CUCM 6.1.5 and CUCM 9.1 Call Recording CODEC Issue

I have a call recording issue where if the CODEC agreed between an MGCP gateway and the IP phone is G711 call recording fails as it looks for an MTP (there are subs running XCODE in the MRGs for the devices in this scenario). The traces seem to suggest that there is mismatch between the agreed DTMF.
When the call between the phone and the gateway is G729 then call recording works fine and doesn't request MT resource.
SIP traces show that the recorder (Verint Impact 360) responds with a SIP OK which contains options for PCMA, PCMU, and G729.
Call manager traces show that as soon as the INVITE is sent to the call recorder from the CUCM the request for MTP resource begins (i.e. before any media options are presented and even before the 100 TRYING is sent back)
The region setting between the phone and the gateways, in the failure scenario, is set to G711 and link loss type is low loss. On CUCM 9.1 Ive set a CODEC preference list which I have tried g711 as the preference and then also G729.
The region setting between the phone and the gateway regions towards the region the call recording SIP trunk is in allows max. G711.
The question is, why when the call is set up using G729 there is no requirement for an MTP on the call recorded leg whereas when the call is setup with G711 then the CUCM looks for MTP?

To answer your question we need to look at the traces , please attach both the traces here.
Thanks
Manish

Similar Messages

Since you don't allow emails any more – I suspect because of the numerous complaints with your service and the way you treat people that you don't want documented, I am calling and I want this call recorded for future reference. I have been a long time fa

Since you don’t allow emails any more – I suspect because of the numerous complaints with your service and the way you treat people that you don’t want documented, I am calling and I want this call recorded for future reference.
I have been a long time faithful customer of vzw and although the past year I have been late on payments many times and really couldn’t afford your exorbitant prices for services lots of other companies offer sometimes three times cheaper than what you charge, I have hung in there trying my best to meet my obligations.
This month has been no exception. You don’t know the background; the whole story of people’s lives. I know you could care less because all you care about is the profit-the money that comes in.
I was told when I agreed to pay my bill on the third per the recorded message that I had 14 days to pay…you cut me off anyway. The phones are not the tissue; your suspending my service means I cannot work. I may lose my job…how do you justify that? In any case? The least you could do would be to keep 4986 on and cut the phones off. But no. You refuse to compromise and meet the basic needs of your customer. What does that say about your company? I tried to call back on three separate occasions to tell you I couldn’t pay because of unexpected expenses but couldn’t get out of the automated system…sadly couldn’t get to a real person which also speaks volumes to me.
All this tells me this is a company I don’t wish to be affiliated with any more. As soon as I can, I will discontinue service with you…I know you could care less. I will honor the remaining portion of the contract but that’s it. You don’t deserve my business. I am a good, hardworking person who, at the sacrifice of myself and my needs, always pays her bills…albeit late at times. I realize others tell you stories and lies to justify themselves. That’s not me. If you knew what I had been through the last 7 yrs you would marvel that I am still on my feet…don’t judge too quickly. You could be wrong…and in my eyes you are by doing this to me.
God will see us through this extremely scary time of that I have no doubt. No thanks to your company and lack of understanding and mercy. I am doing the best I can. Sadly you are not.
See I have choices. MANY choices of providers for services you offer. I don’t have to be treated like this. I don’t have to succumb to your coldness and callousness. I intend to choose better (and cheaper). If your company doesn’t get the “people factor” back you will be sorry.

Problem here is you admit you cannot afford the service.
And you want to blame Verizon for losing a job because you have no cell phone.
If your job depends on that phone I would pay it on time every time if you need a job to pay your bill.
No other service is going to treat you any different. And if you cannot afford Verizon's monthly invoice how are you going to afford new devices, activation fees, possible security deposits on any other cellular carrier? You can't.
Also if you made an arraignment to pay and then decide you cannot do so, why should Verizon extend you service or credit, or why is it you want to use the service and data and not pay for it as agreed.
Get a prepay phone. Its evident the cost is too high for you to afford on post pay.
Good Luck

CUCM 6.1 DirSync and CUCM trash collector program

If I turn on DirSync and CUCM syncs LDAP data to CUCM but I then turn off DirSync before the trash collector program runs will my original user data be there in the CUCM corp directory?

Peter,
Right on.
So what you are saying is that if I enable DirSync and allow the sync to happen and I don't like the results I can disable DirSync before the garbage collector program runs and my original CUCM User database data will be available again?
The main thing I was trying to determine is if DirSync is enabled and the actual sync process happens does it permanently alter my CUCM User database at that point even before the garbage collector program runs.
Somebody pointed me to the correct documentation for "Cisco Unified Communications Solution Reference Network Design (SRND)
Based on Cisco Unified Communications Manager Release 6.x"
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/srnd/6x/uc6_0.html
It includes some really thorough information on LDAP Directory Integration.
I am currently reading through the details.
Man I wish I had found this from the start it would have saved me a lot of time and questions! :)

CTSMan 1.9.1 and CUCM 8.6.2 sync problems Error 502407

Hi,
I ran into recent problem synchronizing CUCM 8.6.2(b) into CTSman 1.9.1
CTSMan is getting an Error message: 502407
Details
ID:
502407
Severity:
critical
Module:
DiscoveryMgr
SubModule:
CTIAdapter
Summary:
Communication to Unified CM failure
Recommendation:
Verify CCM App User credentials. Verify CTIManager service is activated on the primary application server.
Message:
Unable to create CTI adapter to Unified CM 'CUCM-xxx' because Provider is null.
I researched this earlier in CTSman admin guides, and this error points to CUCM CTI Manager service to be restarted. I did restart this as well as other services, including CUCM hardware itself and, but in vain.
Among other things, i followed the CUCM/CTSman guides when bringing CUCM into CTSman to: created an application user account within CUCM and allocate a proper permissions/user groups etc... it was done.
Among other things there are other servers like Exchange being synchronized with it ( had problems with it earlier that dealt with certificates, it was corrected.).
Can anyone help with this issue.
Responses will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you.

Thanks Manish again for this.
I did get few MediaReosurceListExhausted events from RTMT alerts but was not paying much attention to them. Location bandwidth settings have been checked and increased a bit for sites which were repeatedly getting these events. I will monitor to see if that reduces these alerts. Could you please advise how I can verify it is hitting the maximum limit?
I have also raised this with Cisco TAC and some cores were found on the CUC subscriber server. We seemed to have run into a bug according to Cisco TAC as in here https://tools.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCug61581/?reffering_site=dumpcr and both CUC servers have been upgraded to 8_6_2_24901_1. It has fixed cores and we are now monitoring the voicemail service for few days to see if it will reoccur.
Regards,

Is there a way to script finding users in Unity and CUCM

I currently get a list once a month of all users who no longer work for our company. As we roll out more VOIP installs the list grows and the old way of doing things needs to change. Currently I search one by one through CUCM and Unity to see if the user is assigned a phone. I would like to be able to pull a list of all users from both Unity and CUCM put that into a spread sheet and then compare my attrition spread sheet to that spread sheet therby speeding up the process of determining which users might be assigned a phone.
Note company hires warehouse workers and they come and go frequently and are not assigned phones but, they along with users with phones are all dumped into a spread sheet so I have no way of know who is who.
1. I have a spread sheet with names on it both people with and without phones
2. I would like to download a list so I can compare the two and determine which ones have phones
I am open to other ideas and suggestions to make the laborious task easier.
Thank You in advance

Seems easy enough on the face of it - unless there's something I'm not getting - are you talking Unity or Unity Connection (folks often just say "Unity" as shorthand for either) - if you're dealing with Unity then you'll have to dance with ODBC which isnt' the end of the world but doing it from "script" is going to be a challange. If you're talking about Unity Connection you can also use ODBC but you have the option for an HTTP REST search for users by name.
So it's just a matter of searching by name and getting matches back (names are not guranteed to be unique of course, assuming you mean name as first/last/display name and not alias). It can kick out all matches I suppose and include the extension number. Unity and Unity connecton _always_ have extension numbers (it's required) so I'm unsure what someone "without a phone" would look like in Unity/Connection - that's a bit odd - how do they check messages? And without a phone why do they have a voice mail account?

Exchange 2013 SP1 and CUCM 9.1.2 - Exch not recognizing called extension

I think I'm almost there in getting Exchange 2013 SP1 UM working with CUCM 9.1.2...I've got two issues at the moment that I need a little help with.
1) When I dial my VM pilot (6040) from a UM enabled extension it prompts to enter an extension. When I dial the same extension and let it ring to VM, Exchange picks up and says "the person you are trying to reach does not have a valid voice mail box
on our system".
2) This just started happening this afternoon, when I dial my VM pilot (6040) exch3 picks up as thats what I have my route pattern pointing to. If I enter the extension of a mailbox on exch2, I get stuck in a endless loop.
I've followed this post as a guide but it hasn't resolved my issue.
https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/11914031/exchange-2013-um-and-cucm-86
My Exchange environment looks like this:
Site 1:
exch1 - CAS/Mailbox, used for mainly utility type work, journal, dedicated SMTP flows etc
exch2 - CAS/Mailbox, part DAG13
exch3 - CAS/Mailbox, part of DAG13
Site 2:
exch2dr - CAS/Mailbox, part of DAG13
exch3dr - CAS/Mailbox, part of DAG13
DAG13 is stretched between two sites, there are no users at our DR site so CUCM is pointing to Site 1 for UM. Each site has an internet facing CAS-only server for OWA/EAS etc.
Any help is greatly appreciated. I'd love to get rid of Unity.
EDIT:
I just found this event in the event logs:
The Microsoft Exchange Unified Messaging service on the Mailbox server received a diverted call with ID "d51600-3a3140c5-9b8-c1414ac@EXCH3-IPADDR" for extension "4099" on UM dial plan "CUCM" from UM IP gateway "CUCM IP",
but no UM-enabled mailbox for the corresponding extension could be found. Please check the extension and make sure that the corresponding mailbox is enabled for UM and associated with the correct UM dial plan.

9.1.2 I think it is, we upgraded to avoid the known DNS bug
I cant see how to PM you either
The crux of it was outlined below with some tweaks
http://blogs.technet.com/b/canitpro/archive/2014/04/30/step-by-step-integration-between-exchange-2013-um-and-cisco-unified-communication-manager.aspx
As we have multiple combined role servers, our trunks are set up as follows:
1. 1 x CAS Trunk - contains all CAS Servers on port 5060
2. 4 x MBX Trunks - contains Maibox Server with ports 5062-5068
On top of that, we had to Allow "Redirecting Diversion Header Delivery - Inbound (and Outbound)" on the CAS Trunk but DISABLE it on the Mailbox Trunks
Also, make sure that you are using Telephone Extension Dial plans in Exchange 2013 (Despite them being unable to be associated with a 13 Server - EX13 answers for all calls anyway)
Lastly, the MS documentation is a little strange - it says that as your last step of UM migration, you should point your Call Manager to 2013 - I don't agree with that statement, EX13 routes calls back to 2010 UM Servers perfectly fine, so treat it the same
as any other CAS based service - point to 2013, and it will handle the rest

Can not foward into voicemail from outside call on CUE and CUCM 8.6

Dear Team,
I have CUE Utility and CUCM 8.6.
I can call from local, if user busy or go out office then call will foward to voice mail.It is ok.
But when i call from outside to my phone(direct line), then call can not foward to voice mail on CUE.
Please help me some solution.
Thanks.

Hi nam,
A couple of things to check. Have you set the Forward Busy/No Answer "External"
on the DN config page in CUCM?
Are the calls coming in using a codec other than g.711?
Best Practices for Deploying Cisco Unity Express
• Each mailbox can be associated with a primary extension number and a primary E.164 number.
Typically, this number is the direct-inward-dial (DID) number that PSTN callers use. If the primary
E.164 number is configured to any other number, use Cisco IOS translation patterns to match either
the primary extension number or primary E.164 number so that the correct mailbox can be reached
during SRST mode.
• Each Cisco Unity Express site must be associated with a CTI route point for voicemail and one for
AA (if licensed and purchased), and you must configure the same number of CTI route points as
Cisco Unity Express ports licensed. Ensure that the number of sites with Cisco Unity Express does
not exceed the CTI scalability guidelines presented in the chapter on Call Processing, page 8-1.
• Cisco Unity Express is associated with a JTAPI user on Cisco Unified CallManager. Although a
single JTAPI user can be associated with multiple Cisco Unity Expresses in a system, Cisco
recommends associating each dedicated JTAPI user in Cisco Unified CallManager with a single
Cisco Unity Express.
• Calls into Cisco Unity Express use G.711 only. Cisco recommends using a local transcoder to
convert the G.729 calls traversing the WAN into G.711 calls. You can configure Cisco Unified
CallManager regions with the G.711 voice codec for intra-region calls and the G.729 voice codec
for inter-region calls.
• If transcoding facilities are not available at the Cisco Unity Express site, provision enough
bandwidth for the required number of G.711 voicemail calls over the WAN. Configure the Cisco
Unified CallManager regions with the G.711 voice codec for calls between the IP phones and Cisco
Unity Express devices (CTI ports and CTI route points).
• The CTI ports and CTI route points can be defined in specific locations. Cisco recommends using
location-based call admission control between Cisco Unified CallManager and Cisco Unity Express.
RSVP may also be used.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/srnd/4x/42unityx.pdf
Cheers!
Rob
"Far away from your trouble and worry
You belong somewhere you feel free" - Tom Petty

UCCX and CUCM Upgrade

Hi All - We are planning to go for CUCM direct upgrade from 7.1.3 - 9.1.2
Also for UCCX from 7.0.1 SR5 ---> 8.5.1 --> 8.5.1 SU3 --> 9.0.2
During upgarde of UCCX 8.5.1 on UCS Machine it will ask to eneter CUCM AXL user Credentails which is in 9.1.2, So we need to know is that correct way by doing so since UCCX is 8.5.1 and CUCM 9.1.2
Also i checked few PDF'S where i can get below info.
These Unified CM versions are supported - 8.0(1), 8.0(2) and all SUs, 8.5(1) and all SUs, and Unified CM 8.6.2.22033 and later.
Does it mean CUCM 9.1.2 is compatible with UCCX 8.5.1 and 8.5.1 SU3.
SIVANESAN R

Refer to this document for all CCX compatibility details including which version you can upgrade from:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/crs/express_compatibility/matrix/crscomtx.pdf
CUCM 9.1.2 is compatible with CCX 8.5SU4 for example.
Also, you can upgrade to CCX 9.0.2 directly from 7.0.2ES3.
HtH,
Chris

Cannot make outside call (H.323 gateway and CUCM 6)

I cannot make outside calls. I am using H.323 gateway configuration and CUCM 6. I have attached configuration file and debug file. I configured H323 gateway and route pattern in CUCM. Please let me know if this is a configuration issue or telecom issue.

Hi 9tysixuae,
I can see that call is hitting the analog ports but from there on it generates error 34 which means circuit not available. You can try the following :
1. Plug Analog phone and verify if the circuit is fine ?
2. Try putting signal ground start on the voice port and see if that makes any difference.
Regards
Aditya Gupta

CUEAC 9.1.1.10 and CUCM 7.1(5) 64 bit TSP Plugin

Hello,
I have a customer with CUCM 7.1(5) who has purchased CUEAC 9.1.1.10 and wants to run it on Windows Server 2008 R2 (64 bit).
According to the data sheet this should be supported but when I go through the CUEAC server installation process it tries to download the 64 bit TSP plugin from the CUCM server.
This is a problem as CUCM 7.1(5) does not have the 64 bit TSP plugin - it only has the 32 bit version.
The exact message I get is
Error occured while downloading Cisco TSP.
Path: https://10.80.20.12/plugins/CiscoTSPx64.exe
I have obtained the 64 bit TSP from a later CUCM and done a manual installation hoping that the installer would see the TSP is already installed and skip the step but it does not do so.
Can anyone suggest how to resolve this?
I know I could use a 32 bit version of Windows Server or upgrade CUCM but these options are not available.
Thanks

Update
I built a CUCM 9.x server as a virtual machine and integrated CUEAC with that. The 64 bit TSP downloaded and installed ok and I was hoping that I could then reconfigure the TSP CTI manager addresses and the CUEAC CUCM server to point to the version 7.1 CUCM server.
Unfortunately this did not work as I got a message complaining about version incompatibilities between the CUEAC server and CUCM.
I do not think there is any workaround for running CUCM 7.1 with CUEAC on a 64 bit Windows Server.
Luckily for me the customer found an old Windows 2003 32 bit server that they used to run Cisco ACS on. CUEAC installed without a hitch on this server and is running fine.
If anyone manages to get this working I would be interested to know how.
Lesson here is do not believe Cisco data sheets

NAT between IPIVR (or UCCX) and CUCM?

Hi,
i would like to know if NAT between IPIVR (or UCCX) and CUCM is allowed? (with ASA only or also router and switch).
I didn't find anything about it in UCCX SRND.
thanks
[IPIVR v8, CUCM v7.1(5).]

Hello,
1) Yes, please use sip trunk as the interface between cme and cucm.
2) Please note: officially cme sip trunk video is only supported for cme1—sip trunk---cme2 type set up, but for basic call you could try to setup cucm to use early media on the sip trunk. cme by default would use early media and it should work.
3) For configuration guide on CME Video, you can refer http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucme/admin/configuration/guide/cmevideo.html#wp1027101
4) For interfacing CME with CUCM, please remember to configure below command on CME:
       voice service voip
        sip
          asymmetric payload full
Hope this helps,
Vishal

UCCX and CUCM issue

Hi,
I integrated UCCX 8.5 and CUCM 8.5 in a lab setup using VMware.
Created CTI ports and then some applications including AA application. But when calling from my soft phone to the Trigger, its getting disconnected after 5 seconds. I am not able to hear the prompt also.
Checked and started all the services and resynced all the applications and finally installed CUCM and UCCX again but still the same issue is happening.
Please give some valuable inputs.
Regards..

Hi
You should probably try a debug of the script. Run Script Editor and make sure you log in. The do Debug/Reactive Script, and enter SSCRIPT[aa.aef] in the top box, and 60 in the bottom box.
Then dial the AA.
One of several things should happen:
1) Nothing at all - in this case the system can't run the AA script, and you'll have to look at the logs to find out why.
2) The script will appear, and you can step through it by pressing F10 and see what the script does in real time. As you step through the steps, if you go past a Play Prompt and still get silence, then it might reach a point where it decides you aren't responding and hangs up on you
3) You might get an error in the script
Report back what happens...
Also:
1) What language configuration do you have on the system?
2) If you press the ? key on a 79xx twice quicky during the 5 second call, do you see rx packets increasing?
Aaron

Cucme and cucm with aim-cue

Hi all, I just want to know if AIM-CUE can work with cucme and cucm 8.0?
Because based on this matrix Cisco Unity Express Compatibility Matrix [Cisco Unity Express] - Cisco Systems
It says that it is supported, but CUE (AIM-CUE Module) should have a version of 7.2 or 7.3 to support cucme 8.x and cucm 8.x
Can anyone confirm this because aim-cue is the cheapest among the CUE cisco offers. Thanks!

That's what I read, having cue 7.2 or 7.3 will let you use cucme/cucm 8.x
When you say "there will not be any new firmware release on the old aim-cue", Does that mean that cue version 7.3 will be the last firmware version to be released on the old aim-cue that will support cucme/cucm 8.x? Future versions of cucme/cucm (version 9) will not be supported by the old aim-cue?

CUCME and CUCM Licensing

I would like to know how to register the licenses ordered for IP Phones to be registered and uploaded
in to CUCME and CUCM.
I searched a lot of documents but cant find out a proper answer. Could someone help me out on this issue, as I am having 2 projects, 1 with CUCME and 1 with CUCM. The customer have ordered for Licenses, but i dont know how to register it.
Please help

No, the whole process really is what I've written above. The license file is purchasesd from Cisco, but once you have that file there is no further involvement with Cisco, it's all done on the CUCM.
You license the CUCM to accept a certain number of devices, and then as you add phones to the CUCM the license totals will go down.
The licenses are in units. So say you apply a license file that contains 1000 units. If you look in the License Calculator, it will tell you how many units each type of phone would use up.
Every time you add a phone (or sometimes a feature such as Mobility) it will use up a certain number of units as shown in the Calculator, and if you ever remove that phone later (say because it needs replaced because of a fault or for a newer model), the units are returned. So for example, a Cisco 7945 IP phone takes up 4 units each, whereas a 7975 uses up 5 units each.
Once you run out of units it won't let you add any more phones until you either remove some devices to get the units back, or you apply more units.

CUCM 10.5(1) and Unity Connection 9.1(2) compatibility

I'm planning to use PCD to migrate my MCS Call Manager 8.0(3) cluster to 10.5(1) early next week. I have a standalone 9.1(2) Unity Connection server and I'm reading conflicting information on Cisco's website about their compatibility. One page says they are compatible (http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/connection/compatibility/matrix/cucsccpmtx.html#46452) and another page says I have to upgrade Unity Connection to at least 10.0 (http://tools.cisco.com/ITDIT/vtgsca/VTGServlet). Can someone clarify this for me please?
If Unity Connection 9.1(2) is incompatible with CUCM 10.5(1) and I need to upgrade it, which procedure should I do first - or if they can safely be done at the same time. If I do Call Manager first, will Unity Connection be "dead in the water" until I get it upgraded?
Thanks in advance!
Lisa

That's very good news. Thank you very much, Jaime, for your speedy reply. You are truly an asset to this community!
If I do upgrade CUC at the same time and both CUCM (pub and sub) and CUC (standalone) are at 10.5(1), where would you host PLM? Right now I have ELM co-located on my CUC server. Our voice environment is reasonably small - less than 400 voice mail accounts and roughly 450 phones.
Also, can I upgrade CUC at the same time PCD is migrating my CUCM cluster or should this be done at a different time?
Thank you again!
Lisa

CUCM 6.1.5 and CUCM 9.1 Call Recording CODEC Issue

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for