[cisco-voip] Gatekeeper question

[wayne.j.jackson at uk.bnpparibas.com]

Gatekeeper question


I was originally looking to deploy gatekeepers in a voice only 
infrastructure for address resolution between a number of sites which all 
have their own  Site codes- no problem however now we are looking to make 
use of the same GK`s for video again using  the same sites codes- is the 
single GK approach for voice and video recommended?

The video devices will register to a regional CCM, this CCM will route 
normal voice traffic to the GK as well

Voice calls dial 8xx+ extension number to dial another site, the 8 is a 
route pattern to the GK

Ideally only one set of Gatekeepers to serve both voice and video
Same access code for voice and video 8xxxxx 

Below is a simple example  of a possible GK set up 

Zone local London cisco.com x.x.x.x
Zone local New York
Zone local  Tokyo


Zone prefix London 812*
Zone prefix New York 846*
Zone prefix Tokyo 823 * 

Issue

I would like for a video call to be sent to the GK  for resolution but be 
governed by the bandwidth commend say 384 for Video however a voice call 
to the same site to be governed by either no bandwidth control or another 
figure e.g 880. Also I`m trying to cut down on the amount of  commends in 
the GK  so this is the reason we wish to use GK`s

Can it be done?

My thinking is as bandwidth commend is linked to the name of the zone and 
so the name of CCM registered to it ,  can I register  two trunks to the 
GK from the same CCM but with different names and use the routing in CCM 
to pick the voice trunk and the video trunk? 

     Zone local Londonvoice cisco.com x.x.x.x
Zone local New Yorkvoice
Zone local  Tokyovoice
      Zone local Londonvideo
Zone local New Yorkvideo
Zone local  Tokyovideo


however I then have the issue of  wanting to use the same access code for 
both calls

Again maybe use different tech-prefix on the voice trunk and video trunk 
1#. 2# and somehow use this for routing in the same way as a zone prefix? 
can you associate a bandwidth to a tech-prefix.   I know you can use 
hopoff based upon the tech-prefix but how good is this approach and is it 
recommended? Another way is  If we do not allocate any bandwidth setting 
to voice but  only video then the voice calls could use the hop off 
statements for routing  and the video use the zone local statements , how 
much work is this , is it recommended?


An other way is to use two access codes 8 for voice #8 for video, if I do 
this do I need to have multiple local zone as below   but the question is 
still can the CCM register two different trunks so to create the different 
 zones  LONDONVOICE, LONDONVIDEO to the same GK ?

 Zone local Londonvoice.cisco.com x.x.x.x
Zone local New Yorkvoice
Zone local  Tokyovoice
      Zone local Londonvideo
Zone local New Yorkvideo
Zone local  Tokyovideo

Zone prefix Londonvoice 812*
Zone prefix New Yorkvoice 846*
Zone prefix Tokyovoice 823 * 
Zone prefix Londonvideo #812*
Zone prefix New Yorkvideo #846*
Zone prefix Tokyovideo #823 * 

I could then at least have different bandwidths per zone

bandwidth interzone new yorkvoice 880
bandwidth interzone new yorkvideo 384

Also can you have bandwidth zone between individual zones i.e  to limit 
the number of calls between CCM A to CCM B  to be 880 but CCM A to CCM C 
to be 128 due to the different possible links 


Sorry for the multiple questions

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20081127/2f157edd/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
BNP Paribas is proud to support the Royal Academy of Arts in their presentation of ?Miro, Calder, Giacometti, Braque: AIM? MAEGHT AND HIS ARTISTS? at the Sackler Wing of Galleries from 4 October 2008 to 2 January 2009.

This communication is confidential, may be privileged and is meant only for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by reply and delete the message from your system. Any unauthorised dissemination, distribution or copying hereof is prohibited.

BNP Paribas Fund Services UK Limited, BNP Paribas Trust Corporation UK Limited, BNP Paribas UK Limited, BNP Paribas Commodity Futures Limited, BNP Paribas Asset Management UK Limited and Investment Fund Services Limited are authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.

BNP Paribas London Branch and BNP Paribas Private Bank London Branch are authorised by the CECEI and supervised by the Commission Bancaire.  

BNP Paribas London Branch is authorised and subject to limited regulation by the Financial Services Authority. Details about the extent of our authorisation and regulation by the Financial Services Authority are available from us on request. BNP Paribas is also a member of the London Stock Exchange.

BNP Paribas Private Bank London Branch is subject to limited regulation by the Financial Services Authority.  Details about the extent of our authorisation and regulation by the Financial Services Authority are available from us on request.   

BNP Paribas Securities Services London Branch is authorised by the CECEI and supervised by the AMF, and subject to limited regulation by the Financial Services Authority. Details on the extent of our regulation by the Financial Services Authority are available from us on request. BNP Paribas Securities Services is also a member of the London Stock Exchange.