[cisco-voip] strange shared line behavior on 88XX phones

Fri Oct 2 13:11:25 EDT 2015

The phones actually start ringing as expected.  It's the behavior after the
call is answered that is the problem.

This was a 5 cluster project that started prior to the release of SU2 and
SU2a so going back and upgrading again wasn't an option.

On Sep 30, 2015 9:27 PM, "Anthony Holloway" <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Having the 487 delayed would not impact when the phone starts ringing
> though.  In fact, the phones should start ringing at the sending of the 180
> back to CUCM.  In Daniel's diagram that would be this one:
>
> cucm ß 180 ß phoneA&B&C     (one response per phone)
>
> So, if anything, there should be a delay in the CUCM sending of the INVITE
> to the delayed ringing phone(s), or the delayed ringing phone(s) should
> delay their 180 back to CUCM.  If none of this is delayed on the wire, then
> I would think it's some internal firmware bug on the phone.  Have you tried
> an older or newer firmware?  Granted, you had the same firmware on the
> 8.6(2), but since we're grasping for ideas, why not give it a shot?
>
> Also, have you looked in bug search tool yet?  I only found this one
> closely related bug, but as with all filed defects, you can never really be
> 100% sure.
>
> https://tools.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCur10651
>
> Good luck.  Also, you should be on 10.5(2)SU2a.  ;)  Just say'n.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The 200 comes relatively quickly and the CM sends the ACK back quickly.
>> It's only the 487 that is delayed and not all the time.  The time frame in
>> the console logs matches the CM traces so it doesn't look like any funny
>> business on the network.
>>
>> This one is a head scratcher for sure.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Daniel Pagan <dpagan at fidelus.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Interesting… Out of curiosity, there should first be a CANCEL to the IP
>>> phones where the call wasn’t answered. The phones should then 200 that
>>> CANCEL request, and then send the 487 final response to the original INVITE
>>> for the call. Do you see the 487 final response six seconds *after* the
>>> CANCEL/200 exchange? I ask only because this should help you determine
>>> where the delay is coming from - the phone or CUCM.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - Dan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On
>>> Behalf Of *Erick Wellnitz
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:51 PM
>>> *To:* Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
>>> *Cc:* cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] strange shared line behavior on 88XX phones
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Finally had the behavior repeat.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Found in the console logs and the CM traces that a couple of the phones
>>> are, for some reason, delaying their 487 - Request Cancelled response for
>>> up to 6 seconds from when the call is answered.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent to TAC to see what they have to say.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> turns out it is written.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/admin/7_1_2/ccmsys/accm-712-cm/a03dn.html#wp1100362
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Shared Line Restrictions
>>>
>>> The following restrictions apply to shared lines:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>> •Do not configure shared-line appearances on the primary lines of the
>>> phones; for example, if two phones have a shared-line appearance, only one
>>> of the phones should have the primary line configured as shared (the other
>>> phone should have the secondary line configured as shared).
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In version 10 it becomes a suggestion though. Interesting.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/admin/10_0_1/ccmsys/CUCM_BK_SE5FCFB6_00_cucm-system-guide-100/CUCM_BK_SE5FCFB6_00_cucm-system-guide-100_chapter_010001.html#CUCM_RF_S05975F9_00
>>>
>>>
>>> Shared Line Suggestions
>>> Do not configure shared line appearances on primary lines as certain
>>> feature interactions are impacted. Settings of the primary line are
>>> applicable to the shared line. For example: if two phones have a
>>> shared-line appearance, only one phone should have the primary line
>>> configured as shared to avoid unexplained post configuration behavior.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
>>> Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
>>> Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
>>> University of Guelph
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354 <519%E2%80%90824%E2%80%904120%20Ext%2056354>
>>> lelio at uoguelph.ca
>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
>>> Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
>>> Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> *From: *"Erick Wellnitz" <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
>>> *To: *"Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
>>> *Cc: *cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, September 30, 2015 12:20:51 PM
>>> *Subject: *Re: [cisco-voip] strange shared line behavior on 88XX phones
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It is on a fair number of them.  They didn't have the issue on 8.6.2
>>> with the same firmware.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We're waiting on the next occurrence to gather traces.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I recall there being an (un)written rule where shared lines should not
>>> be the primary line. It could cause issues.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Are the shared lines the first DN on the phone?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Lelio
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
>>> Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
>>> Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
>>> University of Guelph
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354 <519%E2%80%90824%E2%80%904120%20Ext%2056354>
>>> lelio at uoguelph.ca
>>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
>>> Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
>>> Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> *From: *"Erick Wellnitz" <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
>>> *To: *cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, September 30, 2015 12:00:20 PM
>>> *Subject: *[cisco-voip] strange shared line behavior on 88XX phones
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> anyone seen issues with the 88xx phones on firmware 10.3(1) and CUCM
>>> 10.5.2 SU1 where the line starts ringing on some phones right away and some
>>> start ringing up to 15 seconds later.  Some also experience ringing after
>>> the call is answered up to 15 seconds after answered.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 88xx phones are the only ones exhibiting this behavior.  Another
>>> consideration is that this shared line is on 17 devices.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for any insight!
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20151002/e4134f7f/attachment.html>