[cisco-voip] h323 or mgcp with fractional pri

[Scott Voll]

Yes.

Now the question becomes..... do you make it simple on the gateway and still
do all the traffic changes via Route patterns on the CM, or do you match
everything on the GW (SRST).

Scott

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Dan Letkeman <danletkeman at gmail.com>wrote:

> Yes, I just changed it over from mgcp to h323.  I like the idea of
> having more control over the config.
>
> So I guess I need to create route patterns on the cucm and dial-peers
> on the gateway for pstn calls?
>
> Dan.
>
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> > YES.
> > Did that help?
> > :-)  For partial PRI there are work arounds.  but you can set it up in
> H323.
> >  So you do have the ability to do it both ways.
> > Where the question comes down to, is what features are better supported
> by
> > one or the other.  and with that.... you would need to make that decision
> > based on what you need.
> > Personally I like H323, but it take more to configure.
> > Scott
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 8:11 AM, Dan Letkeman <danletkeman at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I'm setting up a new gateway and I'm new to using CUCM.  I'm wondering
> >> what is recommended for a gateway protocol when using a fractional
> >> pri?  I have read that there are workarounds for using mgcp with a
> >> fractional pri, but am I better off going with h323 for other reasons?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Dan.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/20101028/227c2f74/attachment.html>