08-01-2013 09:04 AM - edited 03-14-2019 12:09 PM
Hi All,
We have following static Route in CVP 8.5, but CVP is taken last route and routed the call to CUCM instead of VXML G/W.
I know its configuration issue not supposed to have same route to CUCM and VXML, But as i know CVP static route will always looks for longest prefix and route the call accordingly.
If we have same route then it will always looks for first hit, But in my case it taken last route and routed the calls to CUCM.
8041>,idvgws.com
8041>,cucmcluster.com
Here we will route all the calls to VG once ICME repsond with Extn and we have SIP Trunk from VG ---> CUCM to handle RTP.
Line 156: Line 17443: 53512: 192.168.11.14: Aug 01 2013 13:43:25.109 +0800: %CVP_8_5_SIP-7-CALL: {Thrd=pool-1-thread-206-SIP-103686} CALLGUID = 009FB0B9F9A411E2B331BB97113E239E LEGID = 009FB0B9F9A411E2B331BB97113E239E-13753358051091899 - [OUTBOUND]: INVITE TO <sip:8041603@cucmcluster.com
CALL: {Thrd=DIALOG_CALLBACK.3} CALLGUID = 009FB0B9F9A411E2B331BB97113E239E LEGID = 009FB0B9F9A411E2B331BB97113E239E-13753358051091899 - [OUTBOUND] - DsSipInvitation - <sip:
8041603@cucmcluster.com;transport=tcp>;tag=280702~4be616ac-9b26-47c3-8e1d-1202b153260f-37940173 - 1 REJECTED WITH 404 - Not Found Reason: Q.850;cause=1
Search "8041063" (0 hits in 0 files)
Instead of sending calls to VG, CVP routed calls to CUCM and we don't have SIP TRUNK from CVP ---> CUCM to strip significant digits as 804.
Please suggest in which case/scenario it will take route from bottom. Is there any logic/logarithm behind this.
Regards,
Sivanesan R
SIVANESAN R
Solved! Go to Solution.
08-05-2013 08:23 PM
Hello,
Do you use Sip Server Group Configuration or HostName ? Below is the small snippet on Static Routes Validation from SRND. Did you have reachability from CVP B to VG ? Can you have a look at the Error logs for any Route disabled Notice.
Static Routes Validation:
The hostname or IP address of a static route is validated at startup and configuration deployment time
with a DNS lookup resolution. If the hostname does not resolve to an A record or an SRV record, then
the route is disabled and a notice is printed in the Unified CVP error log. The calls will not be routable
to this route in this state. If the host is in the local SRV Server Groups configuration as an SRV name,
then the host will not undergo this check, because it resolves to a local SRV name. IP addresses always
pass this validation.
Regards,
Senthil
08-01-2013 09:09 AM
Sorry CVP Version is 8.0
SIVANESAN R
08-01-2013 09:13 AM
I know its configuration issue not supposed to have same route to CUCM and Ingress G/W, But as i know CVP static route will always looks for longest prefix and route the call accordingly.
SIVANESAN R
08-02-2013 03:12 AM
Hi All - Even i checked SIP properties file in CVP, Where i can see below route in order.
8041>,idvgws.com
8041>,cucmcluster.com
Can anyone suggest, In which scenario CVP select route from Bottom ---> Top.
SIVANESAN R
08-02-2013 03:41 AM
Hi Sivanesan,
You are right. In case, we have two Static Routes in CVP, the CVP will take only the first hit and it will not look for the second static route. (Have checked with Cisco CVP team).
Its surprising in your case.
I would like to know why are you routing agent extensions to Voice Gateway instead of CUCM. Can you briefly explain the call flow.
In case, you have implemented a comprehensive setup, you would need to have a SIP trunk between CVP and CCM
Thanks,
Dass
Please rate useful posts
08-02-2013 09:34 AM
Hi Dass,
Thanks for your reply.
1. We have Multisite - centralized Deployement with CVP SIP comprehensive call flow.
2. For Edge queueing we are using SIG Digits to route call to respective location for VXML Treatment and we have Ingress and VXML as seperate G/W.
Call Flow:
PSTN ---> Ingress ---> CVP ---> ICME
Once ICME repsonsd Connect MSG to CVP with Extn as 1XXX , We have below static route which is pointed to Ingress G/W.
8041>,idvgws.com
8041>,cucmcluster.com
In Ingress We have Dial-Peer which Points towards CUCM and we have SIP Trunk which retians SIG Digits and forwards the Four Digit Extn to CUCM for RTP.
In CVP - A we have only one route 8041>,idvgws.com and all the calls will route to CVP A as First Preference.
Unfortunately CVP A NIC goes down and all the calls were routed to CVP - B and calls were failing after VRU treatment.
When we analyzed the Logs, We came to know it's taken last route and routed the calls to CUCM, Since we don't have SIP Trunk in CUCM for CVP with proper configuration to retain Significant Digits, Calls were failed.
But i am wondering, How CVP - B taken route from Bottom --> TOP and routed calls to CUCM, I know its configuration issue not suppose to have but i wanted to know why the Algorithnm was not acheived properly when we have same prefix length. (Top ---> Bottom)
------------------------------------------------------------------
The reason behind handling calls from Ingress instead of CVP, Suppose let's say we don't have DNS SRV option in CVP and we have Pattern (1XXX> CUCM PUB IP), If that particular node goes down CVP will not check alternate route even if we have same ( 1XXX> SUB IP).
But Incase of SRV records even first node goes down it will wait for SIP re-try invite and forward INVITE to second node in SRV Records.
Like same way we can also have multiple Dial-peer which points to PUB/SUB according to preference to achieve the same like SRV Records.
But in CVP 8.0 we have SRV Records option, but no idea why we are handling Agent Leg from Ingress ---> CUCM
SIVANESAN R
08-05-2013 08:23 PM
Hello,
Do you use Sip Server Group Configuration or HostName ? Below is the small snippet on Static Routes Validation from SRND. Did you have reachability from CVP B to VG ? Can you have a look at the Error logs for any Route disabled Notice.
Static Routes Validation:
The hostname or IP address of a static route is validated at startup and configuration deployment time
with a DNS lookup resolution. If the hostname does not resolve to an A record or an SRV record, then
the route is disabled and a notice is printed in the Unified CVP error log. The calls will not be routable
to this route in this state. If the host is in the local SRV Server Groups configuration as an SRV name,
then the host will not undergo this check, because it resolves to a local SRV name. IP addresses always
pass this validation.
Regards,
Senthil
08-05-2013 10:21 PM
Hi Senthil - If there is some problem in resolving service records, then how come calls routed to VG according below static route after we reomved the pattern pointing to CUCM.
8041>,idvgws.com
8041>,cucmcluster.com
We haven't modify/change SRV which is pointing to VG, As soon as we removed CUCM CVP started taking route as
8041>,idvgws.com and routed calls to respective G/W according to SRV records.
Also checked error logs not observed any error w.r.t SRV/static route for that particular time period.
SIVANESAN R
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide