PRI 232 - Alcatel DEX fiasco

[4wireguy]

Anyone heard of this? Anyone know a fix?

Our long distance provider, in this case Verizon... serves 2 of our remote locations (Dallas - Charlotte) with DEX central offices. When they make a call to a phone (the fit in your pocket kind), sometime it takes awhile to find it - might be roaming... out of the service area, etc. the phone provider sends an excessive delay - progress update. This causes our M1 to drop the call... generate a PRI 232 and a message: invalid IE contents. Could it be more what's in the message that the message itself? I have read of others getting the PRI 232... but this much more than a bother, this is bad service. Nortel says, ask them to stop sending the unsupported (OA) message... Verizon tells us their little DEX can't. Is there a solution? The only one I know is to get the provider to serve from another office type. This trouble must be happening to other M1 customers served out of a DEX. Am I the only one who realizes it? If anyone has figure this out, please let me know before I pull out the few remaining hairs on my head.

Thanks for your reply,

The old 4 wire guy,

 

[curtismo]

What PRI protocol does your switch talk to the DEX with?

 

[johnpoole]

might try the number plus #, the eod may help find the target... cell phones are great, if you don't care that they only work about half the time...

i can hear the headaches if the pbx dropped as many calls as a cell.. or took that long to connect.. if they were programed right, they could work as well as a pbx. with end to end pri i can get ringback in .7 sec coast to coast.. press the send key on my cell on a local call, 30 seconds of wondering if the call is going anywhere...

john poole
bellsouth business
columbia,sc

 

[4wireguy]

curtismo - thanks for the reply. D250.

DCH: 10 LINK PARAM CONFIRM TIME: 15:15:24
TMDI : 2
PORT : 1
INTERFACE : D250
OPER MODE : RS232/DTE/USR/64000/EXT CLK
T200 : 3
T203 : 10
N200 : 3
N201 : 260
K : 7

Other DCH
DCH: 11 LINK PARAM CONFIRM TIME: 15:23:10
TMDI : 3
PORT : 1
INTERFACE : D250
OPER MODE : RS232/DTE/USR/64000/EXT CLK
T200 : 3
T203 : 10
N200 : 3
N201 : 260
K : 7

TYPE RDB
CUST 00
DMOD
ROUT 10
DES MCI/LD
TKTP DID
M911_ANI NO
M911_TONE NO
NPID_TBL_NUM 0
SAT NO
RCLS EXT
VTRK NO
DTRK YES
BRIP NO
DGTP PRI
ISDN YES
MODE PRA
IFC D250
SBN NO
PNI 00000
NCNA YES
NCRD NO
CHTY BCH
ISAR NO
CPUB OFF
DAPC NO
BCOT 0
DSEL 3VCE
PTYP PRI
AUTO NO
DNIS NO
DCDR NO
ICOG IAO
RANX NO
SRCH LIN
TRMB YES
STEP
ACOD 8910
TCPP NO
PII NO
TARG
CLEN 1
BILN NO
OABS
INST
IDC YES
DCNO 0
NDNO 0 *
DEXT NO
DNAM NO
ICIS YES
TIMR ICF 512
OGF 512
EOD 2048
NRD 10112
DDL 70
ODT 4096
RGV 640
FLH 510
GRD 896
SFB 3
NBS 2048
NBL 4096
DRNG NO
CDR YES
INC YES
LAST YES
QREC YES
OAL YES
AIA NO
OAN YES
OPD NO
CDRX NO
NATL YES
MUS YES
MRT 11
RACD NO
EQAR NO
FRL 0 0
FRL 1 0
FRL 2 0
FRL 3 0
FRL 4 0
FRL 5 0
FRL 6 0
FRL 7 0
TTBL 0
ATAN NO
PLEV 2
MCTS NO
ALRM NO
ART 0
SGRP 0
AACR NO

REQ: LTM
CUST 0
ROUT 10
TYPE TLST
TKTP DID
ROUT 10
DES MCI/LD
TN 003 01 MBER 1 MCI/LD
Thru
TN 003 23 MBER 23 MCI/LD
plus
TN 002 01 MBER 24 MCI/LD2
Thru
TN 002 23 MBER 46 MCI/LD2

 

[4wireguy]

john poole - thanks for the reply - I know what you mean by eod... and manually pressing the #... not sure how, if possible to set that up in the outbound dial string. These numbers, by the way are only failing over this DEX (LD) route. a local call never fails to cells (no more than usual The local switch is a D100.

The RDB has a EOD timer set to default at default 2048.

 

[curtismo]

Searched the Nortel Knowledgebase and found a new patch that may fix your problem. Don't see what release you are running, but this is for 4.5.

MPLR24454_CPP_04.50W: PRI232 from Progress Indicator # 10 Delay in Response at Called Interface

The bad news is that it may end up affecting more of us than just 4wireguy. The readme says that this appears to be a new progress message in use by Cell phone carriers and that it may become a problem for all interface types. The notes say this is a problem when you have a LD carrier prompting for authcodes.

 

[curtismo]

...and now as I think about it I think I've seen this error on my TTYs, which makes sense since I:

- use D250 PRI
- have carrier-based authcodes

Haven't heard any complaints about dropped calls but now I will have to go back through my logs.

Crap.

 

[4wireguy]

Curtismo - thanks for the great reply! Do you have a DEX? I have sent what you gave me to our vendor and will let you know the result. We run 3.0 (11C) and 25.40 (61C). Turning on messaging reveals a lot. I have been told that the phone being called has seen our CLID and has actually called back.

May I ask how you found out about the patch? Sounds like something I should be looking at. Even our vendor (Shared Tech) hasn't mentioned it.

Thanks,
Old 4wireguy

 

[curtismo]

No, just an end-user with a CS1000 rel 4.5 with Verizon (MCI) LD PRI service, set up as D250 interface. Don't know what they have on the other end; always assumed it was a DMS platform.

Just went through my history file and I am seeing the described errors sporatically. Probably since most of our customers are local, we have a low percentage of LD calls to cell phones.

As far as the knowledgebase, I have Nortel service agreements on my data stuff and a end-user customer login at

http://www.nortel.com

> Support and Training > Online self-service > Knowledgebase. You may be able to get a login and enough access to search the knowledgebase.

 

[4wireguy]

curtismo - I found out that the patch is for 4.5 switches. Shared has asked Nortel to write a patch for our 3.0 switch since it is supported, but we are out of luck on the 25:40. We planned to update to 5.0 at the 25:40 site, but not until October and it requires CPU/cage upgrade as well.

 

[911guru]

If you are doing the upgrade in October, you will be getting 5.50. The expected GA date is March 28th.

911Guru

http://pbx-e911.com

 

[4wireguy]

Thanks 911Guru and all. I talked to Verizon Business and they are willing to route to an honest to goodness D250 at one location, then if it solves the dropped calls, do it at site B. Shared had 3 shots at the problem and didn't know about a patch. Thanks to curtismo for that one, I am getting assess to knowledgebase, as well.