[VoiceOps] ATA To Connect to Mitel PBX

Wed Jun 19 11:41:01 EDT 2019

Unfortunately the MITEL tech is being very little help.  Even the 
customer says they are not-responsive.  So I have no way of knowing what 
the MITEL settings are now, he has not responded to my requests.  
Previously they were getting POTS handoff from an AT&T T-1 to POTS unit, 
supposedly it worked fine.

This is at a Hotel, so getting the exact scenario that happens is a 
little difficult.  What we have been told is that randomly, an incoming 
call will route directly to a guest room.  We can't even get times when 
this happens to correlate call logs, as the guest just complains to the 
front desk at checkout.  The only thing we can figure, is that the MITEL 
is not closing a trunk line, and and if an incoming call hits that same 
trunk, it just rings through to the last extension connected to that trunk.

Would there be any harm in turning the Forward Disconnect Delay up to 
it's maximum value?  I think 2000ms.

Nate

On 6/19/2019 10:07 AM, Matthew Yaklin wrote:
>
> Nate,
>
>
> I see that you have Forward Disconnect Delay set to 750 ms on the Adtran.
>
>
> But has the mitel tech told you what is set on the PBX for forward 
> disconnect delay?
>
> Is it possible some PBX tech in the past set an unusually high value 
> for that?
>
>
>
> Also what are these certain call scenarios? Are you talking about an 
> incoming call going to the PBX and the user is then doing something to 
> have the call go back out to the world?
>
>
> Or are we talking about a regular plain jane incoming call or outgoing 
> call. In order to help we need to know if this is more complicated 
> then it seems.
>
>
> Matt
>
>
>
>
> *Matthew Yaklin*
> Network Engineer
> *FirstLight*
> 359 Corporate Drive │ Portsmouth, NH 03801
> Mobile 603-845-5031
> myaklin at firstlight.net | www.firstlight.net
> /This email may contain FirstLight confidential and/or privileged 
> information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are directed/
> /not to read, disclose or otherwise use this transmission and to 
> immediately delete same. Delivery of this message is not intended/
> /to waive any applicable privileges./
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* VoiceOps <voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org> on behalf of Nate 
> Burke <nate at blastcomm.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 19, 2019 10:44:50 AM
> *To:* voiceops at voiceops.org
> *Subject:* Re: [VoiceOps] ATA To Connect to Mitel PBX
> Thanks to everyone for the replies. The MITEL Tech is being 0 help
> other than continuing to tell the customer that my lines are the problem.
>
> The MITEL card that I'm  plugging into is a 'LS/GS Trunk (6cct)
> 0109-011-001-SA'.  I'm guessing the settings that are the problem are the
>
> Forward Disconnect Delay
> Forward Disconnect Battery
>
> Anybody know what these settings should be to in the TA908 to interface
> to this MITEL card?
>
> Currently they are set to
> Forward Disconnect Delay - Currently at 750ms
> Forward Disconnect Battery -Currently on Remove.
>
> Thanks,
> Nate
>
>
> On 6/17/2019 9:07 PM, Todd Wolf wrote:
> > This link is relevant to your issue
> >
> > https://supportforums.adtran.com/thread/2264
> >
> >
> >> On Jun 17, 2019, at 9:36 PM, Nate Burke <nate at blastcomm.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Sorry for Dredging up an old post.  I've had the Adtran TA908 (2nd 
> gen) installed to the MITEL for about a month, but now I'm starting to 
> hear about problems.  In Certain call scenarios, the MITEL is not 
> disconnecting the Trunk port, even though a call has ended.  The Mitel 
> consultant is placing the blame squarely with me, that I'm not sending 
> the proper 'Disconnect Supervision' and the MITEL is not hanging up 
> the line.
> >>
> >> I've been googling, and reading manuals, and haven't been able to 
> find any sort of settings for a 'disconnect supervision'
> >>
> >> Anyone run into this before?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Nate
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 4/13/2019 7:23 AM, Nathan Anderson wrote:
> >>> You didn't say what the "some issues" were that the customer was 
> still complaining about.  Just stuck lines?  Just echo?  Both?  
> Something else entirely?
> >>>
> >>> Re: stuck lines, sounds to me like the TA and the phone system are 
> not in agreement about what method of disconnect supervision (if any) 
> the TA is going to provide and the phone system trunks are going to be 
> looking for.
> >>>
> >>> -- Nathan
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of 
> Nate Burke
> >>> Sent: Friday, April 12, 2019 9:33 AM
> >>> To: voiceops at voiceops.org
> >>> Subject: [VoiceOps] ATA To Connect to Mitel PBX
> >>>
> >>> I've only had to provide POTS termination to 1 MITEL system.  I tried
> >>> using Linksys/Cisco SPA and Grandstream ATA's, then finally put in an
> >>> Adtran TA904 (2nd gen).  The Adtran seemed to give the least number of
> >>> issues with Lines getting stuck open, Echo, etc. But the (former)
> >>> customer was still complaining about some issues when they closed 
> up shop.
> >>>
> >>> I now need to provide 6 analog lines to hand off to an existing MITEL.
> >>> Is there an ATA that's better than a TA908 for doing "Acceptable" POTS
> >>> to a MITEL?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Nate
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> VoiceOps mailing list
> >> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/voiceops/attachments/20190619/f9c903fc/attachment-0001.htm>