Local Route Groups vs translation to E.164

Hello.
Can anybody describe local route groups benefits compared to dialplan with translations to E.164?
Let's see simple scenario. I have 3 sites - MSK, SPB and NSK. All site has phones and a gateway, each site has it's partition for termination (TERM-MSK, TERM-SPB, TERM-NSK) and a partition for translation (XLAT-MSK, XLAT-SPB, XLAT-NSK). There are 2 CSS for translation and termination for each site (CSS-X-MSK, CSS-X-SPB, CSS-X-NSK, CSS-TERM-MSK, CSS-TERM-SPB and CSS-TERM-NSK). All phones has a translation CSS local to it's site configured, for example phones at MSK has CSS-X-MSK in phone configuration. There are translation patterns for translating dialed off-net numbers to E.164 format (7495XXXXXXX for MSK, 7812XXXXXXX for SPB and 7383XXXXXXX for NSK). Subscribers uses 9 for local off-net calls and 90 for long-distance, there are 2 translation patterns with corresponding XLAT partition and CSS-TERM CSS (9.[1-9]XXXXXX -> 7495 prefix plus XXXXXXX and 90.[1-9]XXXXXXXXX -> 7 plus XXXXXXXXXX, partition XLAT-MSK, CSS CSS-TERM-MSK for MSK). CSS-X CSSes has corresponding XLAT partition only. CSS-TERM CSSes has allowed TERM patitions. Each route pattern has corresponding TERM partition and points to single route list with single route group. Finally I have 3 route patterns 3 route lists, 3 route groups, 6 partitions and 6 CSSes total).
Using Local Route Groups I have the same 3 route patterns, 3 route lists and 3 route groups but one partition and one CSS. Pros for this scheme is less partitions and CSSes. Cons is the loss of flexibility (I can't allow calls to anywhere from MSK and only MSK and NSK for NSK and can't use different prefixes for off-net calls for each office).
Have I understood the Features and Services Guide rignt? Is there other way to translate dialed off-net number to E.164 without using extra partitions and CSSes (Translatio Pattern requires this)?

Maxim,
Local Route Groups have not dependency on e.164 dial plan and vice-versa, there are independent features. Local Route groups allow you to consolidate your route patterns/route lists/CSS/PT, depending on complexity of your routing you can accomplish all your remote site routing via a common set of route patterns/list CSS/partitions, so routing decisions are based on local route groups assigned to device pool of the calling device rather than just the CSS. E.164 dial plan is merely a way to structure dialed numbers, how and where you transform them is up to you, I prefer using transformation patterns vs. translation patterns for example.
HTH,
Chris

Similar Messages

CUCM 10.5 Local Route Group

When utilizing the local route group for a device pool, when a change is made for that device pool, does a reset of the devices have to occur for the changes to go into affect? The reason I ask is if you are simply making the change to the Route List there is no interruption to the end users, but what if a location's Long Distance is pointing to a Route List that references a Local Route Group. If you want move that to another route group under the device pool is there any impact on the phones in that device pool?
Thanks,
Joe

So What you ask is if you modified the route list (change the actual local route Group for other route group) will reset the phones ? as far as I now no change on rl will reset phone but change on dp will..

UCCX Redirect Step and Local Route Groups

Hello,
CUCM 9.1.2
UCCX 9.0
I have come across a situation in one of our UCCX scripts with the call redirect step where it is forwarded to a local cell phone for after hours calls. The number in the Call Redirect step is 9, followed by the 10-digit number of the cell.
While the call does redirect successfully from the UCCX script, the call always uses the local route group of the original calling party's device. So, if the call from an IP Phone to the cell is going out the gateway where the cell number is a local call, the 9 followed by the 10 digit number works fine.
If it's a site across the WAN, the call redirect to the cell fails because it's using LRG of the calling party's phone and thus it needs to be a long distance call.
I kind of thought the Service Parameter Local route group for redirected calls being set to "Local route group of last redirecting party" might have addressed this, like it did for call forward all situations, but it does not seem to be the case.
Would the recommendation be to use Call Consult Transfer instead of the Call Redirect step? This seems to work, but was wondering if there were other ways to approach it.
Thanks for your help,
Frank

Hi Anthony,
Thanks for the reply. The Call Consult Transfer step did resolve my issue, so now the call is always coming from the local site and using the LRG of the DP of the CTI ports. I previously had it set up using the Call Redirect step in the script with 9 followed by the 10-digit number, and thus it was kind of not working when calling over the WAN from remote sites.
I should have mentioned that we recently did an CUCM / CCX upgrade. In CUCM, all call restrictions were previously done at the device level, nothing on the line. Now we have the line doing the call restrictions. So the Call Redirect step worked fine in the old environment with the 10-digit number, not so much in the new.
But I like your suggestion about +E164 even better, since we rolled that into the upgrade as well. I tried putting the full +E164 number in the script using the Call Redirect step. Works perfectly from all sites.
Thanks for your help.
Frank

TEHO with Local Routing Group

Hi,
I was watching an online training video of setting TEHO using Local Routing Group on CUCM 8.6. However somehow I think he configured it wrong.
In his example,
He used a centralized call processing infrastructure for NY (hosts the CUCM) and CA offices. NY and CA router groups are created to contain local gateways respecitively and also assigned to corresponding device pool. When configuring Route List for the remote patterns (Pattern to reach CA numbers from NY, vice versa), he only created one RL for both patterns and only added the Standard Local Route Group to the RL… Then wrap up the configure.
To me, in order to make TEHO work, there should be one RL for each location (one for NY and one for CA) and the NY route group needs to be added into the CA RL and CA Route group needs to be added into NY RL and both RL has SLRG as secondary option.
Am I crazy or the video did it wrong...

Good catch, with what is described here, when someone in CA calls a number in CA, the CA route list would be matched and the route list would be selected which contains Standard Local Route Group (SLRG) and the device pool for CA would be checked and the CA route group would be selected. That works as expected. Now if a CA phone calls a NY number, the route pattern would be matched, the route list the route pattern points to would be SLRG, so the device pool of the originating device would be checked. The CA device pool being that a CA phone placed the call would be checked for the local route group and that would be set for a CA route group, so the call would go out of a CA gateway.
What usually is done is that the route list for TEHO for the CA phone would contain, the NY route group and then SLRG in that order. That way the call would be extended to NY first out their local gateway for TEHO and then extended to the CA local gateway if the NY gateway fails. For NY to CA TEHO, the CA route group would be added to another route list, this time with the CA gateway first in the list followed by SLRG.

Matching Route Patterns with standard Local Route group and Specific Route Group

Hi
I have a customer with CUCM 8.6 with few branches
couple of branches in UK and few in Europe and middle east.
I configured route patterns with Standard local route group, but using their own Voice gateway, everything was working fine until adding the recent branch with matching pattern
UK has a mobile pattern with 9.07XXXXXXXXX (11 digits)
One Branch has a mobile with 9.07XXXXXXXX (10 digits)
When branch call 907X..(10digit) number there was a delay and I ticked the Urgent priority to process it quicker, but later realized the UK branch cannot dial 907x.. (11Digit) mobile.
I created Route List for branch and added the 10 digit pattern to that but still the UK cannot call 11 digit. so i believe when you call out it will check the pattern first and the Route-List and Route-Group and gateway play a part.
Is there a way to get 07 -10digit call out quickly also allowing the 07 -11digit pattern as well ( without changing the T302 timer)
Really appreciate your support
thanks
shameer

Yes, they key to managing overlapping centralized dial plans is to be really good with patterns, partitions, and CSSs. You can have 3 different 9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXXX patterns and assign them a different partition, and then assign that to the branch CSS. This will only work if each Branch has a different CSS.
For example:
9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXXX @ Egypt-PT ->Routes to Local route group of Egypt.
9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXX @ UK-PT -> Routes to Local route group of UK
9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXX @ Germany-PT -> Routes to Local Route group of Germany.
//PT = partition//
Then have Egypt-CSS that contains 9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXXX @ Egypt-PT.
UK-CSS contains 9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXX @ UK-PT
Germany- CSS contains 9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXX @ UK-PT
The other patterns will be invisible to your sites because they are in a different partition that is not in their CSS. 2 overlapping patterns in the same PT will cause you to wait for the inter-digit timeout unless you press #.
Thanks,
Frank

MGCP/Standard Local Route Group List question

Hello all,
Here is the scenario:
Site A - CUCM Pub/Sub / MGCP gateway
Site B - CUCM Sub / MGCP gateway
Site C - CUCM Sub / MGCP gateway
The sites are using the standard local route group with TEHO per location. Site A (HQ) has s discount carrier for LD, and therefore it would be cost effective to backhaul the LD from Site B and Site C to the Site A PRIs.
Can this be accomplished while using Standard Local Route Groups or is it necessary to go back to site specific routing?
Thanks,
JN

In CUCM 9 and older you can only have a single local route group per device pool (this changed on version 10), so you will either have to define the Local or LD RG as your Local Route group and then use standard route patterns/route lists/route group configuration for the other calls, so at site B you would have (assuming local route group is local trunks):
Local Pattern --> Standard Local RL
911 pattern --> Standard Local RL
LD pattern --> SiteB LD RL
Intl pattern --> SiteB LD RL
etc
HTH,
Chris

Utilizing the Standard Local Route Group with CER

Hello,
I'm running UCM 7.1(2) and recently a contractor we brought in to install our CER 7.0(1) created a very signicicant amount of Calling Search Spaces, Route Patterns, Partitions, Route Lists and Route Groups in an effort to route calls from our 6 sites (we are centrilized with one Publisher and 6 suscribers) out the correct gateway towards the correct PSAP.
I took the contractor's word that we needed to make such drastic additions and now I belive I made the wrong choice. We already have a Route List (PSTN_RL) that includes:
1)Standard Local Route Group
2) XX_RG (the backup RG)
3) XX_RG (another backup RG)
Most of my Directory Numbers (DN) and the Primary CER Route Point belong to one Partition (PhoneLines_PT) and I would like all the calls from the Directory Numbers associated with the PhoneLines_PT to be routed via the Route List that utilizes the Standard Local Route Group (PSTN_RL) and maintain that CER is able to "see" 911 calls.
Can anyone tell me if I I change the PSTN_RL (Standard Local RG) associated Route Pattern Partitions to the PhoneLines_PT, will all Directory Numbers associated with the PhoneLines_PT route calls over the PSTN_RL?
I guess I am trying to wrap a sort of reverse implementation "around my head."
Thanks in advance for you time.

Partition and Calling Search Space (CSS) are closely related but always confused.
Good examples are:
Line A and Line B in the same partition doesn't necessarily mean Line A can call Line B.
Phone A and Phone B have the same CSS doesn't necessarily mean Phone A can call Phone B.
Now back to the topic of LRG (Local Route Group). A good use case would be 911 calls. We always want 911 calls to be routed through local gateway so it can reach local PSAP. Without LRG, you'll have to configure multiple 911 patterns (in different partitions) so you can assoicate them with different gateways. With LRG, you just need one 911 route pattern. Of couse that route pattern should be accessible by everyone. To make it simple, you may put it in null partition.
Michael
http://htluo.blogspot.com

Is RTMT can monitor when the first Route Group of a Route List is not used ?

Hi everyone,
I want to find how monitor this event in RTMT without success. I hope someone will have an idea to suggest !
My problem :
I have one Route List (RL_Remote) wich is used to route calls between two sites. This Route List has two Route Group :
- the first is a SIP trunk connected to my remote site (RG_SIP)
- the second is a local route group wich used PSTN (RG_PSTN) [BACKUP]
Is it possible that RTMT sends me an alarm when calls are routing via RL_Remote but are not using RG_SIP ?
In fact, I want to receive an alarm as soon as the Backup Route Group (RG_PSTN in my example) is used.
Thanks for your help !
Have a nice day,
Franck-Emanuel

More or less correct yes:
Core Issue
This issue can occur if an available route is not found in the indicated route list.
If the call fails on the current gateway, Cisco CallManager attempts to extend the call to the next route in the route list. This occurs until it reaches the last route. If the call cannot be completed with the last gateway, the Route List Exhausted event is logged.
These are possible reasons for a failure on the current gateway:
Unallocated number, such as a non-existing destination
Busy user
Out of bandwidth
Gateway fails to respond to the call setup request
The user receives alerts similar to this in the Real-Time Monitoring Tool (RTMT):
Most Recent Alert Raised: At 09:19:27 on 12/21/2005 on cluster CALLMANAGER1-Cluster. Number of RouteListExhausted events exceed 0 within 60 minutes.
There are at least five RouteListExhausted events (up to 30) received during the monitoring interval from 09:07:27, 12/21/2005 to 10:07:27, 12/21/2005.
https://supportforums.cisco.com/docs/DOC-29032

Currency Translation from local to group currency in AP /AR

Hi Gurus,
I have reporting requiremtents where in i need to show KF;s in local and group currency. I am using standard extractor AP_4 and AR_4. These extractors does not bring KF's in Group currency but only in local and document currency.
Can anyone tell me what is the best way to go about carrying out the currency translation from local to glocal currency for AP and AR.
Thanks in advance and yeah points guranteed for helpful answers...
Cheers..
Sam

I take it you mean the extra currency in the company code config (ie group reporting)
Just unhide the fields DMBE2 and HWAE2 from the extract structure and allocate a new infoobject to them - then add to eith your transformation or transfer rules/update rules and add to the cube

Realized exchange rate difference in local and group currency

Hi Friends,
For a company code with local currency as Euro and group currency as USD, the setting in TR code OB22 for group currency is: Translation taking first local currency as a basis. When the open items are cleared, SAP posts difference in local currency and group currency. Sometimes, document currency is also group currency i.e. USD. The realized exchange difference is posted in Euro but it is not converted from Euro to group currency. Instead, system just calculates difference in group currency by comparing the value in group currency at the time of original transaction and when the transaction is cleared. Does anyone have dealt with such requirement and is there a way to be able to translate realized exchange differences from local to group currency?
Thanks and regards,
Pinky

>Sometimes, document currency is also group currency i.e. USD.
Can you explain, it's because of your settings or because of SAP?

Removing old exchange 2003 routing groups from Exchange 2010.

I have migrated over to Exchange 2010(server2008) from Exchange 2003(SBS2003). I've also already run the uninstall for exchange 2003 on the old SBS 2003 server. The old server itself is still running but exchange has been removed and once I get this fixed
I plan to fully remove the old SBS server.
I now get event ID 5020 and 5006 throughout the day on the new server. From what I've read, this happens because the old routing group connectors still exist.
If I run Get-ExchangeServer I get
Name                Site                 ServerRole Edition     AdminDisplayVersion
SERVER                                   None
Standard    Version 6.5 (Bui...
SERVER2008          hr.local/Configur... Mailbox,... Standard    Version 14.0 (Bu...
Am I correct in assuming that the way to fix this now is to go into ADSI edit and delete records under CN=First Administrative Groups? As in delete CN=Routing Groups and CN=Servers and everything under both of those? I'd try this myself but I'm not aware
of any way to restore those records easily if I'm wrong.
Event ID 5006
Cannot find route to Mailbox Server CN=SERVER,CN=Servers,CN=first administrative group,CN=Administrative Groups,CN=HR,CN=Microsoft Exchange,CN=Services,CN=Configuration,DC=hr,DC=local for store CN=Public Folder Store (SERVER),CN=First Storage Group,CN=InformationStore,CN=SERVER,CN=Servers,CN=first
administrative group,CN=Administrative Groups,CN=HR,CN=Microsoft Exchange,CN=Services,CN=Configuration,DC=hr,DC=local in routing tables with timestamp 27/09/2014 1:57:43 PM. Recipients will not be routed to this store.
Event ID 5020The topology doesn't contain a route to Exchange 2000 Server or Exchange Server 2003 server.hr.local in Routing Group CN=first routing group,CN=Routing Groups,CN=first administrative group,CN=Administrative
Groups,CN=HR,CN=Microsoft Exchange,CN=Services,CN=Configuration,DC=hr,DC=local in routing tables with the timestamp 27/09/2014 1:57:43 PM.

Get-RoutingGroupConnector shows nothing. As for the servers group. It has the old server under it as shown in the image I posted above. That's actually what stops me from just deleting it because other guides have said not to delete it if an old server
is listed.
Is the SBS2003 server listed because I haven't ran DCPROMO to remove it from the network yet? I am planning to do this but was waiting till I cleaned up all the errors before transferring the 5 FMSO roles and running DCPROMO on the old server.
DCPROMO isn't related to this, no.
So you removed Exchange already? How? With setup? It should have removed the Exchange Server object then.
It is supported to remove Exchange 2003 manually if required with adsiedit:
http://support2.microsoft.com/kb/833396
Twitter!: Please Note: My Posts are provided “AS IS” without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied.

Removing a transportserver from a routing group

Hi, we are currently changing from 2 x 2003 servers to 1 x 2010 server
FOXGLOVE - SBS2003
PINE - Server 2003 with Exchange 2003
APPLE - Server 2012 with Exchange 2013.
We have moved public folder replica's\mailboxes off PINE, and came to uninstall exchange from PINE, but it popped up that it couldn't be done as it was a remote bridgehead
When i look on System Manager on the 2003 server, the routing group connector "2k32k10" shows FOXGLOVE & PINE as remote bridgheads. (but they cannot be removed from here (new version of exchange)
So looking on 2010
Name SourceRoutingGroup TargetRoutingGroup
2k32k10 first routing group Exchange Routing Group (DWBGZMFD01QNBJR)
2k32k10 Exchange Routing Group (DWBGZMFD01QNBJR) first routing group
also running "Get-Routinggroupconnector | fl" shows the pine server listed in "targettransportservers"
targettransportservers : {PINE, FOXGLOVE}
I searched and found the command to set the target transport server:
[PS] C:\Windows\system32>Set-RoutingGroupConnector -Identity "2k32k10" -TargetTransportServers "FOXGLOVE"
The operation couldn't be performed because '2k32k10' matches multiple entries.
+ CategoryInfo : NotSpecified: (0:Int32) [Set-RoutingGroupConnector], ManagementObjectAmbiguousException
+ FullyQualifiedErrorId : 52C67F2B,Microsoft.Exchange.Management.SystemConfigurationTasks.SetRoutingGroupConnector
So instead I used the guid
[PS] C:\Windows\system32>Set-RoutingGroupConnector -Identity "bcf647c9-aa29-430c-80e9-4adc43240e3b" -TargetTransportServ
ers "FOXGLOVE"
Target servers can't be in the same routing group as the source servers. The source servers belong to the routing group
: 'first routing group'.
+ CategoryInfo : InvalidOperation: (2k32k10:RoutingGroupConnector) [Set-RoutingGroupConnector], SendConne
ctorSo...nOneRgException
+ FullyQualifiedErrorId : 39024363,Microsoft.Exchange.Management.SystemConfigurationTasks.SetRoutingGroupConnector
+ PSComputerName : apple.phoenix.local
Im now a bit stumped.
Basically FOXGLOVE needs to stay working with APPLE, but PINE needs to be removed.
Any help?
Thanks

Hi Garry,
Agree with Dare's suggestion. You can run the following cmdlet to remove the routing group connector between Exchange 2010 routing group and Exchange 2003 routing group at first.
Remove-RoutingGroupConnector -Identity "xxx" -DomainController xx.xx.xx
What's more, here are some helpful threads for your reference.
Remove-RoutingGroupConnector
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa998645(v=exchg.141).aspx
You cannot remove a server that is a bridgehead for a routing group connector
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/exchange/en-US/ea872977-ec59-417d-9d7a-e2a5840e98ba/you-cannot-remove-a-server-that-is-a-bridgehead-for-a-routing-group-connector
Changing Routing Group Connector Bridgehead
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/exchange/en-US/c397e275-9c25-421e-898f-11dbea5f25e3/changing-routing-group-connector-bridgehead
Hope it helps.
If there are any problems, please feel free to let me know.
Best regards,
Amy
Amy Wang
TechNet Community Support

Create Routing Groups using BAPI_ROUTING_CREATE Limitation?

Hi all,
I am doing a conversion for the routing groups for PP. The routing groups include sequence, operation number, material assigned and component allocation.
In this project, the BOM size of the material is super huge, thus to ease the conversion. I have used Function module to download the BOM structure and then allow user to maintain manually the operation and sequence. After that I will use BAPI BAPI_ROUTING_CREATE to do the conversion.
And I manage to get all operation, sequences, material assigned and component allocated. However, I face a problem as the BOM size keep increasing and same material BOM might be assigned to different header BOM at the same time. Thus, key field such as level and path is important for the input.
Note: Please check the order path in CA03, the technical name is STPOB-WEGXX1 with attribute type DEC length 4.
In my case, the Order Path is more than 99... around few hundreds.... But the issue is the order path field used in the BAPI_ROUTING_CREATE: BAPI1012_COM_C-ORDER_PATH is only has attribute type NUMC length 2.
Either I get a short dump by passing in the order path, or I might miss out the some component allocation using the BAPI. Anyone faces this before? Please advise.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Vin

Hi Vivek,
I got this reply from SAP.
ORDER_LVL and ORDER_PATH need not be filled, but PATH has to be
filled with the KANTE values.
The logic to calculate path value is the same as the kante value.
(PATH)
A (N) 0
-> B (P) 1
-> B1(N) 1
-> B2(P) 2
-> C (P) 3
-> C1 (N) 3
-> C2 (P) 4
N- normal item P- phantom
Note 305919 details this.
However, it quite confuses me as I read through sapnote 305919 : It seems like what is been replied from SAP does not really correct.
Symptom
You want to create component allocations to phantom assemblies using batch or direct input. In order to uniquely identify the phantom assembly, you must enter the level and the path. This note describes how the SAP System assigns the level and the path.
Thus, I will continue to check with SAP. I think this is the inconsistency of the database and the BAPI, correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks a lot.
Regards,
Vin

CUCM 10.5 - Order of trunks in Route Group ignored...Not sure why

Question #1
I've had a voice mail pilot number working for a long time now. It's MS Unified Messaging (MS UM for short). Since we have more than one MS UM server, I thought I'd go ahead and create a SIP trunk for each of the MS UM servers and then put them in the existing Route Group (RG). I thought I'd go ahead and reorder the trunk groups listed in the RG just to be sure my configure for the new trunk groups was correct. I have the SIP Options Ping enabled in my SIP profile and I do see all the MS UM SIP trunks with a status of 'Full Service'. Anyway, if I place one of the newly added SIP trunks for MS UM at the top of the existing RG, my calls are still ending up at the original MS UM server. It's like CUCM is ignoring the fact that I placed the new SIP trunk at the top and it keeps routing to the old/existing SIP trunks/MS UM server I had in this RG. I tried resetting the SIP trunks and also reset the Route List (which I didn't think I'd need to do, but I did it anyway) and the result is the same. It won't select the new SIP trunks no matter what I try.
I didn't try removing the original SIP trunk from that RG yet and I don't want to do it during the business day, but I could try that after hours and see what happens then.
Any ideas about why it won't use the new SIP trunks even though they're in service and at the top of the RG list (higher priority), above the original SIP trunk? My RG is set for top down, not circular.
Question #2:
Here's a somewhat related question. (screenshot attached for this one) I first thought I could simply go to the original SIP trunk and add the other IP addresses for the ofther MS UM servers so I wouldn't need to create more SIP trunk groups for this. Maybe I'm understanding it wrong, so please enlighten me what these fields are really used for. On the SIP trunk page, there's a SIP Information section and that's where you add the IP address of the device CUCM is talking to (Destination). For example, the MS UM server. Was I wrong to assume that if the SIP trunks would be identical in their config you can simply add the other IP addresses for the alternate MS UM servers here in this section of the SIP trunks page? What exactly would the extra IP address fields be used for (when you click + to added another address)?
As soon as I added a second IP address, my calls to MS UM stopped working. After I removed the second IP (which is for an alternate MS UM server), everything started working again. Just curious how that IP address field should really be used. For now, I simply created new SIP trunk groups for the other MS UM servers.
Thanks :-)

Hello,
For me both questions are related, and I expect a communication issue between CUCM and the new MS UM server.
I would like to start with the 2nd question as it answers both, the below is mentioned in the admin guide of CUCM 8.5 but no much explanation was added to the admin guide of 10.0:
"•When an outbound call gets placed, a destination address gets chosen randomly. No preference is given to one destination address over another. All SIP messages that are sent out for a given outbound call go to the same destination address.
•The SIP trunk accepts inbound messages from any of the configured destination addresses."
The above answers your inquiry, redundancy cannot be achieved by configuring multiple destinations. And calls are dropped when you add the new ip address within the same trunk, because it was chosen but the CUCM was not able to communicate with it, and also this explains why the new MS UM server trunk was not selected in the RG, as CUCM also was not able to communicate with it and moved to the next member in the RG (i.e. the old MS UM).
- Can you try to ping the new MS UM server from CUCM server, SSH to CUCM server and issue the following command: utils network ping IP_ADDRESS_OF_NEW_MS_UM
- It can be that the new MS UM server is configured to accept only SIP UDP messages, can you try changing it from the SIP security Profile?
If the above two suggestions did not help to isolate the issue, then we need detailed CCM logs covering test outgoing call together with the IP addresses of both MS UM servers.
Thank you,
Shadi

Active Directory users not made member of Local Network group

Hi all,
I've just done a clean install from 10.6 Server to 10.8.4.
The issue I seem to be having is a mismatch between what Groups in Server.app is reporting as members (who happen to be users or groups from our Active Directory domains) of a Local Network group and what dseditgroup reports as members of the same network.
The Setup:
In Groups in Server.app under Local Network Group I have created a group call "AccessServer"
Members in that group are:
     - AD-Domain User Group (so should be all users in the domain)
     - MacOS X "netaccounts" group (again, should capture all users that connect through the network I've used this in the past/10.6 very handy)
     - AD User 1
     - AD User 2
     - AD User 3
The Server is bound to the AD Domain, All-Domains is not selected and a Search Path is added for each Domain needed and set at the top of the search order.
The Behaviour:
AD User 1 can access AFP and other services as expected.
AD User 2 and 3 cannot.
Another user within AD-Domain User Group or netaccounts can access AFP and other services as expected
Yet other users within AD-Domain User Group or netaccounts cannot
Furthermore:
If I REMOVE AD User 1 (a working user) *and* the AD Domain Group and netaccounts Group. I can still login with that account!
Diagnosis:
I tried checking group membership with dseditgroup, the results match the behaviour, not the setup.
>dseditgroup -o checkmember -m ADUser1 accessserver
yes ADUser1 is a member of accessserver
>dseditgroup -o checkmember -m ADUser2 accessserver
no ADUser2 is NOT member of accessserver
>dseditgroup -o checkmember -m ADDomainUser/netacc accessserver
yes ADDomainUser/netacc is a member of accessserver
>dseditgroup -o checkmember -m n accessserver
no ADUser2 is NOT member of accessserver
When non-member users try to connect I get a message in the logs of (IP/DNS values anonymized):
2013-06-25 3:04:36.794 PM sshd[5217]: error: PAM: authentication error for illegal user ----- from ----.mala.bc.ca via x.x.
I get the same results even after removing the user from the Groups screen!
Failed Solutions
- As we are a large AD I've tried specifying specific Active Direcotry servers that might better be able to find the users in question and authenticate.
- I've let the system just sit, in hopes delayed replication would solve the problem overnight.
- I've deleted and recreated the groups.

Upon further investigation we have discovered:
a) the main behaviour that is causing the problem is best described as AD users that are added to a Local or Network OS X group... either individually or through a Domain group.... are not actually recognized as members of that OS X group even though the GUI or CLI tool have added them and acknowledge them as being in the list.
b) This is NOT limited only to MacOS X Server 10.8. The same behaviour is occuring on a long-running 10.6 server as well.
c) The problem remains whether we nest AD groups to capture a large bunch of users, or add users individually. If the user is part of the mysteriously denied set, how they are added to the OD or local group is irrelevant, including if added from the command line.
d) Which users are allowed and which are not is unclear and appears generally random. We have found 3 'classes' of users:
          1 - those that are successfully becoming members every time.
          2 - those that are intermittent members. Members on one server or another, or in one case even go from being reported as a member (by dseditgroup), to not being a member, to being a member again within the span of only a minute or two.
          3 - those that are never successfully admitted as a member.
So the problem is both Apple's and Windows in that:
Apple: Is allowing a group and/or user to be added and implying then membership in the group even though that membership is not being honoured in some way and there is no feedback or communication of that fact aside from generic 'denied' or 'illegal user' errors.
Windows: Is passing along membership through its groups and users, but not completely, for reasons that are, at this point, a mystery.
Really hoping people have some ideas on this. This system of nested groups or individual user access is something we have of course being using for many years. So this is a major setback.

Local Route Groups vs translation to E.164

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for