CS1000e to 1000m CDP Networking Problem

[cuda446]

$500 to anyone who can fix this problem:

Replaced a 25.40 11C (networked to a CS1000m 5.0 system across the street via PRI) with a CS1000e 5.5 and are unable to dial across Tie Line. All 25.40 CDP database was duplicated in CS1000e correctly. D-channels establish on both ends and channels are idle, but receive fast busy when dialing far end. Same when dialing from far end. DCH OMSG shows correct Calling DN and far end Called DN, however Called DN in original 25.40 OMSG message showed 3-digits inserted before calling DN. CS1000e does not. See outbound CDP OMSG message example below:

CS1000E 5.5:

Calling #: 1730 NUM PLAN: PRIVATE/CDP
Called #: 1665 NUM PLAN: PRIVATE/CDP

Original 11C 25.40:

Calling #: 1730 NUM PLAN: PRIVATE
Called #: 1051665 NUM PLAN: PRIVATE

LD 80 Call trace showed following on CS1000e:

ACTIVE TN 000 1 06 00
ORIG DN 1730
TERM NONE
DIAL DN 1665

Replaced card & DCH. Moved PRI circuit from slot 4 to 3 to no avail. TMDI cards not supported (licensing) so NTAK09DA cards are in use.

No DTI/DTA/DCH/DTC error output at any time.

NOTE- The signalling server that came with the CS1000e has not been connected yet. To be installed after cut-over when a handful of IP phones are to be installed.

Randy
(714) 279-1414

 

[zstic78]

Looks like there is a dmi in that rli from before?

 

[cuda446]

No DMI defined in DGT table or RLB on either end. Digits 105 always precede any calls to far end CS1000M in OMSG message and LD 80 call trace from 25.40 11C. Digits 103 or 107 always precede calls from far end 1000m to near end 11C.

Not sure where these digits come from. Don't show up when CS100e replaces 11C on near end.

 

[KCFLHRC]

Compare the NET Data in the old and new switch. I believe your issue is the PFX1 setting in the Net Data in the customer data block. It is not a DMI table issue

 

[NortelGuy1979]

Your RDB signaling on the TIE route is set for ESN5 on the calling side and not the other. Need to match on both sides. That 105 you're seeing is the TCOS marker (1 = TGAR? 0 = Custno 5 = NCOS). If this is SIP and there are multiple systems (some non-Nortel/Avaya for example) then I suggest STD signaling. If both are Nortel/Avaya then ESN5 gives you traveling class of service.

I believe the prompt is SIGO = xxxx
-M

Matthew - Technical Support Engineer Sr.

http://www.linkedin.com/in/matty79

 

[cuda446]

Tim from AT&T has fixed the problem. Didn't have SIGO defined in RDB correctly.
Will attempt to reinstall CS1000e tomorrow night.

Thanks to Tim and all.

 

[cuda446]

NortelGuy1979, you are correct. Tim beat you by about 5 minutes. If you want to split half I'm okay with it. Let me know.

 

[NortelGuy1979]

LOL what's half the prize?
But on another note - why would you have to reinstall? You can change SIGO in LD 16, if it's a virtual route then do LD 32 DIS VTRM 0 X where X is the route, then wait a minute or two, then ENL VTRM 0 X where X is the route. On a PRI route (TIE MCDN) you usually don't have to disable and re-enable anything but you may want to bounce the D-channel.

Matthew - Technical Support Engineer Sr.

http://www.linkedin.com/in/matty79

 

[cuda446]

We reinstalled the old 11C when we couldn't get the tie line problem fixed (last night). We then reconnected the CS1000e in our test center this morning where I just modified the SIGO data in the RDB. We'll install it at the customer site tomorrow night.

 

[NortelGuy1979]

Ah. Good luck and enjoy!

Matthew - Technical Support Engineer Sr.

http://www.linkedin.com/in/matty79

 

[cuda446]

Thanks Matthew. You want anything for your time? Also, we are going to need tech assistance on connecting Sig Server and a handful of remote IP phones. They also want to connect a site across the street in the future. Will contract you out if your interested. This switch came from a customer who networked 2 sites down the road via IP so it's equipped with the licensing and hardware to do so.

 

[NortelGuy1979]

Hi Cuda - sorry I didn't reply earlier. No, no need for anything for my time - that's what this site is for. It took me literally about 2 minutes to read the post and type my reply. As for contracting with you, I used to work for a vendor but no more; now I'm a telecom guy at a regular company full time. Just haven't bothered to change my profile or anything... But no, not really looking for any contract work. Thanks though!

Matthew - Technical Support Engineer Sr.

http://www.linkedin.com/in/matty79