[cisco-voip] h323 to call manager inbound calls randomly complete

Mon Mar 22 08:13:59 EDT 2010

Thanks for the info. We did have h323 inspection on, we turned off to test
and calls work. I'll have my firewall guy take a further look into the
inspection configuration, he may be missing some of the policy maps and
what not.

Scott Irey
Network & Telecom Systems Engineer
Oakland University
Office: 248.370.2808
Mobile: 248.505.9827

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Slow [mailto:peter.slow at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 12:37 PM
To: Scott Irey
Cc: Nick Matthews; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] h323 to call manager inbound calls randomly
complete

>From the GW's angle it looks like the TCP session was set up just
fine, but i think the firewall is probably proxying the tcp session.
try taking the firewall out of the mix, the alternative is getting
packet captures from either side or trying random things on your FWSM
to continue. is h323 inspection on in the firewall?

-Peter

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Peter Slow <peter.slow at gmail.com> wrote:
> Blech.
>   Since it's not in production, what are the chances you'd be willing
> to bypass the FWSM completely for a couple tests? Since you're using
> the loopback of the router, as long as you fix IP routing, you don't
> need to change any voice related configuration at all to do this.
>
> -Peter
>
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Scott Irey <irey at oakland.edu> wrote:
>> Hi Thanks for the input. Here is a copy of the tcp debug as well as
cch323
>> h225 debug for a call that did not complete. Seems to be about every
other
>> call that does not complete. There is an FWSM module on one of the
cores
>> that thing transverses. Right now it is permit IP between the two
subnets
>> for testing purposes.
>>
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCB492D19A0 created
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCB492D19A0 setting property TCP_NO_DELAY (0)
>> 483CCCEC
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCB492D19A0 setting property TCP_TOS (11) 483CCD34
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCB492D19A0 setting property TCP_NONBLOCKING_WRITE
>> (10) 483CCD78
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCB492D19A0 setting property TCP_NONBLOCKING_READ
>> (14) 483CCD78
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCB492D19A0 setting property TCP keepalive timeout
>> (17) 483CCD78
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCB492D19A0 setting property TCP_VRFTABLEID (20)
>> 48F1C694
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCB492D19A0 setting property TCP_NO_DELAY (0)
>> 483CCD34
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCB492D19A0 setting property TCP_ALWAYSPUSH (15)
>> 483CCD34
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCP: Random local port generated 61648, network 1
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCB492D19A0 bound to x.x.x.x.61648
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: Reserved port 61648 in Transport Port Agent for
TCP
>> IP type 1
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCP: sending SYN, seq 3252130252, ack 0
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCP0: Connection to x.x.x.x:1720, advertising MSS
536
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594: TCP0: state was CLOSED -> SYNSENT [61648 ->
>> x.x.x.x(1720)]
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.594:
//628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/cch323_h225_set_new_state:
>> Changing from H225_IDLE state to H225_IDLE state
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.598: TCP0: state was SYNSENT -> ESTAB [61648 ->
>> x.x.x.x(1720)]
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.598: TCP: tcb 492D19A0 connection to x.x.x.x:1720, peer
>> MSS 1380, MSS is 536
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.598: //628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/run_h225_sm: Received
>> event H225_EV_SETUP while at state H225_IDLE
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.598:
//628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/check_qos_and_send_setup:
>> Setup ccb 0x4961850C
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.598: //628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/run_h225_sm: Received
>> event H225_EV_FS_SETUP while at state H225_IDLE
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.598: //628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/idle_fsSetup_hdlr:
Setup
>> ccb 0x4961850C
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.598: //628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/copy_token_from_ccb:
>> copy_token_from_ccb: Entered
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.598: //628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/generic_send_setup:
>> generic_send_setup: is_overlap = 0, info_complete = 0
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.598: //628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/generic_send_setup:
>> sending calling IE
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.598: //628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/generic_send_setup:
======
>> PI = 0
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.598: //628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/generic_send_setup:
Send
>> infoXCap=128, infoXRate=16, rateMult=0, xMode=128, info_layer1_prot=163
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.598: //628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/generic_send_setup: src
>> address = x.x.x1.255; dest address = x.x.x.10
>> Mar 15 15:30:06.602:
//628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/cch323_h225_set_new_state:
>> Changing from H225_IDLE state to H225_REQ_FS_SETUP state
>> Mar 15 15:30:08.442: x.x.x1.255:61648 <---> x.x.x.10:1720   congestion
>> window changes
>> Mar 15 15:30:08.442: cwnd from 536 to 536, ssthresh from 65535 to 1072
>> Mar 15 15:30:08.442: TCP0: timeout #1 - timeout is 3674 ms, seq
3252130253
>> Mar 15 15:30:08.442: TCP: (61648) -> x.x.x.10(1720)
>> Mar 15 15:30:12.118: TCP0: timeout #2 - timeout is 7348 ms, seq
3252130253
>> Mar 15 15:30:12.118: TCP: (61648) -> x.x.x.10(1720)
>>
>> Mar 15 15:30:16.682: //628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/run_h225_sm: Received
>> event H225_24
>> Mar 15 15:30:16.682:
//628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/cch323_h225_send_release:
>> h225TerminateRequest: src address = -1915609089; dest address =
x.x.x.10
>> Mar 15 15:30:16.682:
//628287/FED119DB8D03/H323/cch323_h225_set_new_state:
>> Changing from H225_REQ_FS_SETUP state to H225_IDLE state
>>
>> Scott Irey
>> Network & Telecom Systems Engineer
>> Oakland University
>> Office: 248.370.2808
>> Mobile: 248.505.9827
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Peter Slow [mailto:peter.slow at gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 8:22 PM
>> To: Scott Irey
>> Cc: Nick Matthews; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] h323 to call manager inbound calls randomly
>> complete
>>
>> Scott,
>>   debug ip tcp transact is the right thing to be looking at... Can we
>> see? Also, can you describe the network in between the gateway and the
>> CUCM server? what devices are in between and what does the network
>> look like?
>>
>>   How many CUCM servers are in the cluster? Ideally, a timeout with
>> one or two would lead to a new TCP session being attempted with a
>> different callmanager server. if there are multiple callmanagers
>> involved and you see the same thing for that call  with the TCP
>> session establishment to multiple servers, that tells us one thing
>> (network) if it continually fails with one server but works with
>> another (and the two servers are in the same location) that might be
>> pointing at that particular CUCM. Either way, while we are figuring
>> out what the problem is, invlving multiple servers should help reduce
>> the actual impact of the issue. Use multiple dial-peers combined with
>> an h323 voice class and "h225 timeout tcp establish" to knock the
>> timers down to something that allows for quick failover to the next
>> dialpeer when the TCP session doesn't start up in a timely fashion.
>>
>> -Pete
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Scott Irey <irey at oakland.edu> wrote:
>>> Thanks! Funny you mentioned that as I did turn on debug ip tcp
>>> transactions and am able to see some tcp timeouts. Haven't had much
time
>>> to go any further (not a production box) but seems to be something
>> there.
>>> Some negotiation of congestion window happens and then 3 tcp timeouts.
>>> Like I said, it's not every time.
>>>
>>> Strange.
>>>
>>> Scott Irey
>>> Network & Telecom Systems Engineer
>>> Oakland University
>>> Office: 248.370.2808
>>> Mobile: 248.505.9827
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: matthn at gmail.com [mailto:matthn at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Nick
>>> Matthews
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 1:47 PM
>>> To: Scott Irey
>>> Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] h323 to call manager inbound calls randomly
>>> complete
>>>
>>> Looking at this from a packet capture in a TCP level instead of odd
>>> H323 debugs will be much more helpful.
>>>
>>> -nick
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Scott Irey <irey at oakland.edu> wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Having a problem with inbound calls from TDM completing h323 to cucm
>>> 7.1.
>>>> Seems to be fairly random, works once or twice, next call fails,
cycle
>>>> repeats. Doing a debug CCH323 all, here is where a call fails and
never
>>>> connects.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ar 15 10:51:35.455: //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/cch323_timer_dispatch:
>>>> Timer[CCH323_SOCK_WRITE_BLOCKED_TIMER] expired
>>>>
>>>> Mar 15 10:51:35.455:
>>>> //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/h323_gw_sock_block_timer_expired: fd 2
>>>>
>>>> Mar 15 10:51:35.455:
>>>> //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/h323_gw_start_sock_blocked_timer: fd 2
>>>>
>>>> Mar 15 10:51:35.455:
>>>> //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/h323_gw_sock_block_timer_expired: Retry, fd=2
>>>>
>>>> Mar 15 10:51:35.555: //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/cch323_timer_dispatch:
>>>> Timer[CCH323_SOCK_WRITE_BLOCKED_TIMER] expired
>>>>
>>>> Mar 15 10:51:35.555:
>>>> //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/h323_gw_sock_block_timer_expired: fd 2
>>>>
>>>> Mar 15 10:51:35.555:
>>>> //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/h323_gw_start_sock_blocked_timer: fd 2
>>>>
>>>> Mar 15 10:51:35.555:
>>>> //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/h323_gw_sock_block_timer_expired: Retry, fd=2
>>>>
>>>> Mar 15 10:51:35.655: //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/cch323_timer_dispatch:
>>>> Timer[CCH323_SOCK_WRITE_BLOCKED_TIMER] expired
>>>>
>>>> Mar 15 10:51:35.655:
>>>> //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/h323_gw_sock_block_timer_expired: fd 2
>>>>
>>>> Mar 15 10:51:35.655:
>>>> //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/h323_gw_start_sock_blocked_timer: fd 2
>>>>
>>>> Mar 15 10:51:35.655:
>>>> //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/h323_gw_sock_block_timer_expired: Retry, fd=2
>>>>
>>>> Mar 15 10:51:35.755: //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/H323/cch323_timer_dispatch:
>>>> Timer[CCH323_SOCK_WRITE_BLOCKED_TIMER] expired
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Repeats this for a bit and then sends a disconnect. And I get
operator
>>> from
>>>> the telco.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Any one seen something like this before where some calls complete and
>>> some
>>>> don't?
>>>>
>>>> Scott Irey
>>>>
>>>> Network & Telecom Systems Engineer
>>>>
>>>> Oakland University
>>>>
>>>> Office: 248.370.2808
>>>>
>>>> Mobile: 248.505.9827
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>