Bearer Capability Not Implemented (65) - VG310

[techToddler]

Hello,

We are trying to send a fax from VG-310 --> CUCM-->ISP

we are getting Bearer Capability Not Implemented (65) and user getting a busy signal.

So, I took G729 off and tried only with G711 and now it is User Busy(17)

The SDP in the invite has annexb=no but when I receive back it doesn't have line itself. I assume the service provider accepts and require us to enable that?

Codec preference in dial peer to set 711 and then 729 now. 729 matches. But 729 is not a preferred codec for a fax for its compression rate.

How do I fix this?

Thanks

Sanjay

[Jonathan Schulenberg]

Faxes will never succeed with G.729, full stop. Annex B (ie VAD) would only make that situation worse. You need to use either G.711 for fax passthrough or T.38 fax relay, the latter of which is strongly preferred.

Your post is missing a lot of relevant details (eg config of both the VG and CUBE, what the PSTN circuit is and in the case of SIP what the provider supports, etc) so it’s difficult to provide specific guidance here. Here’s a common config reference to get you started:

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/voice-unified-communications/unified-border-element/115742-fax-modem-call-flows-00.html#anc9

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/voice/fax/configuration/15-mt/vf-15-mt-book/Configuring_Cisco_Fax_Relay.html

[techToddler]

Thanks for your reply.

VG310-->SIP-->CUCM-->SME-->ITSP

We have 10 sites having the same config, only this site, in particular, has a problem. Sending test fax to HP number works great but no to other numbers.

During some restrictions, I am unable to post configs here. 

But I tried taking voice class codec (though it has only 711 now) and tried enforcing 711 directly on the dial peer. When doing this it gets user busy error ( the destination is available).

Does ANI make any changes in this routing because I tried setting up a station number in port and nothing helped? 

Please advise.