cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
3492
Views
5
Helpful
10
Replies

CUCM 8.5 and Mobile Voice Access over SIP trunk

pjiracek
Level 1
Level 1

Hi there,

I'm tryng to set up MVA over the following:

CUCM 8.5<--> SIP <--> CUBE <--> SIP <--> ITSP

I've enabled MVA in Service parameters with number 5858 and for a test user, created Remote Destination and RD profile in CUCM and on the CUBE I have

application

service cucmmva http://146.191.205.31:8080/ccmivr/pages/IVRMainpage.vxml

dial-peer voice 5858 voip

description *** INBOUND SIP TRUNK PEER FOR MVA ***

  service cucmmva

session protocol sipv2

incoming called-number 5858

voice-class codec 1

dtmf-relay rtp-nte

no vad

dial-peer voice 5555 voip

  destination-pattern 5[8-9]..$

session protocol sipv2

session target ipv4:146.191.251.40

voice-class codec 1

dtmf-relay rtp-nte

fax rate disable

ip qos dscp cs3 signaling

no vad

When I call 5858 DDI the SIP call is established but I cannot hear anything.Anything missed?

Attached is debug voice ccapi trace

Thanks

10 Replies 10

pjiracek
Level 1
Level 1

It looks like cucm cannot get the IVR audio file. MVA service trace from the publisher is attached

Can you run a SIP debug on the CUBE from the ITSP?  I've seen this behaviour before myself and it was because the ITSP was using G.711a and the IVR files on the CUCM are only for G.711u - I had to do transcoding on the CUBE to convert it to u-law.

Andy

Yes, that's my conclusion as well. ITSP allows alaw only. I thought the Media termination point in cucm would do the transcoding, though.

Hi Andy,

I've set up the Xcoding on the CUBE:

voice-card 0

dspfarm

dsp services dspfarm

sccp local GigabitEthernet0/1

sccp ccm xxx.xxx.205.32 identifier 3 priority 3 version 7.0

sccp ccm xxx.xxx.251.40 identifier 1 priority 1 version 7.0

sccp ccm xxx.xxx.2.102 identifier 2 priority 2 version 7.0

sccp

!

sccp ccm group 1

bind interface GigabitEthernet0/1

associate ccm 1 priority 1

associate ccm 2 priority 2

associate ccm 3 priority 3

associate profile 1 register XCoder

!

dspfarm profile 1 transcode

codec g711ulaw

codec g711alaw

codec g729ar8

codec g729abr8

maximum sessions 4

associate application SCCP

and then successfully registered the XCoder on CUCM as Cisco IOS enhanced MTP..

I get

hcpgw01#sh dspfarm all

Dspfarm Profile Configuration

Profile ID = 1, Service = TRANSCODING, Resource ID = 1

Profile Description :

Profile Service Mode : Non Secure

Profile Admin State : UP

Profile Operation State : ACTIVE

Application : SCCP   Status : ASSOCIATED

Resource Provider : FLEX_DSPRM   Status : UP

Number of Resource Configured : 4

Number of Resource Available : 4

Codec Configuration: num_of_codecs:4

Codec : g711ulaw, Maximum Packetization Period : 30

Codec : g711alaw, Maximum Packetization Period : 30

Codec : g729ar8, Maximum Packetization Period : 60

Codec : g729abr8, Maximum Packetization Period : 60

SLOT DSP VERSION  STATUS CHNL USE   TYPE    RSC_ID BRIDGE_ID PKTS_TXED PKTS_RXED

0    1   28.3.3   UP     N/A  FREE  xcode   1      -         -         -

0    1   28.3.3   UP     N/A  FREE  xcode   1      -         -         -

0    1   28.3.3   UP     N/A  FREE  xcode   1      -         -         -

0    1   28.3.3   UP     N/A  FREE  xcode   1      -         -         -

Total number of DSPFARM DSP channel(s) 4

but it doesn't transcode, when I call MVA number.

Am I missing something?

Am I right I don't need to use something like this on the CUBE if the XCoder is already registered with CUCM:

telephony-service

sdspfarm units 1

sdspfarm transcode sessions 4

sdspfarm tag 1 XCoder

max-ephones 1

max-dn 1

ip source-address xxx.xxx.201.41 port 2000

max-conferences 8 gain -6

transfer-system full-consult

Cheers

Pavel

The problem with the way I set up transcoding on the CUBE is the inbound peer has to have alaw (from the ITSP) and the IVR service which requires ulaw is published on the same peer:

dial-peer voice 5858 voip

description *** INBOUND SIP TRUNK PEER FOR MVA ***

service cucmmva

session protocol sipv2

incoming called-number 15858

voice-class codec 1    ---> alaw

dtmf-relay rtp-nte

no vad

There are conflicting codec requirements on the same call leg. Any way to publish the IVR service on CUCM?

pjiracek
Level 1
Level 1

OK I managed to configure this - I had to create another call leg to  our other gw and forced ulaw.The original gw served as a xcoder.

However, don't know why I bothered and spent the time with this.   I really cannot see the benefits of MVA. Enforcing enterprise mobiles  to go via enterprise mobile gateway if there's any? Having to put in the  PIN all the time is a hassle.

Thanks everybody for their suggestions.

OK I managed to configure this - I had to create another call leg to  our other gw and forced ulaw.The original gw served as a xcoder.

However, don't know why I bothered and spent the time with this.   I really cannot see the benefits of MVA. Enforcing enterprise mobiles  to go via enterprise mobile gateway if there's any? Having to put in the  PIN all the time is a hassle.

Thanks everybody for their suggestions.

I agree with you, there is no point dedicating a gateway just for a feature like this. Personally I dont see the point of it. SNR is a much richer feature and thats what I see people use often times.

Please rate all useful posts

"There is a wideness in God's mercy Like the wideness of the sea.There's a kindness in His justice Which is more than liberty"

Please rate all useful posts

A few examples where MVA could be a good thing:

1) You are a support tech that has to make an afterhours call to a client and you do not want the client to have either your home or cell number because they will use it instead of going through proper support channels.

2) You have a sales staff with realatively high turnover and you do not want to give customers the private numbers for sales people because next week they may be working for your competitor.

3) Have users that frequenly travel the world.  Instead of paying global roaming fees they can simply dial into the local office and then make calls.

You can add your PIN to the speed dial to make it easier to make calls for users that use the feature often.

The benefits is MVA or what some people call DISA. Basically having a 1800 number for your company that your employeers could use to place international calls from their mobiles, on the company bill and be able to run CDR reports from those calls placed is usefull.

We have more elaborated features like Dial By the Office, with CUMA integration.

I guess with softphones running on laptops and VPN, having this type of feature for Mobile Phones are less used, it's one of the reasons CUMA will be deprecated at some point in the future. 

Dears

can you put the whole configuration please

 

Getting Started

Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: