[cisco-voip] Call drop issue

[Nick Matthews]

Packet capture looks normal, it's a bit odd that Avaya continually sends
empty H323 messages, but that doesn't appear to be root of the problem.
Debugs you sent seem to show a TCP FIN message coming from Avaya for the
call drop.

-nick


On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:09 PM, John Van Laecke <John.VanLaecke at ghd.com>wrote:

> This normally happens when the router can't see the call manager.
>
> Or you are missing the h323 bindings.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Kenneth Hayes
> Sent: Thursday, 29 November 2012 6:12 AM
> To: Michele Russo (AM)
> Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Call drop issue
>
> Do you have the proper codecs in place?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 28, 2012, at 2:08 PM, "Michele Russo (AM)"
> <michele.russo at dimensiondata.com> wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > I am working with a customer who is seeing sporadic call drops on their
> systems.  They following is the setup:
> >
> > CME - H323 Trunk to Avaya - call routed out a LD PRI registered to the
> Avaya system.
> >
> > The CME has 12 7937's and 4 biamp devices registered to it, the Biamps
> are SIP based phones.  The off-net calls drop sporadically and the
> seemingly relevant messages we see in the Wire Shark and Syslog  traces
> show:
> >
> >
> > 10.146.128.50 (Avaya)    10.146.149.65     TCP        [TCP ACKed lost
> segment] h323hostcall > hfcs-manager [ACK] Seq=1 Ack=2 Win=8736 Len=0
> > TCP0: bad seg from 10.146.128.50 -- bad sequence number: port 35839 seq
> 2919846836 ack 1534185920 rcvnxt 2919846837 rcvwnd 3146 len 0
> > TCP0: ACK timeout timer expired
> >
> > With a disconnect Cause Value=38 (meaning network out of order).
> >
> > I am attaching the router config, the syslog file and the Wireshark
> capture.
> >
> > Note:  the CME and the Avaya re on the same 4507E switch and a review of
> both interfaces show literally zero CRC, Frame, Overrun or other L2 issues.
>  So it seems unlikely that there are any cabling issues, and the switch
> itself seems quite healthy.
> >
> > Any thoughts/suggestions would be very helpful!  So far TAC has
> suggested we add the 'no vad' statement to the dial-peer 11 and
> allow-connections h323 to h323.  I am not sure either one of those
> configuration changes will fix this issue.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Michele Russo
> > Consultant
> > Dimension Data NA
> > 202-460-3965 (cell)
> > 571-203-4007 (desk)
> > michele.russo at dimensiondata.com
> > <mime-attachment>
> > <dropped conf call.pcap>
> > <SyslogCatchAll.txt>
> > <WASWAN1_show_run.11_26_12.txt>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
> _____________________
> This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by MessageLabs.
>
> _____________________
> This email and all attachments are confidential. For further important
> information about emails sent to or from GHD or if you have received this
> email in error, please refer to http://www.ghd.com/emaildisclaimer.html .
> _____________________
> This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by MessageLabs.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20121201/25c1d123/attachment.html>