[cisco-voip] MGCP vs H323
Philip Walenta
pwalenta at wi.rr.com
Wed Aug 30 15:32:12 EDT 2006
MGCP and CVP/H.323 cannot be compatible at this time.
CVP uses voicexml and tcl in the routers to intercept and treat calls.
MGCP takes full control of the connection and backhauls all Q931 to
CallManager.
If MGCP is in operation, voicexml and TCL never see a q.931 message to act
upon.
If someday in the future CallManager itself was capable of VXML, this would
solve the issue. Otherwise you'd need to attempt CVP -> CRS IVR, and while
CRS does "support" VXML, I wouldn't say it'd work as well as VXML on an
H.323 gateway.
_____
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jason Burwell
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 1:15 PM
To: Jason Aarons (US); Matt Slaga (US); cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MGCP vs H323
I know there is a limitation with call manager supporting both types of
facility ie which is why Calling Party name does not work on 4ESS protocol
however TAC said that problem is fixed in CCM 4.2 by adding a Facility IE
check box on the gateway setup. I am starting to get concerned with moving
from MGCP to H323, I can't believe that CVP is not compatible with MGCP.
Jason
_____
From: Jason Aarons (US) [mailto:jason.aarons at us.didata.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 2:09 PM
To: Matt Slaga (US); Jason Burwell; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] MGCP vs H323
So it's a ccapi issue with IOS not sending it along? I kept thinking the
CallManager BU would have to fix it versus IOS team. I've never look at a
sniffer trace to see if the name goes across to CallManager/H323.
_____
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Matt Slaga (US)
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 1:55 PM
To: Jason Burwell; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MGCP vs H323
H323 does support calling party number, just not name. Like Jason mentioned
before, the options are there and you can see name traverse inbound in
debugs, but the gateway does not send it on to CallManager.
_____
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jason Burwell
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 1:36 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MGCP vs H323
We have just purchased CVP and are being told that we can no longer use MGCP
gateways and must migrate to H323. According to what I have heard here, H323
will not support Caller Name but will H323 support Calling Party Number
capability?
Jason
_____
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jason Aarons (US)
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 12:52 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MGCP vs H323
I believe the issue is with CallManager not supporting both types of
facility ie as you can see the Calling Party Name in the router's debug isdn
q931.
_____
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Linsemier, Matthew
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 12:11 PM
To: Matt Slaga (US); Joe Pollere (US); Nick Kassel;
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MGCP vs H323
Calling Name/Number is one of the main reasons we utilize MGCP over H.323.
This coupled with failover (which seems to be handled much more gracefully
then in an H.323 environment) keep us on this protocol. If H.323 could
handle Calling Name, I would definitely make the move. It would certainly
make fax integration with products such as Unity or XMedius fax much easier.
I, however, find myself in a position where I couldn't possibly take away
features that my users have come to expect and love.
I did hear rumblings that H.323 was going to support Calling Name in a later
IOS release. The information is there on the router, just not getting
processed. Can any of you Cisco folks comment (off the record)?
-Matt
_____
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Matt Slaga (US)
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 12:00 PM
To: Joe Pollere (US); Nick Kassel; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MGCP vs H323
At this point, MGCP is able to provide name/number display on a PRI (if
provided from the carrier) whereas this is not yet possible in H323.
I have started to hear some rumblings within Cisco about MGCP being slowly
phased out and eventually being replaced with SIP and/or H323. Sounds about
right since Cisco has been shoving MGCP down everyone's throat for the past
three years that they would want to keep this down to a rumbling.
Personally, I would only use MGCP when interconnecting with a PBX during a
migration to keep from having thousands of dial peers. Or, if I needed
name/number display on a PRI.
Funny thing is (and this may be fixed now), but with FXO-M1s the only way to
get name/number display was with H323. MGCP couldn't do it. Sounds kind of
backwards that it's just the opposite with a PRI
_____
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Joe Pollere (US)
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 10:51 AM
To: Nick Kassel; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] MGCP vs H323
Nick,
This is from the GWGK course book:
Using H.323 as the call control protocol to a gateway has the following
advantages:
* H.323 provides integrated access. Data and voice channels can be
placed on the same T1.
For example, for a service provider like AT&T, FR and PRI can be placed on
the same T1.
* H.323 provides support for fractional PRI.
* Gateways support caller ID on FXO ports. CallManager does not
support caller ID on FXO
ports from MGCP gateways.
* Many more TDM interface types and signaling protocols-for example,
analog-Direct
Inward Dialed (DID), recEive and transMit (E&M), T1 Feature Group-D (FGD),
and E1
R2-can be used.
* H.323 drops DSPs on hairpinned calls to enable capabilities like
ISDN video switching.
* Gateway resident applications like Toolkit Command Language (TCL)
and voice
extensible markup language (VXML) can be used. TCL and VXML applications
provide
IVR features and call control functionality such as call forwarding,
conference calling, and
voice mail.
* CAC network design with H.323 gatekeepers is often necessary when
voice and video
coexist in a network and Cisco CallManager is not the only call controller
in the network.
* There are no release dependencies between gateways and Cisco
CallManager for
supporting new voice hardware. New hardware cards on Cisco IOS gateways
become
immediately available for use with all existing Cisco CallManager releases.
* H.323 enables a much easier migration architecture to SIP because
the fundamental
concepts of H.323 and SIP-for example, distributed control with dial-peer
configurations-are the same.
* Calls from IP phones through an H323 gateway are dropped on a
CallManager failover
unless SRST mode is enabled. With SRST enabled, the calls are preserved.
Using MGCP as the call control protocol to a gateway has the following
advantages:
* Centralized configuration, control, and download from Cisco
CallManager
* Better feature interaction with capabilities like caller ID and name
display
* Easy, centralized dial-plan management
* Gateway voice security features (voice encryption) as of Cisco IOS
Software Release
12.3.(5th)T
* Q Signaling (QSIG) supplementary services as supported by Cisco
CallManager:
* - Cisco CallManager interconnects to a QSIG network using an MGCP
gateway and
T1 or E1 PRI connections to a private integrated services network (PISN).
The
MGCP gateway establishes the call connections. Using the PRI backhaul
mechanism, the gateway passes the QSIG messages to the Cisco CallManager to
set
up QSIG calls and send QSIG messages to control features.
* - When a PBX is connected to a gateway that is using QSIG via H.323,
calls that are
made between phones on the PBX and IP phones attached to the Cisco
CallManager
can have only basic PRI functionality. The gateway that terminates the QSIG
protocol provides only the calling line ID (CLID) and DID number, instead of
Cisco
CallManager providing that information.
* Enhanced call survivability:
* - Calls from IP phones through an MGCP gateway are preserved on a
CallManager
failover. This feature avoids dropped calls when applying the monthly
operating
system service release on the Cisco CallManagers
* - In SRST mode, calls from IP phones through an MGCP gateway are
preserved on
MGCP fallback for calls on analog or CAS circuits. Calls on ISDN circuits
are
dropped on fallback.
HTH's
Joe
_____
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Nick Kassel
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 10:35 AM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-voip] MGCP vs H323
Does anyone know if there is a document that lists the differences or
benefits of using either MGCP or H323.
I need to install a gateway for PSTN breakout in a DR site so it won't be
needed for redundancy or anything like that.
All our branch offices currently use H323 and we have H323 for our HQ so
that they can be used for redundancy should be an issue with the local
branch PSTN.
Just wondering whether it might be better to go with MGCP in this instance.
Is it easier to mask the calling numbers with MGCP?
****************************************************************************
*******************
The information contained in this e-mail is strictly confidential, some or
all
of which may be legally privileged. It is for the intended recipient only.
Access to this e-mail by any other person is prohibited. If you are not the
intended recipient, any use, disclosure, copying, printing, distribution of,
replying to or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on this
e-mail, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please contact the sender
immediately
should this e-mail have been incorrectly addressed or transmitted.
You accept that any instructions are deemed to have been given at the time
the
recipient(s) accesses them and that delivery receipt does not constitute
acknowledgement or receipt by the intended recipient(s). You accept that
there
may be a delay in processing the instructions received from e-mails after
Charles Stanley has received them. You are advised that urgent, time
sensitive
and confidential communications should not be sent by e-mail.
You acknowledge that e-mails are not secure and you accept the risk of
malfunction, viruses, unauthorised interference, mis-delivery or delay.
****************************************************************************
********************
Charles Stanley & Co. Ltd
Registered Office: 25 Luke Street London EC2A 4AR
Tel: 0207 739 8200 Fax: 0207 739 7798
Registered in England No. 1903304
Charles Stanley Sutherlands and Charles Stanley Securities are divisions of
Charles Stanley & Co. Ltd
Authorised and Regulated by the Financial Services Authority, Member of the
London Stock Exchange, International Securities Markets Association, and The
London International Financial Futures &
Options Exchange.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by McAfee
VirusScan and SurfControl Email Filter software.
_____
CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT
This communication and any attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and may be protected
by one or more legal privileges. It is intended solely for the use of the
addressee identified above. If you are not the intended recipient, any use,
disclosure, copying or distribution of this communication is UNAUTHORIZED.
Neither this information block, the typed name of the sender, nor anything
else in this message is intended to constitute an electronic signature
unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this message. If
you have received this communication in error, please immediately contact me
and delete this communication from your computer. Thank you.
_____
_____
Disclaimer:
This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
confidential and privileged information and is for use by the
designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the
intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
from your computer. Thank you.
_____
Disclaimer:
This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
confidential and privileged information and is for use by the
designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the
intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
from your computer. Thank you.
_____
Disclaimer:
This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
confidential and privileged information and is for use by the
designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the
intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
from your computer. Thank you.
_____
Disclaimer:
This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
confidential and privileged information and is for use by the
designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the
intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
from your computer. Thank you.
_____
Disclaimer:
This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
confidential and privileged information and is for use by the
designated addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the
intended addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received
this communication in error and that any use or reproduction of
this email or its contents is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please
notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting it
from your computer. Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20060830/f207493b/attachment-0001.html
More information about the cisco-voip
mailing list