03-16-2015 11:02 AM - edited 03-17-2019 02:20 AM
I need to connect a Nortel PBX to a Unity Connection server for voicemail. This is currently working for a small test group with:
Nortel <--QSIG--> 3900ISR <--MGCP--> CUCM <--SIP--> CUC
We have message waiting and everything going in this confiugration. I want the final End state to look like this:
Nortel <--QSIG--> CUBE (4431) <--SIP--> CUC
It is going to take some doing I know. Please keep in mind:
1) There is no SIP license on the PBX.
2) The software version on the PBX does not support SIP
3) There is no interest in spending any money on the PBX, this whole scenario is part of the phasing out of the PBX.
So, I would like to use TLS and encrypt the RTP stream between the CUC and the CUBE, but in order to accomplish this I am going to have to set the CUBE to accept user/pass from the CUC. My questions are:
1) Is my logic valid?
2) Where do I find how to configure the CUBE to authenticate the CUC?
Thanks in advance!
Solved! Go to Solution.
03-18-2015 03:51 AM
Looks like you are right, SIP is what you need on the 4400 platform.
Still that should be much simpler without encryption to worry about, and as I said you don't need any SIP capability on the PBX.
Aaron
03-17-2015 03:16 AM
Hi
If you are using QSIG now from PBX-->ISR, and will use QSIG in future, then no SIP config/license is required on the PBX. It won't know SIP is there.
I would suggest that the effort you are investing is probably not worth it. If you have a working system with MGCP there is no major benefit in going to SIP AFAIK.
Encryption would be useful if your traffic is traversing untrusted networks; most orgs do not encrypt voice (bear in mind it is not encrypted on the PBX end anyway).
Also you do not need CUBE; what you have is a SIP Gateway which you don't need a CUBE license for. CUBE is for SIP-to-SIP/SBC type deployments.
Aaron
03-17-2015 08:50 AM
The current 3900 is being replaced with a 4400, and we will be adding SIP via an ITSP. Thus the reference to CUBE. The long term plan is to replace the current MGCP configurations with SIP globally. .
Looking at this table:
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/routers/3900-series-integrated-services-routers-isr/data-sheet-c78-729824.html
It would appear the features required for the QSIG integration using the 4400 are not supported via MGCP, only SIP if we want MWI to work. This is my first crack at a 4400, so maybe I am missing something.
I did confirm with the customer that encryption is not required. That makes life much easier and should eliminate the need to authenticate the SIP Trunk.
Thanks!
03-18-2015 03:51 AM
Looks like you are right, SIP is what you need on the 4400 platform.
Still that should be much simpler without encryption to worry about, and as I said you don't need any SIP capability on the PBX.
Aaron
02-04-2021 05:09 AM
Based on that document which has been updated since this post. I do not see why MWI would only be supported via SIP.
This looks now to to be supported via SIP and MGCP not that in most cased you ever still want to use MGCP.
T1/E1 Q.SIG, including call diversion and forward, transfer, calling and connected ID services, and message-waiting indicator.
I am assuming it was not before?
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