[cisco-voip] AAR vs. Route Lists

[Justin Steinberg]

There is a callmanager service parameter that controls this action:

 Stop Routing on Out of Bandwidth Flag

By default it is set to false, and it will try RG2.

On 10/2/07, Kelemen Zoltan <keli at carocomp.ro> wrote:
> So a RL won't fall back to the second route group if the network is
> congested (that basically should send a busy as well, not?)?
>
> Example:
> RouteList IP_PSTN
>  RG1: IPTrunk
>  RG2: PSTTrunk
>
> if RG1 is congested (Locations bandwidth exceeded) it won't go over to RG2?
>
> Zoltan
>
> Justin Steinberg wrote:
> > AAR works in conjunction with CCM Locations bandwidth.  Think two IP
> > phones located at two remote sites that attempt to dial each other and
> > exceed the Locations bandwidth.  AAR is invoked and the call is
> > rerouted out a local PSTN gateway.
> >
> > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/voicesw/ps556/products_administration_guide_chapter09186a00803edabe.html#wp1056007
> >
> > On 10/2/07, Ahmed Elnagar <aelnagar at act-eg.com> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Hello;
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I never use the AAR feature before, but something came to my mind. Maybe the
> >> AAR can achieve the following (that RL cannot):
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> When the call is rejected due to not enough bandwidth on the WAN link don't
> >> send the call through the PSTN.
> >>
> >> When the call is rejected due to WAN failure send the call through the PSTN.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I am not sure of it, I am just assuming.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >>  From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> >> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> >> Kelemen Zoltan
> >>  Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 11:30 AM
> >>  To: Cisco VoIP
> >>  Subject: [cisco-voip] AAR vs. Route Lists
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 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
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cisco-voip mailing list
> >> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >>
> >>
>
>