High Traffic on IP Phones

Unanswered Question
Sep 18th, 2007

Hi Nettech

I have a problem where the message "High Traffic Call Try Your Again Later" is being displayed on the IP Phones, whenever this happens there is a delay in dialling a number or selecting a line to dial you get a 10 - 15 secs. delay. I crave your help in this matter.

Mesdean

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.

Whenever the CallManager service parameter LowPriorityQueueThrottlingFlag = TRUE and the LP queue is over the limit specified by the CallManager Service Parameter LowPriorityQueueThrottlingMaxCount, then the message 'High Traffic Try Again Later' will be displayed on the LCD of any IP phone registered to this server attempting to go offhook and make a new call.

When you begin seeing "High Traffic, Try again later" on the phones, then note the time and take a look at the SDL\CCM traces during that time. Look for the LP queue getting backed up. By default, this message will be displayed on the phone if the LP queue gets deeper than 20 signals

sjcarroll Tue, 02/19/2008 - 10:21

Has anyone seen this message on version 4.x? The LowPriorityQueueThrottlingFlag doesn't appear under the CallManager Service Parameter in this version but we're seeing the above message along with no dial tone.

pbosio Wed, 03/05/2008 - 13:43

Has anybody seen this message in CUCM 6.1

Again, the LowPriorityQueueThrottlingFlag doesn't appear under the CallManager Service Parameter in this version but we're seeing the above message along with no dial tone.

abcronin Tue, 03/11/2008 - 13:20

I have a customer running 6.0 and they see this message 4-5 times a day, never saw it before on 4.1.......is it still an issue in your environment?

I am about to log a tac case.

cheers

andy

pbosio Tue, 03/11/2008 - 17:12

The site hasn't gone live yet but yes I believe its still happening.

Let us know how you get on with the TAC and your case number so I can reference when I get around to logging a call.

a.gooding Thu, 10/28/2010 - 08:24

Was this ever resolved? im having the same issue on a CUCM 7.X implementation. appreciate some insight into the issue and what was done to resolve.

thanks in advance

Actions

This Discussion