer.
>
> Why is the call not succeeding through the MGCP gw? You are receiving "no
> circuit/channel available" which means you are trying to use an invalid
> bearer channel. Try using Top-Down within the MGCP gw and then no mgcp/mgcp
> and see if the call succeeds. Then when you have the call going through the
> MGCP gw successfully shutdown the voiceport and check the backup path.
>
> Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890
> Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.
>
> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
> Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 5, 2012, at 2:36 AM, J. Peralta wrote:
>
> I have a questions regarding redundancy withing the a route list.
>
> I changed the Service parameters to
> Stop Routing on Unallocated Number Flag : False
>
> After receiving the following message from my MGCP gateway, Call
> Manager does not attempt the call over the secondary group inside the
> route List. Any ideas why?
>
> Jan 12 10:11:17.834 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/0:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PROC pd = 8
> callref = 0xBDA2
>    Channel ID i = 0xA9838B
>    Exclusive, Channel 11
> Jan 12  10:11:17.918 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PROC pd = 8
> callref = 0x9BB5
>    Channel ID i = 0xA98383
>    Exclusive, Channel 3
> Jan 12  10:11:18.466 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- DISCONNECT pd =
> 8  callref = 0x9BB5
>    Cause i = 0x80A2 - No circuit/channel available
> Jan 12  10:11:18.494 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: TX -> RELEASE pd = 8
> callref = 0x1BB5
> Jan 12  10:11:18.566 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- RELEASE_COMP pd
> = 8  callref = 0x9BB5
>
> Thanks,
>
> J
> ___
> 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
>
>
___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] cBarge during SRST

[Vik Malhi]

I think they cannot tell you to preserve cBarge and not show ephonesMy 
interpretation is that if they want you to preserve this feature they will not 
give this restriction.



-- 
Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890
Managing Partner / Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Fax: +1.810.454.0130
Live Assistance, Please visit: www.ipexpert.com/chat


IPexpert is a premier provider of Self-Study Workbooks, Video on Demand, Audio 
Tools, Online Hardware Rental and Classroom Training for the Cisco CCIE (R&S, 
Voice, Wireless, Security & Service Provider) certification(s) with training 
locations throughout the United States, Europe, South Asia and Australia. Be 
sure to visit our online communities at www.ipexpert.com/communities 
  and our public website at 
www.ipexpert.com 


On Mar 5, 2012, at 6:40 PM, Ken Wyan  wrote:

> If they ask " You are not allowed to have learned ephone details in running 
> configuration "
>  
> I will configure
>  
> telephony-service
> srst mode auto provision none 
> srst ephone template 1
>  
> ephone template 1
> softkeys remote-in-use cBarge NewCall
>  
> ephone 1
> privacy off
>  
> ephone 2
> privacy off
>  
> Is there any possibility of  interpretting my answer as wrong ?
>  
>  
> Ken
> 
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Vik Malhi  wrote:
> You have to disable privacy at the ephone level (in IOS 12.4x). Disabling 
> privacy at the telephony-service level and template level does not work.
> 
> Therefore you must have srst mode auto-prov all in order to preserve cbarge.
> 
> So I would expect that if you are required to preserve cBarge, the words "do 
> not pre-define any ephone or ephone-dn" to not restrict the learned 
> ephones/dn's from showing up in the running config. The problem I have with 
> not creating any pre-defined ephones/dn's is that you must have a pre-defined 
> ephone-dn for the "conference ad-hoc" so I'm not sure if this question is 
> possible.
> 
> Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890 
> Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.
> 
> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
> Fax: +1.810.454.0130 
> Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 4, 2012, at 2:50 AM, Vega Wong wrote:
> 
>> Hi All, 
>> 
>> Let say we need to make sure the same call feature remains during SRST, and 
>> there is a share line with cbarge during normal CUCM operation. However, if 
>> the requirement is
>> 
>> "Do not pre-define any ephone or ephone-dn in running-config"
>> 
>> how would you interupt this? 
>> 
>> The simplest way is to use "srst mode auto-provision none". The issue with 
>> this command is that cBarge during SRST would not work. 
>> 
>> So if we use "srst mode auto-provision all", the configure in running-config 
>> will be "learnt" during SRST. would that still consider as "pre-define"?
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> ___
>> 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
> 
> 
> ___
> 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
> 
___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] CCIE Numbers ?

[Vik Malhi]

It is rare- but it does happen. I think Jonathan Monestel who was in my class 
in Jan passed first try but that is the exception not the rule...If everybody 
would just come to my class then there would be more:-) Just kidding!



-- 
Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890
Managing Partner / Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Fax: +1.810.454.0130
Live Assistance, Please visit: www.ipexpert.com/chat


IPexpert is a premier provider of Self-Study Workbooks, Video on Demand, Audio 
Tools, Online Hardware Rental and Classroom Training for the Cisco CCIE (R&S, 
Voice, Wireless, Security & Service Provider) certification(s) with training 
locations throughout the United States, Europe, South Asia and Australia. Be 
sure to visit our online communities at www.ipexpert.com/communities 
  and our public website at 
www.ipexpert.com 


On Mar 5, 2012, at 6:31 PM, Ken Wyan  wrote:

> Based on numbers , pass rate is very high. ( yes there should  be a lot of 
> unallocated numbers )
>  
> But for Voice ,  still very very rare if someone pass his first try. 
> 
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Vik Malhi  wrote:
> Only Cisco knows. One thing for sure is that the pass rate was very very high 
> (based on numbers) and this cannot (in my opinion) be without suspicion.
> 
> If the numbers have flattened I would think they have found and addressed the 
> source of the problem.
> 
> Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890 
> Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.
> 
> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
> Fax: +1.810.454.0130 
> Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 4, 2012, at 10:45 PM, Ken Wyan wrote:
> 
>> CCIE Numbers reached 30,000 in last September. In January they were giving 
>> 34k numbers . Now in March still 34k numbers.
>>  
>> Seems pass-rate has dropped in year 2012 ?  Lab or Grading seems got tougher 
>> this year.
>> ___
>> 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
> 
> 
___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] cBarge during SRST

[Ken Wyan]

If they ask " You are not allowed to have learned ephone details in running
configuration "

I will configure

telephony-service
srst mode auto provision none
srst ephone template 1

ephone template 1
softkeys remote-in-use cBarge NewCall

ephone 1
privacy off

ephone 2
privacy off

Is there any possibility of  interpretting my answer as wrong ?


Ken

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Vik Malhi  wrote:

> You have to disable privacy at the ephone level (in IOS 12.4x). Disabling
> privacy at the telephony-service level and template level does not work.
>
> Therefore you must have srst mode auto-prov all in order to preserve
> cbarge.
>
> So I would expect that if you are required to preserve cBarge, the words
> "do not pre-define any ephone or ephone-dn" to *not* restrict the learned
> ephones/dn's from showing up in the running config. The problem I have with
> not creating any pre-defined ephones/dn's is that you must have a
> pre-defined ephone-dn for the "conference ad-hoc" so I'm not sure if this
> question is possible.
>
>  Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890
> Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.
>
> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
> Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com
>
>
>
>
>   On Mar 4, 2012, at 2:50 AM, Vega Wong wrote:
>
>Hi All,
>
> Let say we need to make sure the same call feature remains during SRST,
> and there is a share line with cbarge during normal CUCM operation.
> However, if the requirement is
>
> "Do not pre-define any ephone or ephone-dn in running-config"
>
> how would you interupt this?
>
> The simplest way is to use "srst mode auto-provision none". The issue with
> this command is that cBarge during SRST would not work.
>
> So if we use "srst mode auto-provision all", the configure in
> running-config will be "learnt" during SRST. would that still consider as
> "pre-define"?
>
> Cheers
>
> ___
> 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 
>
>
>
> ___
> 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 
>
___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] CCIE Numbers ?

[Ken Wyan]

Based on numbers , pass rate is very high. ( yes there should  be a lot
of unallocated numbers )

But for Voice ,  still very very rare if someone pass his first try.

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Vik Malhi  wrote:

> Only Cisco knows. One thing for sure is that the pass rate was very very
> high (based on numbers) and this cannot (in my opinion) be without
> suspicion.
>
> If the numbers have flattened I would think they have found and addressed
> the source of the problem.
>
>  Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890
> Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.
>
> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
> Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com
>
>
>
>
>  On Mar 4, 2012, at 10:45 PM, Ken Wyan wrote:
>
>  CCIE Numbers reached 30,000 in last September. In January they were
> giving 34k numbers . Now in March still 34k numbers.
>
> Seems pass-rate has dropped in year 2012 ?  Lab or Grading seems got
> tougher this year.
> ___
> 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 
>
>
>
___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] service-policy on trunk ports

[Ken Wyan]

Thanks Vik for your clarification

On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Vik Malhi  wrote:

> This is and has been for a long time been a limitation on the 3750- the
> show policy-map command doesn't work:-(
>
>  Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890
> Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.
>
> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
> Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com
>
>
>
>
>   On Mar 3, 2012, at 12:59 PM, Ken Wyan wrote:
>
>   I have following scenario (Tested in Proctorlabs Rack).
>
> HQ Switch  Fa1/0/1 (trunk port) <---connect to-->  HQ
> Router Fa0/0 (with sub-interfaces)
>
> I want to apply a service-policy to mgcp packets  going through this link.
>
> I configured access-list , class-map , policy-map & applied to switch
> interface. But I can't see any mgcp packets matching
>
> HQ-3750#show policy-map interface fastEthernet 1/0/1
>  FastEthernet1/0/1
>   Service-policy input: mgcp
> Class-map: mgcp (match-all)
>   0 packets, 0 bytes
>   5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
>   Match: access-group 100
> Class-map: class-default (match-any)
>   0 packets, 0 bytes
>   5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
>   Match: any
> 0 packets, 0 bytes
> 5 minute rate 0 bps
> interface FastEthernet1/0/1
>  switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
>  switchport trunk native vlan 10
>  switchport mode trunk
>  speed 100
>  duplex full
>  mls qos trust dscp
>  service-policy input mgcp
>
> *Now  same thing I configured on HQ Router ( Fa0/0 interface)  , then I
> can see packets are matching with service policy.*
>
> What can be the reason?
> (Switch accepts service-policy in input direction only , hence I applied
> service-policy in output direction on Router port)
>
> Can this be a limitation for trunk (multi-vlan) ports on switches ?
>
> Ken
>
>
> ___
> 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 
>
>
>
___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] QoS Question

[Vik Malhi]

We are using the T1 and T2 values on the egress side in a very different way to 
the way we use T1/T2 on the ingress side.

We are trying to expand our buffers dynamically to prevent the frame from being 
dropped. How we do this is by not reserving all of our memory per port (in our 
case we reserved 92%) and contributing to a common pool which can be used for 
the interfaces that are congested and need the extra buffer space.

The dynamic nature of the reserved/max threshold is more flexible that the more 
regimented method you have described- which may be good for some ports but not 
others (and you only get two shots since there are only two queue sets).


Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890 
Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.

Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
Fax: +1.810.454.0130 
Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com




On Mar 5, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Kyle Rogers wrote:

> Vik,
> 
> Thanks for the explanation, that answered most of my questions and helped 
> quite a bit.  My only other question is why someone would carve out 10% of 
> the buffers for a queue, but reserve an amount other than 100%.  For example, 
> if I set the Reserved Bandwidth to 80, why wouldn't I just set the buffer 
> setting to 8 instead?  The only explanation I can come up with is that I can 
> only use whole percentages in the buffer statement and can't put 8.5%, but if 
> I put 10% buffers and 85% reserved, I can reserve 8.5% of the buffers.  Is 
> that the reason or am I missing a piece of the puzzle?  I apologize for 
> asking so many questions but I'm sort of at an impass in my studies until I 
> get a firm grasp on this.  I will definitely check out the blog.
> 
> Thanks,
> Kyle
> 
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Vik Malhi  wrote:
> Answers inline.
> 
> For more info please read my 3 part blog on the Catalyst 3750: 
> http://blog.ipexpert.com/tags/3750-qos/
> 
> Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890 
> Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.
> 
> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
> Fax: +1.810.454.0130 
> Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 5, 2012, at 11:26 AM, Kyle Rogers wrote:
> 
>> QoS is probably the area that I have the most difficulty with - especially 
>> LAN QoS.  I have some general questions.  let's use the following sample 
>> config:
>> 
>> 
>> mls qos queue-set output 1 buffers 10 10 26 54
>> mls qos queue-set output 1 threshold 2 138 138 92 400
> 
> You have only showed queue set 1 - we shall assume that the interface is 
> assigned to queue set 1 but you must check the interface.
> 
>> 
>> Let's say this is applied to a 100 Mbps interface
>> 
>> So if I understand this correctly:
>> 
>> Queue 1 = 10% of interface bandwidth is reserved (10 Mbps)
>> Queue 2 = 10% of interface bandwidth is reserved (10 Mbps)
>> Queue 3 = 26% of interface bandwidth is reserved (26 Mbps)
>> Queue 3 = 54% of interface bandwidth is reserved (54 Mbps)
> 
> Not really interface bandwidth. When talking about buffer sizes we are 
> talking about the sizes of the 4 queues = buffer space = memory allocation 
> per queue. So our buffer size (which is quite small and not published but 
> potentially 2MB per 4 ports - not important)  is for Q1-4 is 10%, 10%, 26%, 
> 54%. The bandwidth each of the 4 queues has is specified using the srr 
> commands within the interface.
> 
>> 
>> In queue 2:
>> T1 is set to 138% of bandwidth (138% x 10 Mbps)
>> T2 is set to 138% of bandwidth (138% x 10 Mbps)
>> T3 is always set to 100% (100% x 10 Mbps)
>> Reserved BW = 92% x 10 Mbps
>> Maximum Reserved BW = 400% x 10 Mbps
> 
> Let's pretend our buffer per port is 1MB. Q2 has 10% of the buffer which is 
> 100KB.
> 
> However there is a twist since we are only actually reserving 92% buffers 
> allocated to Q2. This is defined in the reserved threshold value. So really 
> what we are reserving or guaranteeing  is 92KB of buffer space for Q2. The 
> remaining 8% goes to what is known as the common pool- which can be used by 
> anybody (temporarily) as and when it is needed. Q2 is allowed to grab 4x the 
> buffers if available- so the buffer size could temporarily expand to 4MB 
> (based on our 1MB per port example).
> 
> So traffic placed into Q2T1 will be dropped when Q2 is 138% full (or when Q2 
> has 138KB of it buffers utilized). To get to this value we would have had to 
> borrow some of the common pool bandwidth since only 92KB is reserved. If 
> there is no common pool bandwidth then we would have dropped traffic sooner. 
> 
> Same for Q2T2.
> 
> Traffic place into Q2T3 will be dropped when Q2 is 400% full (or when Q2 has 
> 4MB of its buffers utilized). To get to this value we would have had to 
> borrow a substantial amount of common pool bandwidth. Worst case- we would 
> drop this traffic when the reserved buffers are full (92KB).
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> I think the Reserved and Max Reserved are what are tripping me up.  
>> My questions are:
>> 
>> 1.  If I allocated 10% using the "buffers" command and therefore have 10% of 
>> the interface's Reserved Memory Pool available for Queu

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] service-policy on trunk ports

[Mohammed Al Baqari]

As Vik said "show policy-map" command in 3750 won't show stats. Instead use
"show mls qos interface stats" command. Also, make sure that your ACL is
correct.

 

Regards,

Mohammed Al Baqari

 

From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com
[mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of Ken Wyan
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2012 12:59 AM
To: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com
Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] service-policy on trunk ports

 

I have following scenario (Tested in Proctorlabs Rack).

 

HQ Switch  Fa1/0/1 (trunk port) <---connect to-->  HQ Router
Fa0/0 (with sub-interfaces)

 

I want to apply a service-policy to mgcp packets  going through this link.

 

I configured access-list , class-map , policy-map & applied to switch
interface. But I can't see any mgcp packets matching

 

HQ-3750#show policy-map interface fastEthernet 1/0/1
 FastEthernet1/0/1

  Service-policy input: mgcp

Class-map: mgcp (match-all)
  0 packets, 0 bytes
  5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
  Match: access-group 100

Class-map: class-default (match-any)
  0 packets, 0 bytes
  5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
  Match: any
0 packets, 0 bytes
5 minute rate 0 bps

interface FastEthernet1/0/1
 switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
 switchport trunk native vlan 10
 switchport mode trunk
 speed 100
 duplex full
 mls qos trust dscp
 service-policy input mgcp

 

Now  same thing I configured on HQ Router ( Fa0/0 interface)  , then I can
see packets are matching with service policy.

 

What can be the reason?

(Switch accepts service-policy in input direction only , hence I applied
service-policy in output direction on Router port)

 

Can this be a limitation for trunk (multi-vlan) ports on switches ?

 

Ken


 

___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] QoS Question

[Kyle Rogers]

Vik,

Thanks for the explanation, that answered most of my questions and helped
quite a bit.  My only other question is why someone would carve out 10% of
the buffers for a queue, but reserve an amount other than 100%.  For
example, if I set the Reserved Bandwidth to 80, why wouldn't I just set the
buffer setting to 8 instead?  The only explanation I can come up with is
that I can only use whole percentages in the buffer statement and can't put
8.5%, but if I put 10% buffers and 85% reserved, I can reserve 8.5% of the
buffers.  Is that the reason or am I missing a piece of the puzzle?  I
apologize for asking so many questions but I'm sort of at an impass in my
studies until I get a firm grasp on this.  I will definitely check out the
blog.

Thanks,
Kyle

On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Vik Malhi  wrote:

> Answers inline.
>
> For more info please read my 3 part blog on the Catalyst 3750:
> http://blog.ipexpert.com/tags/3750-qos/
>
> Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890
> Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.
>
> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
> Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 5, 2012, at 11:26 AM, Kyle Rogers wrote:
>
> QoS is probably the area that I have the most difficulty with - especially
> LAN QoS.  I have some general questions.  let's use the following sample
> config:
>
>
> mls qos queue-set output 1 buffers 10 10 26 54
> mls qos queue-set output 1 threshold 2 138 138 92 400
>
>
> You have only showed queue set 1 - we shall assume that the interface is
> assigned to queue set 1 but you must check the interface.
>
>
> Let's say this is applied to a 100 Mbps interface
>
> So if I understand this correctly:
>
> Queue 1 = 10% of interface bandwidth is reserved (10 Mbps)
> Queue 2 = 10% of interface bandwidth is reserved (10 Mbps)
> Queue 3 = 26% of interface bandwidth is reserved (26 Mbps)
> Queue 3 = 54% of interface bandwidth is reserved (54 Mbps)
>
>
> Not really interface bandwidth. When talking about buffer sizes we are
> talking about the sizes of the 4 queues = buffer space = memory allocation
> per queue. So our buffer size (which is quite small and not published but
> potentially 2MB per 4 ports - not important)  is for Q1-4 is 10%, 10%, 26%,
> 54%. The bandwidth each of the 4 queues has is specified using the srr
> commands within the interface.
>
>
> In queue 2:
> T1 is set to 138% of bandwidth (138% x 10 Mbps)
> T2 is set to 138% of bandwidth (138% x 10 Mbps)
> T3 is always set to 100% (100% x 10 Mbps)
> Reserved BW = 92% x 10 Mbps
> Maximum Reserved BW = 400% x 10 Mbps
>
>
> Let's pretend our buffer per port is 1MB. Q2 has 10% of the buffer which
> is 100KB.
>
> However there is a twist since we are only actually reserving 92% buffers
> allocated to Q2. This is defined in the reserved threshold value. So really
> what we are reserving or guaranteeing  is 92KB of buffer space for Q2. The
> remaining 8% goes to what is known as the common pool- which can be used by
> anybody (temporarily) as and when it is needed. Q2 is allowed to grab 4x
> the buffers if available- so the buffer size could temporarily expand to
> 4MB (based on our 1MB per port example).
>
> So traffic placed into Q2T1 will be dropped when Q2 is 138% full (or when
> Q2 has 138KB of it buffers utilized). To get to this value we would have
> had to borrow some of the common pool bandwidth since only 92KB is
> reserved. If there is no common pool bandwidth then we would have dropped
> traffic sooner.
>
> Same for Q2T2.
>
> Traffic place into Q2T3 will be dropped when Q2 is 400% full (or when Q2
> has 4MB of its buffers utilized). To get to this value we would have had to
> borrow a substantial amount of common pool bandwidth. Worst case- we would
> drop this traffic when the reserved buffers are full (92KB).
>
>
>
>
> I think the Reserved and Max Reserved are what are tripping me up.
> My questions are:
>
> 1.  If I allocated 10% using the "buffers" command and therefore have 10%
> of the interface's Reserved Memory Pool available for Queue 2, why would I
> then cut it down from 10% to 9.2%?
> 2.  Does the 400 for Max Reserved mean that T1 +T2 + T3 traffic cannot
> exceed 400% x 10 Mbps of the interface's bandwidth?
>
> I guess I just need a good explanation for the correlation of the numbers
> in the command "mls qos queue-set output 1 threshold 2 138 138 92 400"
>
> Thanks in advance for any assistance.
>
> Kyle
> ___
> 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
>
>
>
___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] QoS Question

[Vik Malhi]

Answers inline.

For more info please read my 3 part blog on the Catalyst 3750: 
http://blog.ipexpert.com/tags/3750-qos/

Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890 
Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.

Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
Fax: +1.810.454.0130 
Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com




On Mar 5, 2012, at 11:26 AM, Kyle Rogers wrote:

> QoS is probably the area that I have the most difficulty with - especially 
> LAN QoS.  I have some general questions.  let's use the following sample 
> config:
> 
> 
> mls qos queue-set output 1 buffers 10 10 26 54
> mls qos queue-set output 1 threshold 2 138 138 92 400

You have only showed queue set 1 - we shall assume that the interface is 
assigned to queue set 1 but you must check the interface.

> 
> Let's say this is applied to a 100 Mbps interface
> 
> So if I understand this correctly:
> 
> Queue 1 = 10% of interface bandwidth is reserved (10 Mbps)
> Queue 2 = 10% of interface bandwidth is reserved (10 Mbps)
> Queue 3 = 26% of interface bandwidth is reserved (26 Mbps)
> Queue 3 = 54% of interface bandwidth is reserved (54 Mbps)

Not really interface bandwidth. When talking about buffer sizes we are talking 
about the sizes of the 4 queues = buffer space = memory allocation per queue. 
So our buffer size (which is quite small and not published but potentially 2MB 
per 4 ports - not important)  is for Q1-4 is 10%, 10%, 26%, 54%. The bandwidth 
each of the 4 queues has is specified using the srr commands within the 
interface.

> 
> In queue 2:
> T1 is set to 138% of bandwidth (138% x 10 Mbps)
> T2 is set to 138% of bandwidth (138% x 10 Mbps)
> T3 is always set to 100% (100% x 10 Mbps)
> Reserved BW = 92% x 10 Mbps
> Maximum Reserved BW = 400% x 10 Mbps

Let's pretend our buffer per port is 1MB. Q2 has 10% of the buffer which is 
100KB.

However there is a twist since we are only actually reserving 92% buffers 
allocated to Q2. This is defined in the reserved threshold value. So really 
what we are reserving or guaranteeing  is 92KB of buffer space for Q2. The 
remaining 8% goes to what is known as the common pool- which can be used by 
anybody (temporarily) as and when it is needed. Q2 is allowed to grab 4x the 
buffers if available- so the buffer size could temporarily expand to 4MB (based 
on our 1MB per port example).

So traffic placed into Q2T1 will be dropped when Q2 is 138% full (or when Q2 
has 138KB of it buffers utilized). To get to this value we would have had to 
borrow some of the common pool bandwidth since only 92KB is reserved. If there 
is no common pool bandwidth then we would have dropped traffic sooner. 

Same for Q2T2.

Traffic place into Q2T3 will be dropped when Q2 is 400% full (or when Q2 has 
4MB of its buffers utilized). To get to this value we would have had to borrow 
a substantial amount of common pool bandwidth. Worst case- we would drop this 
traffic when the reserved buffers are full (92KB).



> 
> I think the Reserved and Max Reserved are what are tripping me up.  
> My questions are:
> 
> 1.  If I allocated 10% using the "buffers" command and therefore have 10% of 
> the interface's Reserved Memory Pool available for Queue 2, why would I then 
> cut it down from 10% to 9.2%?
> 2.  Does the 400 for Max Reserved mean that T1 +T2 + T3 traffic cannot exceed 
> 400% x 10 Mbps of the interface's bandwidth?
> 
> I guess I just need a good explanation for the correlation of the numbers in 
> the command "mls qos queue-set output 1 threshold 2 138 138 92 400"
> 
> Thanks in advance for any assistance.
> 
> Kyle
> ___
> 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

___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Route List redundancy - Stop Routing on Unallocated Number

[Vik Malhi]

What is your second choice gateway? If it is H323 check using debug voip 
dialpeer.

Why is the call not succeeding through the MGCP gw? You are receiving "no 
circuit/channel available" which means you are trying to use an invalid bearer 
channel. Try using Top-Down within the MGCP gw and then no mgcp/mgcp and see if 
the call succeeds. Then when you have the call going through the MGCP gw 
successfully shutdown the voiceport and check the backup path.

Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890 
Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.

Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
Fax: +1.810.454.0130 
Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com




On Mar 5, 2012, at 2:36 AM, J. Peralta wrote:

> I have a questions regarding redundancy withing the a route list.
> 
> I changed the Service parameters to
> Stop Routing on Unallocated Number Flag : False
> 
> After receiving the following message from my MGCP gateway, Call
> Manager does not attempt the call over the secondary group inside the
> route List. Any ideas why?
> 
> Jan 12 10:11:17.834 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/0:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PROC pd = 8
> callref = 0xBDA2
>Channel ID i = 0xA9838B
>Exclusive, Channel 11
> Jan 12  10:11:17.918 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PROC pd = 8
> callref = 0x9BB5
>Channel ID i = 0xA98383
>Exclusive, Channel 3
> Jan 12  10:11:18.466 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- DISCONNECT pd =
> 8  callref = 0x9BB5
>Cause i = 0x80A2 - No circuit/channel available
> Jan 12  10:11:18.494 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: TX -> RELEASE pd = 8
> callref = 0x1BB5
> Jan 12  10:11:18.566 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- RELEASE_COMP pd
> = 8  callref = 0x9BB5
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> J
> ___
> 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

___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] CUCME time format

[Vik Malhi]

I don't think so.

Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890 
Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.

Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
Fax: +1.810.454.0130 
Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com




On Mar 4, 2012, at 9:33 PM, Ken Wyan wrote:

> Can we change date display seperator  ( / slash  , - dash , . dot )  in CUCME 
> & call-manager fallback similar to CUCM.
>  
> Is there any command except  date-format , time-format  in CME for this?
>  
> Thanks
> ___
> 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

___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] cBarge during SRST

[Vik Malhi]

You have to disable privacy at the ephone level (in IOS 12.4x). Disabling 
privacy at the telephony-service level and template level does not work.

Therefore you must have srst mode auto-prov all in order to preserve cbarge.

So I would expect that if you are required to preserve cBarge, the words "do 
not pre-define any ephone or ephone-dn" to not restrict the learned 
ephones/dn's from showing up in the running config. The problem I have with not 
creating any pre-defined ephones/dn's is that you must have a pre-defined 
ephone-dn for the "conference ad-hoc" so I'm not sure if this question is 
possible.

Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890 
Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.

Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
Fax: +1.810.454.0130 
Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com




On Mar 4, 2012, at 2:50 AM, Vega Wong wrote:

> Hi All, 
> 
> Let say we need to make sure the same call feature remains during SRST, and 
> there is a share line with cbarge during normal CUCM operation. However, if 
> the requirement is
> 
> "Do not pre-define any ephone or ephone-dn in running-config"
> 
> how would you interupt this? 
> 
> The simplest way is to use "srst mode auto-provision none". The issue with 
> this command is that cBarge during SRST would not work. 
> 
> So if we use "srst mode auto-provision all", the configure in running-config 
> will be "learnt" during SRST. would that still consider as "pre-define"?
> 
> Cheers
> 
> ___
> 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

___
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

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] QoS Question

[Kyle Rogers]

QoS is probably the area that I have the most difficulty with - especially
LAN QoS.  I have some general questions.  let's use the following sample
config:


mls qos queue-set output 1 buffers 10 10 26 54
mls qos queue-set output 1 threshold 2 138 138 92 400

Let's say this is applied to a 100 Mbps interface

So if I understand this correctly:

Queue 1 = 10% of interface bandwidth is reserved (10 Mbps)
Queue 2 = 10% of interface bandwidth is reserved (10 Mbps)
Queue 3 = 26% of interface bandwidth is reserved (26 Mbps)
Queue 3 = 54% of interface bandwidth is reserved (54 Mbps)

In queue 2:
T1 is set to 138% of bandwidth (138% x 10 Mbps)
T2 is set to 138% of bandwidth (138% x 10 Mbps)
T3 is always set to 100% (100% x 10 Mbps)
Reserved BW = 92% x 10 Mbps
Maximum Reserved BW = 400% x 10 Mbps

I think the Reserved and Max Reserved are what are tripping me up.
My questions are:

1.  If I allocated 10% using the "buffers" command and therefore have 10%
of the interface's Reserved Memory Pool available for Queue 2, why would I
then cut it down from 10% to 9.2%?
2.  Does the 400 for Max Reserved mean that T1 +T2 + T3 traffic cannot
exceed 400% x 10 Mbps of the interface's bandwidth?

I guess I just need a good explanation for the correlation of the numbers
in the command "mls qos queue-set output 1 threshold 2 138 138 92 400"

Thanks in advance for any assistance.

Kyle
___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] CCIE Numbers ?

[Vik Malhi]

Only Cisco knows. One thing for sure is that the pass rate was very very high 
(based on numbers) and this cannot (in my opinion) be without suspicion.

If the numbers have flattened I would think they have found and addressed the 
source of the problem.

Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890 
Managing Partner - IPexpert, Inc.

Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 ext 420
Fax: +1.810.454.0130 
Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com




On Mar 4, 2012, at 10:45 PM, Ken Wyan wrote:

> CCIE Numbers reached 30,000 in last September. In January they were giving 
> 34k numbers . Now in March still 34k numbers.
>  
> Seems pass-rate has dropped in year 2012 ?  Lab or Grading seems got tougher 
> this year.
> ___
> 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

___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] CME/CUE DTMF relay from UCM(sip trunk) to CME/CUE

[Juan Lopez]

Datucha,
thanks again for the clarification and for the very useful tip you gave
about the MTP restricting the use of dtmf notify - and the need to remove
the RTP NTE from the rtp stream when going from inband to out of band DTMF.
I am sure this will come in very useful once I start with adding CUE to the
picture.
cheers,
Juan

2012/3/4 datucha123 datucha123 

> There is a little restriction for SIP Notify DTMF for CUCM.
>
> Juan is correct  - You need to enable the "accept unsollicited notify" in
> sip security profile so that CUCM will be able to receive Notify DMTFs.
> But if MTP is checked, then the Notify option will not work.
> Also for outbound Notify DTMF from CUCM, it is not necessary to enable
> "accept unsollicited notify". It will still work.
>
> As for KPML and Notify internetworking  -  it is supported of CUCME (CUBE).
>
> If you are using Inband (RFC2833) on one side and any out of band DTMF on
> other side, then you have to configure the following command on RFC2833
> side dial-peer, so that the Router will strip out the inband DTMF's and
> leave only out of band for outgoing dial-peer:
>
> *dtmf-relay rtp-nte digit-drop*
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Juan Lopez <
> lopez.hernandez.j...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> for option 1 below - you could try to set under the sip security profile
>> "accept unsollicited notify" so that on the BR2 side, you use sip-notify as
>> DTMF relay on both CUE and UCM SIP dialpeers.
>> Let us know if thay might help
>>
>> cheers,
>> Juan
>>
>>   2012/3/4 Juan Lopez 
>>
>>> Hi Justin,
>>>
>>> from reading the mail it looks like on the SIP dialpeers on the BR2, you
>>> use the rtp-nte (inband) dtmf-relay method?
>>>
>>> can you try and let us know:
>>> 1) use SIP-NOTIFY on both SIP dialpeers at BR2? (not sure if UCM
>>> supports this - in SRND it states a UCM SIP trunk uses RTP-NTE or possibly
>>> SIP-KPML)
>>> if 1 does not work:
>>> 2) use sip notify on CUE dialpeer and sip-kpml on sip dialpeer to UCM.
>>> Not sure here whether the CUBE at branch 2 supports notify - kpml dtmf
>>> interworking...
>>>
>>> The idea is to have DTMF between UCM and CME out of band...
>>>
>>> From SRND I read that SIP at UCM uses RTP-NTE or possibly SIP-KPML, so
>>> it rules out to use the SIP-NOTIFY on the dialpeer at branch2 pointing to
>>> UCM (not tested yet) to keep it all out of band - but this is the way to
>>> rule out an MTP
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2012/3/3 Justin McIntyre 
>>>
 Ok.  For those who are interested I have resolved my issue.  By
 selecting the Media Termination Point Required option within the SIP trunk
 I was able to resolve my media stream to an MTP  prior to connection to the
 CME.  This allowed in-band/Out of Band DTMF traversal.  Note that when you
 select the MTP required option within your sip trunk to pay special
 attention to the device pool and region settings upon with the MTP that you
 will resolve to will lie.  The MTP will not inherit the Device Pool
 settings from the Sip trunk depending on your configuration.  This was a
 really good learning experience and if anyone is curious as to any further
 details please let me know.


 I am however un-clear on one thing and maybe someone can help me out.
  I remember using Sip-Notify within my CUE dial-peer and within CUE
 configuration the last time I ran this lab.  For some reason I could not
 get SIP-Notify to work in any case at all that I tried this time around.
  If anyone has any clarity on this I would be most appreciative, I'd hate
 to see, "please configure a sip trunk between UCM and CME location at to
 reach the CUE VM pilot.  Note:  use of an MTP on the SIP trunk is not
 allowed" in the lab.  Plus who knows when a customer site may encounter
 this situation.  Thanks everyone.


 *!*!*!*Thanks to Chase and Vik as they were pertinent in my
 resolution.*!*!*!*

 Thanks,

 Justin McIntyre


 This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are
 intended for the sole use of the individual to whom they are addressed.
 Black Box Corporation reserves the right to scan all e-mail traffic for
 restricted content and to monitor all e-mail in general. If you are not the
 intended recipient or you have received this email in error, any use,
 dissemination or forwarding of this email is strictly prohibited. If you
 have received this email in error, please notify the sender by replying to
 this email.
 ___
 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 

>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
>> visit ww

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Route List redundancy - Stop Routing on Unallocated Number

[Emanuel Damasceno]

Hey J.

This will sound weird, but this is what happened to me. I had the same
problem you did, but when I had the problem, instead of trying to solve it,
I continued with the lab. Without doing anything, it started working...
Seriously, I was shocked lol

I swear I didn't do anything other than restarting CM Services. Weird...
Let it sit for a little...
*Emanuel Damasceno*
CCNP Voice





On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 7:44 AM, J. Peralta  wrote:

> Excuse my spelling errors... Apparently, I'm not doing very good at
> mulicasting today.
>
> Forgot to add I also set "Stop Routing on User Busy Flag"  to False
> and reset CM services. Still not working.
>
> Thanks,
>
> J
>
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:06 PM, J. Peralta  wrote:
> > I have a questions regarding redundancy withing the a route list.
> >
> > I changed the Service parameters to
> > Stop Routing on Unallocated Number Flag : False
> >
> > After receiving the following message from my MGCP gateway, Call
> > Manager does not attempt the call over the secondary group inside the
> > route List. Any ideas why?
> >
> > Jan 12 10:11:17.834 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/0:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PROC pd = 8
> > callref = 0xBDA2
> >Channel ID i = 0xA9838B
> >Exclusive, Channel 11
> > Jan 12  10:11:17.918 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PROC pd = 8
> >  callref = 0x9BB5
> >Channel ID i = 0xA98383
> >Exclusive, Channel 3
> > Jan 12  10:11:18.466 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- DISCONNECT pd =
> > 8  callref = 0x9BB5
> >Cause i = 0x80A2 - No circuit/channel available
> > Jan 12  10:11:18.494 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: TX -> RELEASE pd = 8
> > callref = 0x1BB5
> > Jan 12  10:11:18.566 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- RELEASE_COMP pd
> > = 8  callref = 0x9BB5
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > J
> ___
> 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
>
___
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

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Route List redundancy - Stop Routing on Unallocated Number

[J. Peralta]

Excuse my spelling errors... Apparently, I'm not doing very good at
mulicasting today.

Forgot to add I also set "Stop Routing on User Busy Flag"  to False
and reset CM services. Still not working.

Thanks,

J

On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:06 PM, J. Peralta  wrote:
> I have a questions regarding redundancy withing the a route list.
>
> I changed the Service parameters to
> Stop Routing on Unallocated Number Flag : False
>
> After receiving the following message from my MGCP gateway, Call
> Manager does not attempt the call over the secondary group inside the
> route List. Any ideas why?
>
> Jan 12 10:11:17.834 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/0:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PROC pd = 8
> callref = 0xBDA2
>        Channel ID i = 0xA9838B
>                Exclusive, Channel 11
> Jan 12  10:11:17.918 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PROC pd = 8
>  callref = 0x9BB5
>        Channel ID i = 0xA98383
>                Exclusive, Channel 3
> Jan 12  10:11:18.466 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- DISCONNECT pd =
> 8  callref = 0x9BB5
>        Cause i = 0x80A2 - No circuit/channel available
> Jan 12  10:11:18.494 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: TX -> RELEASE pd = 8
> callref = 0x1BB5
> Jan 12  10:11:18.566 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- RELEASE_COMP pd
> = 8  callref = 0x9BB5
>
> Thanks,
>
> J
___
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

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Route List redundancy - Stop Routing on Unallocated Number

[J. Peralta]

I have a questions regarding redundancy withing the a route list.

I changed the Service parameters to
Stop Routing on Unallocated Number Flag : False

After receiving the following message from my MGCP gateway, Call
Manager does not attempt the call over the secondary group inside the
route List. Any ideas why?

Jan 12 10:11:17.834 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/0:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PROC pd = 8
callref = 0xBDA2
Channel ID i = 0xA9838B
Exclusive, Channel 11
Jan 12  10:11:17.918 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- CALL_PROC pd = 8
 callref = 0x9BB5
Channel ID i = 0xA98383
Exclusive, Channel 3
Jan 12  10:11:18.466 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- DISCONNECT pd =
8  callref = 0x9BB5
Cause i = 0x80A2 - No circuit/channel available
Jan 12  10:11:18.494 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: TX -> RELEASE pd = 8
callref = 0x1BB5
Jan 12  10:11:18.566 GMT: ISDN Se0/0/1:23 Q931: RX <- RELEASE_COMP pd
= 8  callref = 0x9BB5

Thanks,

J
___
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