Call-forward/call-transfer problem cisco CME

Answered Question
May 15th, 2007

Hi

i have set up an router with callmanager express 3.1 witch is connected to a sip service provider via a sip trunk, ingoing and outgoing calls work just fine but when i try to forward calls i can only use full-consult as transfer-system, and i want to use blind or full-blind.

internally it works with both blind and consult but when i try to transfer a call from the outside to an other internal phone with full-blind it just hangs up.

I see that it sends a sip refer message to the provider and gets a error message back (405 method not allowed) when i use full-blind as transfer-system. but with full-consult that works it doesnt...?

does it really need to contact the sip provider to foward a call from one internal phone to an other?

i think its because of this problem that i can?t get call-forward noa and busy to work either...

hope someone can help me with this annoying problem...

here is my relevant config:

voice service voip

allow-connections h323 to h323

allow-connections h323 to sip

allow-connections sip to h323

allow-connections sip to sip

supplementary-service h450.12

redirect ip2ip

sip

bind control source-interface Loopback0

bind media source-interface Loopback0

registrar server expires max 1500 min 500

voice translation-rule 1

rule 1 /^0/ //

!

voice translation-rule 3

rule 1 /^4/ /004/

!

voice translation-rule 1000

rule 1 /\(^7...\)/ /******nr*******/

!

!

voice translation-profile 100

translate calling 1000

!

voice translation-profile PROFILE1

translate called 1

!

voice translation-profile PROFILE3

translate called 3

dial-peer voice 1 voip

description OUTGOING CALLS

translation-profile outgoing PROFILE1

service session

destination-pattern 0T

voice-class codec 1

session protocol sipv2

session target sip-server

dtmf-relay rtp-nte

clid restrict

clid restrict

no vad

supplementary-service h450.12

!

dial-peer voice 2 voip

description OUTGOING CALLS +4

translation-profile outgoing PROFILE3

service session

destination-pattern 4.........

voice-class codec 1

session protocol sipv2

session target sip-server

dtmf-relay rtp-nte

clid restrict

clid restrict

no vad

supplementary-service h450.12

!

gateway

timer receive-rtp 1200

!

sip-ua

max-forwards 30

registrar ipv4:******IP***expires 3600

registrar ipv4:******IP*** expires 3600 tcp secondary

sip-server ipv4:******IP***

!

!

!

telephony-service

max-ephones 10

max-dn 150

ip source-address 192.168.0.1 port 2000

auto assign 1 to 4

auto assign 50 to 70

calling-number local

timeouts interdigit 5

system message ********

url services http://phone-xml.berbee.com/menu.xml

network-locale NO

create cnf-files version-stamp 7960 May 15 2007 08:57:31

dialplan-pattern 1 ****nr***.... extension-length 4

dialplan-pattern 2 ****nr***... extension-length 3

max-conferences 4

call-forward pattern .T

dn-webedit

time-webedit

transfer-system full-blind

transfer-pattern .T

secondary-dialtone 0

//Kristoffer

Correct Answer by Paolo Bevilacqua about 9 years 9 months ago
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 4.5 (3 ratings)
Loading.
Paolo Bevilacqua Tue, 05/15/2007 - 04:50

Hi,

the thing is that older CME like your, will always contact the SIP provider for transfers, even as you noted, that would not be necessary.

If you upgrade to CME 4.0 or 4.1 there is a new command "no supplementary-service sip moved-temporarily" that will avoid the above. Please see CME documentation about this.

Hope this helps, please rate post if it does!

krille_com Tue, 05/15/2007 - 05:06

I will try cme 4 as soon as a get a new router, it seems that the 1841 doesnt support CME 4.0... at least not if the feature navigator is right.

thanks for your quick answer!

Paolo Bevilacqua Tue, 05/15/2007 - 05:46

No the 1841 does not support CME. Even for older CME, seems like that on 1841, the feature was there by mistake as it has never been advertised.

As a courtesy to those providing answers, please rate all useful posts using the scrollbox below!

Actions

This Discussion