Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

  • Congratulations gkittelson on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

An unusual restriction problem

Status
Not open for further replies.

OzzieGeorge

Programmer
Jan 14, 2005
2,606
AU
I have been tasked with assisting in a cutover to a cisco call manager from an IPS (it seems just lately that I am getting all the fun jobs)! The cisco will be inserted in the incoming ISDN feed and will intercept calls for the extensions that have been ported over and we will be providing a temporary E1 between the two so that the "internal" traffic won't cause congestion.

To facilitate the change I have set up a test setup (using an old IVS and a CME I built from my CCNA lab). I have set up 4 digit extensions 2xxx and in cmd 200 sent 2 to A29. I have extn 2001 & 2002 in the CME and 2010 in the IPS, cmd 8aa00 de 3 is set to 3 and in 8a403 2001 and 2002 are set to 011 and 2010 is set to 804 taking the call back into the IPS and to the extension. 8a011 takes the call out over the E1 to the cisco and this is where it gets interesting.

If in cmd 850 I set the digit length to 5 digits calls to 2010 connect immediately the 4th digit is dialed and calls to 2001 and 2002 connect after a 6 or 7 second delay (I have yet to find the timer that governs this but using # for end of dialing forces immediate connection). However if I take the setting for 850 to the correct setting (4 digits) I get restricted and the call fails. I need to analyze the numbers to the 4th digit in order to move individual extensions but I am at a loss as to what is causing this restriction.

I have actually set up a similar configuration once to send indial calls to a satellite PABX but that was on an old SDS and it worked well and in this case I have used a backup of another customers system rather than start from scratch so it is possible that when I set it up on the working system, I won't have this problem but just in case I do it would be best to know where to look to get round the problem.

Any suggestions?
 
Ok, you are definitely taxing my brain.
If you are using the special table then you need to use 8A407 to repeat digits dialed aka CCIS.
8AA00>3>7
8A407>2001, 2002>011
857>2>4
200>2>A29
Then in route data,
3521>rt>01
3546>rt>0
 
Ok so the plot thickens! I am simply using A29 in Cmd 200 to get the calls to LCR and 804 in Cmd 8A4xx to claw back extensions in the NEC. I have to use A29 as using 804 in cmd 8A4xx I need all 4 digits in play at this point, if I use say A28 and digit add the 2 back in, in 8A9xx, I can't claw back the calls to extensions in the NEC

With further testing I have found that it is restricting on the access code so for example if I use A29 and send 8aa00 de 3 to 3 then it restricts on any digit after the 2 (this is with Cmd 850 set to four digits

I have however come to the conclusion that this is either a corruption or a spurious command that is preventing the call as I realized that the original system the backup came from must have worked with the E1. So I tried a call into the cisco that the NEC would analyze as a normal local call and this time it was the Cisco that rejected the call. So I stripped out the contents of 8A400 which was the normal call route through the lcr and put my 2001 de 011 exe in and 2010 de 804 exe and then in 8AA00 set 3 to go to 0 (8A400) and lo and behold everything worked correctly!

So even though 8A403 and 8A400 are set exactly the same, if I set 8AA00 de 3 de 3 exe calls are restricted but if I set 8AA00 de 3 de 0 exe all works fine!

Does this make sense to anyone?
 
It makes some sense to me. Many years ago I had to do a similar loop back to get 5 digit numbering to work. I have notes somewhere, but having just moved it may take years to find them. At lest it's working.
 
As they say down here, No worries! I'll set up an IVS2 on the weekend and try that to see if I have the same problems.
 
Ok so I have to admit to a stupid oversight! Cmd 3576 sets the digit length pattern and I hadn't set it! However I find it interesting that changes to the basic digit length programming (850) affected the restriction at all as 3576 wasn't set!
 
I usually leave 3576 at default. I have had to adjust it in rare situations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top