[cisco-voip] secondary dial tone problems

[Peter Ejmont]

I did uncheck all "provide dial tone" on all route patterns starting with 8.
Worked like a charm -> no secondary dial tone. Restarted the entire cluster
then, checked all boxes again and restarted the cluster again. Still,
secondary dial tone was in the wrong place.

Then ran a query:

select dnorpattern, outsidedialtone
from numplan
where dnorpattern like '8%' and outsidedialtone = '0'

As I suspected, no results.

1 day later, I am about to download the newest release (4.1(3)sr6)
and start upgrading but guess what, the secondary dial tone is in the right
place. Very odd.
I am not sure what to think of it.
Cisco folks, is it an isolated incident (besides Paul's and Joel's) or is it
a common occurence? Maybe I should disable the secondary dial tone all
together so users won't be confused as much next time? I am just looking for
some suggestions.

Thank you all for help. You guys are great!




On Dec 31, 2007 11:52 AM, Ryan Ratliff <rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:

> 4.1(3)SR6 should be out and does have the fix.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Dec 31, 2007, at 11:33 AM, Jason Burns wrote:
>
> To add a bit to Ryan's email:
>
> I always use the following query in 4.X (either query analyzer or
> enterprise manager with your highest numbered CCM030X DB selected) to
> see what might not have "Provide Outside Dialtone" checked.
>
> select dnorpattern, outsidedialtone
> from numplan
> where dnorpattern like '8%' and outsidedialtone = '0'
>
>
> If that doesn't work...
>
> It's also possible that the forwarding intercept for that 8XXXX is
> still stuck in the database and is causing CCM to hold off on
> providing the outside dialtone because CCM thinks the number still
> exists.
>
> This wouldn't be visible in the previous query, but could be
> identified in the CCM traces.
>
> CSCsj30852 - CM 4.x - Inactive or Unassigned DN with CFA still
> forwards calls
>
> Which was fixed in an Engineering Special (no SR released for it yet)
>
> It's more likely an overlapping pattern somewhere without the
> checkbox, but if after more searching you can't find the offending
> pattern you might want to turn to the traces / TAC.
>
> Thanks,
> Jason Burns
>
>
> On 12/31/2007 10:27 AM, Ryan Ratliff wrote:
> > Looks like you are on the right track so far in identifying the
> > numbers conflicting with the route pattern.  Secondary (outside)
> > dial tone is played only when all potential matches for a dialed
> > string have the flag set to play outside dialtone.   Since you were
> > receiving it after dialing 8[2-9] and 81[2-9] this would tell me
> > you have a pattern beginning with 81 that does not have the flag
> > set to play outside dialtone. -Ryan
> > On Dec 30, 2007, at 11:58 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi wrote:
> > By 'unused' I meant 'unassigned'.
> >  Route Plan > Route Plan Report > Find Unassigned DN (from drop down).
> >  This will give you a list of DNs you have deleted, but not purged
> > from the system.
> >  Just wanted to be clear, some people miss this step.
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------
> > Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> > Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> > (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > "Life expectancy would grow by leaps and bounds if green vegetables
> > smelled as good as bacon."
> > Doug Larson
> >       ----- Original Message -----
> >     *From:* Peter Ejmont <mailto:pejmont at gmail.com>
> >     *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi <mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> >     *Cc:* cisco-voip at puck.nether.net <mailto:cisco-
> > voip at puck.nether.net>
> >     *Sent:* Sunday, December 30, 2007 5:34 AM
> >     *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] secondary dial tone problems
> >     All unused numbers starting with 8 were deleted to begin with.
> >     Then, the entire cluster was restarted.
> >     Thanks,
> >     Peter
> >     On Dec 29, 2007 11:11 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi < lelio at uoguelph.ca
> >     <mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>> wrote:
> >         oh boy. interesting to say the least.
> >                  have you tried deleting the number from the
> > "unused" numbers?
> >                  in route plan report select unused DNs and delete
> > it from there.
> >                  that might help. ???
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net <mailto: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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20080101/1deaac7f/attachment.html