[cisco-voip] Route Pattern / List / Group problems with ATT'sSoftware Defined Network

[Justin Steinberg]

I'm using CCM 3.3(3) and under my LD Route Pattern I have:

Network Service Protocol: PRI 4ESS
Network Service: Software Defined Network

I guess that is the problem.  I have the RP setup as PRI 4ESS (so I
can choose SDN for my LD trunks) and I'm trying to include a local NI2
trunk in the route list/group.



On 13/09/05, Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com> wrote:
> Justin,
> 
> The logic is supposed to be built into CM that if a particular IE is not
> supported under that trunk type, the IE should not be sent.
> 
> What i'm getting at is no, there is no configuration to block the IE,
> however, if you choose (and negotiate with carrier) a different switch type
> that does not support that IE, you can have CM automatically drop the IE.
> 
> In the NSFProtocolServiceMap, TypePriProtocol, and TypeNSFService tables in
> the CCM database you can see which IE's are permitted on which trunk types.
> 
> Looks like SDN is type 18 and database shows that SDN only supported on
> protocols 2,3,6 which are:
> 4ess
> 5e8 Teleos
> PRI 5e9
> 
> I am using 4.1(3) and have to select a 'network service protocol' before i
> can select a specific network service.  Do you have only the service 4ess
> selected and confiugred? or do you have anything configured under NI2?
> 
> /Wes
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Justin Steinberg [mailto:jsteinberg at gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 1:08 PM
> To: Wes Sisk
> Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Route Pattern / List / Group problems with
> ATT'sSoftware Defined Network
> 
> 
> I think that is what my problem is.  The ATT LD circuits use 4ESS (and
> SDN IE) while the local circuits generally use NI2 (and won't process
> calls with SDN IE).
> 
> My goal is to have LD route patterns fail over from the SDN IE enabled
> 4ESS circuits to the NI2 circuits for capacity and redundancy.
> 
> I can't seem to figure out how I would do that with RP->Route
> List->Route Group.  It seems that the only place I can configure SDN
> is the RP.
> 
> Justin
> 
> On 13/09/05, Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com> wrote:
> > SDN IE's should only be sent over trunks that use ISDN protocols that have
> > that SDN IE as a valid IE
> >
> > what ISDN protocols are in use on local vs LD trunks?
> >
> > /Wes
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]On Behalf Of Justin Steinberg
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 11:44 AM
> > To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > Subject: [cisco-voip] Route Pattern / List / Group problems with
> > ATT'sSoftware Defined Network
> >
> >
> > We want to configure our LD route patterns to include our local PRI
> > circuits so that long distance calls can still be completed in the
> > event that our LD PRI circuits are down.
> >
> > All of our branch offices use CCM 3.3(3) with MGCP gateways with local
> > PRIs from a local LEC and LD PRIs from ATT.  The LD PRIs with ATT are
> > configured with ATT's Software Defined Network (which makes
> > interoffice calls cheaper by sending them inbound on the LD circuits,
> > keeping them on ATT's network from origination to termination.)
> >
> > For this to work, we have to configure our LD route patterns with
> > "ISDN Network-Specific Facilities Information Element" specifically:
> > Network Service Protocol: PRI 4ESS
> > Network Service: Software Defined Network
> >
> > This works fine if the associated route lists/groups are ATT's
> > circuits.  But if we put in LEC ciruits in the mix for redundancy they
> > bug out with the extra info and will not process the calls with the
> > SDN information.
> >
> > I was hoping to be able to override the route pattern information on
> > the MGCP gateway config but those are not there for ISDN service
> > options.
> >
> > Anyway for me to do this?  I'm thinking maybe a duplicate route
> > pattern in another partition without the extra ISDN information that
> > is lower in priority in the CSS. I'm just not sure whether CCM will
> > work like that if the first route pattern can't complete calls.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >
> >
> 
>