cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
589
Views
0
Helpful
9
Replies

Two or more call handlers in a CUC 10.0 server for different telephony systems.

david.alfaro
Beginner
Beginner

Hello Guys,

 

We have in my company a CCM 10.0 with a CUC 10.0. Now there is a new company that they need an IVR. We want to implement a second IVR where this one be independent of the anothers. I tried to make it, but unfortunately the new IVR that I implement overlaps and I affected the IVR of my company. My question is How can I do two diffrentes IVR in the same CUC server and they are isolated one of the another without they overlap, and support the two independent enterprises??

 

Thanks in advance

1 Accepted Solution

Accepted Solutions

And exactly why are you using the same DN for call handler and the VM pilot???

Why don't you simply create a CTI RP that forwards to VM and use that same DN in the call handler???

What you're trying to do can be achieved very easily, not sure what you're doing to overcomplicate this, and cause all this problems.

HTH

java

if this helps, please rate

View solution in original post

9 Replies 9

ndehmer
Enthusiast
Enthusiast

I think Cisco added Partitioning and Calling Search Spaces in Unity Connections for just this reason.  You should be able to create a new partition and calling search space for the new company and keep it completely separate from the current setup.

hello ndehmer ,

 

The voice mail profiles were configured properly; and the call handlers were configured each one with its partition and CSS. Now, I configured the two direct routing rules, one poninting a one call handler and the another direct routing rule pointing at the another call handler. For tests, I configured two phones, one phone for each voicemail profile and call handler. The problem is that the two telephones  follow the call handler pointed for the first direc routing rule, because in the list they are arreged in order of preference, I would expect that each phone reach the proper call handler, but that is not ocurring, just the first direct routing rule is used, but not the subsecuent for the second call handler  if I call from the second phone, just append the first. So for this reason of mi question, if it is possibible that the two call handlers can be reached for its respective voice mail profile, or not.

Can you describe the setup a little more?  When you say IVR, do outside callers call a main number and it sends them to the voicemail front end?  Are the numbers for these 2 IVRs you set up different?

 

Also how is the voicemail integration setup?  Do you have separate port groups for each company or are they using the same ports?

 

What is your direct routing rule matching on.

This should be pretty straight forward and should be able to be accomplished without too much issue.

Thanks

Nathan

The idea is the following: We have two companies, each one have their own CUCM or telephony system independent. However there is just one CUC server, in one of these companies, so we have to implement two IVR for each one. The form more easy for me is to implement another CUC server for the another company, but we are limited in hardware for now. So one IVR lets to external callers call to extension of this company, and the another IVR lets to callers call at the extensions of the another one. So I configured one voice profile in one call manager and another voice profile in the another one. Of course separated port groups are configured each one with their own ports, and their own voice mail pilot.

In the side of the CUC server, in the telephony integration section, the two systems were configured, one for each company or voice mail profile. Next, I configured the two call handlers, one for each one company. For reaching each call handler in the CUCM, I configured two direct routing rules, each one pointing at one call handler. The idea is that if a external caller calls at the number of the company 1, he can reach the respect call handler; if he calls the number of the company 2, he can reach the another call handler.

I configured two direct routing rules each one target to each call handler. the problem is that independently that I call a ther company 1 or 2, the CUC always contact the first direct routing rule, it does not reach the corresponding direct routing rule. I see that the direct routing rules are matched in order of decending order of preference and they are not matched in the form than I expect. My question is that if it is possible that the two call handlers can be reached for the corresponding number, if is company 1 or company 2.

 

I hope that it could be a lot more clear, thanks

I would assume you're using a different DN for each call handler, correct????

What's the exact call flow you have right now???

HTH

java

if this helps, please rate

Hi JaVa

 

that is right, they are two DID maped to two DN's. One for each Call Handler. Respect to the flow i attach a little diagram. in the direct routing rules I created drr-co1, drr-co2; and the defaults are "Attempt Sign In" and "Opening Greeting". So when an external caller calls for example +528155151024, I expect tha the call handler Co1 can be reached; and when he calls +528155151025, I expect that te call handler Co2 can be reached. Also I see that the direct routing rules are ordened in order of preference, where the direct routing rule drr-co2 is liested first. So, unfortunately when I call to whichever of the two numbers, the drr-co2 always is used and this behavior does not permit to reach at the call handler desired, how can I override this behavior?? help please, SOS, =(

And exactly why are you using the same DN for call handler and the VM pilot???

Why don't you simply create a CTI RP that forwards to VM and use that same DN in the call handler???

What you're trying to do can be achieved very easily, not sure what you're doing to overcomplicate this, and cause all this problems.

HTH

java

if this helps, please rate

Thanks JaVa,

Stupidly I was using the same DN for the VM pilot and I did not think about the cti route point. I corrected all missing things. I appreciate your words, thanks in advance.

 

Vivek Batra
VIP Alumni
VIP Alumni

What are the challenges you are seeing here? Which kind of overlaps?

I think the way multi-tenant configuration can be done in CUCM dial plan, same can be achieved in CUC as well until and unless you've some extra ordinary requirement.

Thanks 

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: