[cisco-voip] AAR vs. Route Lists

[Jonathan Charles]

If the IP Trunks go to a Gatekeeper and you set the Service Parameter
to make CCM BRQ aware...

However, that still won't kick off AAR (cuz AAR only kicks in when
Locations-based CAC is exhausted), however, it will kick off your
route-list 'next Route Group' thing...



Jonathan

On 10/2/07, Kelemen Zoltan <keli at carocomp.ro> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this may be a noob question to some of you, but there's something I
> don't quite understand:
>  don't Route Lists provide the same (or rather - similar) functionality
> as AAR? If not (and I suppose not) what's the difference?
>
> Case in point:
>   We have a client with three CCM clusters, all connected through ICTs.
> We haven't used AAR so far, but the calls are routed through Route
> Lists: the trunk is the first route group, but if that fails, calls are
> redirected to the PSTN route group with appropriate transform masks for
> called and calling numbers.
>
> If the IP trunk is congested, shouldn't the calls be rerouted to the
> PSTN anyway? (even though AAR is not set)
>
> thanks,
>   Zoltan
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>