[OSL | CCIE_Voice] MGCP Gateway POTS dial-peer

2008-10-24 Thread Balamurugan Singaram
Hi,   For Cisco IOS Software Release 12.3(7)T or later the Pots dial-peer configuration for MGCP gateway should like below or even "service mgcpapp" is not needed ? Could you please correct me if I am wrong ?   dial-peer voice 10 pots service mgcpapp incoming called-number . direct-inward-dial

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] POD26 Subscriber not available

2008-10-24 Thread Hardesty, Scott
Proctor lab folks. POD26 subscriber is not accessible. I tried to open a ticket for after hours support but both links sends you to the support forum. I have posted the issue there as well. Scott. Scott Hardesty | Cisco Engineer | MidAtlantic | Presidio Networked Solutions 7601 Ora Glen

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Pod 26 - BR1 NM-16ESW port config

2008-10-24 Thread Hardesty, Scott
I just logged into pod 26 for my afternoon session. I will let you know if i have problems. Scott Hardesty | Cisco Engineer | MidAtlantic | Presidio Networked Solutions 7601 Ora Glen Drive, Suite 100, Greenbelt, MD 20770 | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] D: 301.313.2041 | C: 443.789.1219 | http:/

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Pod 26 - BR1 NM-16ESW port config

2008-10-24 Thread Trevor Peddle
I have had many replies and verification of my configuration, thank you all for that. Yes the VLANs were ceated and verified I could also ping the VLAN interfaces. So the scenario is this the interfaces and vlans are configured correctly as is the DHCP scope. The phones pick up an address from

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Proctor Labs is down

2008-10-24 Thread Trevor Peddle
I have lost connectivity with proctor labs, my VPN client is connected but I cannot access via the web. I logged onto work to try a different ISP and that is the same. Looks like that is the end of my lab for today ... Trevor

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] QOS LLQ

2008-10-24 Thread Mo
Thank you Mike . You not only answered my question but also answered the other questions that i,m sure i was going to face later on . specially about the Frame relay shaping command on physical interface cheers .:) //Mo On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 8:39 PM, Mark Snow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Pod 26 - BR1 NM-16ESW port config

2008-10-24 Thread Trevor Peddle
Hi all, I have configured the phone ports on BR1 as follows, they get an IP from the DHCP scope on CUCM server which I can see also with CDP on the router. However they are not contactable via IP, if I clear the CDP table the addresses disapear. I can ping the default gateway, it is correct in

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] what is this suppose to mean? different Codecs show up as G711 and G729 on the call parties for a call,

2008-10-24 Thread Ricardo Arevalo
Hi Mark, pls correct me if i'm wrong... I for sure agree the path b2n PSTN router and BR2 is not VoIP, no doubt about it... but it is G711 aka g711 (ulaw or alaw). The function of the DSPs is to take the information from the digital channel decode it and set it ready for the processor to packeti

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] what is this suppose to mean? different Codecs show up as G711 and G729 on the call parties for a call,

2008-10-24 Thread jeremy co
Hi Mark, Please correct me if I'm wrong POTS to POTS calls use G711 PCM codec.on all channels. Also we can verify it on pstn router by sh active call voice Telephony call-legs: 2 SIP call-legs: 0 H323 call-legs: 0 Call agent controlled call-legs: 0 SCCP call-legs: 0 Multicast call-legs: 0 Total

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] QOS LLQ

2008-10-24 Thread Mark Snow
If there were no traffic shaper present in the task requirements (as you state here) - then yes bandwidth command must be used on the Serial interface to 512 and the bandwidth command in the policy map would be set to 51.2 or 51 or 52 since 51.2 wouldn't be accepted by IOS (ask the proctor

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] QOS LLQ

2008-10-24 Thread Mo
Mark. it is either me as a dummy or it,s the subject getting way too complicated . but in either way i appreciate if you can explain it with an example . Here i got one : There a link between HQ and BR1 , bandwidth is 512 and we want to reserve 10% for voice and 5% for SIG . I have to achieve th

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] SRST 4-digits preservation

2008-10-24 Thread Mark Snow
There is no way to do this before CUCM 4.2. -- Mark Snow CCIE #14073 (Voice, Security) Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc. Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 Fax: +1.309.413.4097 Mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Join our free online support and peer group communities: http://www.IPexpert.com/c

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] QOS LLQ

2008-10-24 Thread Mark Snow
Percent in a Policy map is a derivative of Mincir but only IF IF there is a traffic shaper present on the interface. If there is no traffic shaper present - then Percent is a derivative of the "bandwidth" command. HTH, -- Mark Snow CCIE #14073 (Voice, Security) Senior Technical Instructor

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] what is this suppose to mean? different Codecs show up as G711 and G729 on the call parties for a call,

2008-10-24 Thread Mark Snow
The call is routed as such: UCM HQ Phone(VoIP G729)--HQ/GK (VoIP G729)---PSTN-(NO LONGER VOIP - NOW PCM THROUGH E1-R2 CAS) ---BR2(VoIP G711)IPPhone. Bottom line is that once the PSTN has it - it enters BR2 *not* as

[OSL | CCIE_Voice] SRST 4-digits preservation

2008-10-24 Thread Michael Shavrov
I know I asked this bfore, but still didn't get "warm and fuzzy feeling" about this. The question: We need to preserve 4-digits dialing between HQ and Br1 during SRST. On the SRST side it's easy - create POTS dial-peer with "destination-pattern 2..." with "prefix". However it's still not clea

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] what is this suppose to mean? different Codecs show up as G711 and G729 on the call parties for a call,

2008-10-24 Thread jeremy co
Hi , So, What I'm understanding is u say calls is routed to BR2 in G729 and BR2 changes codec to G711 to send it to IPphones. some point that I cannot understand if this is the case. -How can BR2 (gateway) do transcoding? since I didn't set up any transcoding on that so it should not use dspfarm

Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] QOS LLQ

2008-10-24 Thread Mo
Ryan. I got really disappointed for lack of what i call "friendly" approach about this part of QOS so I left it alone for a while and today i came back to give it another shot and then WOOOW Ryan you are a life saver . nice explanation pal. That was exactly where i got lost in QOS and now I am