Confusion on UC320W Setup - Need Clarification

Unanswered Question
Sep 26th, 2011
User Badges:
  • Gold, 750 points or more
  • Cisco Designated VIP,

    2013 Small Business

Hi Cisco Team,


Steaming from a problem that arose yesterday on a UC-320W I had logged a support ticket on a non-responsive system for incoming calls, this resulted today in a reconfiguration of how the system functions, which has left me in a state of confusion and am struggling to resolve if I had originally setup the UC-320W incorrectly or if the current setup (As a result from the SBCS session) is the right method or just another way of doing things.


Original setup:


  • 2X FXO lines
  • 1X Shared FXO setup
  • 1X Member (Reception phone) to the share FXO group
  • Setup in Blended Mode
  • Button 1: Reception Button
  • Button 2: Line-1
  • Button 3: Line-2
  • Button 4: Force Night Mode
  • Remaining buttons watching other extensions


Call Routing:


  • Call comes into Line-1 (Button 2) and is answered, if not answered then call is sent to AA which provides announcement and other options such as being pushed back to the reception phone
  • Call comes into Line-2 (Button 3) and if not answered then same rule as Line-1 is activated, goes to AA and after announcement options are presented to be pushed back to reception phone or go to voice mail
  • Day routing is applied and Night routing is managed by the force night service mode
  • There is potential for a customer to remain in a loop every time they are pushed to the AA, if they get tired of waiting they can continue to hold and deposit a VM, this method has to be used as there is no way to pass a call onto a Park Slot and no other way to Queue a call


The problem:


Today the client calls and advised that any incoming calls to the phone cannot be answered, although the button flashes orange (Alerting) when you press it the phone just does not response and answer the call, this happens on either of the incoming lines. The phone system was rebooted, power cycled, the SF-300 the same, it was checked for an DND or CFWDall that might be in place, this was eliminated as a potential problem.. Could not resolve the problem


Logged a Case with SBCS which resulted in a reconfiguration of the system from being a Shred FXO environment to now a Floating Extension setup.


Reconfiguration by SBCS:


  • Button 2: Changed from Shared FXO line-1 to Reception 205
  • Button 3: Changed from Shared FXO line-2 to Reception 206
  • FXO line-1 hits Reception 205
  • FXO line-2 hits Reception 206
  • If you are on a call the second line does not ring it just flashes, where as in previous setup it rang and made an audible noise
  • Client can no longer press the line key and dial out, if they press Reception 205 they have to dial "0" to get an outside line and then the number
  • All the other rules are still implemented as it was before


I am confused now as to which was the right setup as I was told that my configuration was causing confusion to the system, which is possible and I don't discount it, but I don't fully understand how though as it was working fine for few days after having to implement the crazy AA routing to mimic a dirty, nasty, ugly form of queuing on the system, but this again should not have caused a problem as it is only a simple routine the system has to do...


What would be wrong with my original way of doing things? I will need to go back to it at some stage as I know the client is going to get agro all over again and a complaint to the Telecommunications Ombudsman as already been filed by the client and I am trying to avoid any unnecessary action that has resulted from the system being unable to perform duties as they requested.


I am in a pickle here and I am not sure if it is my knowldge on how the UC-500 system works as apposed to how the UC-320W works that is getting me in trouble here, I just assumed it is not rocket science and pretty much standard call routing practices would apply, I might be wrong with this mindset, but the system should not stop working and then as a result require a reconfiguration to get it to work should it??


BTW I happy that the support office helped me to get it to work, but after being advised that I had set it up wrong, I am left confused and concerned that the other sites I have setup in a similar fashion are all going to go to the dogs as well, but they are all working fine for over 2 months now.


I have full backups of the system before the changes were made today and also a backup of the configuration done today, I am going to attempt to work this up on the LAB system in the office to try and understand it, but sometime tells me this wont help me much, to me it seems not different as to how you set it up to that of a UC-500 with the exceptions of some limitations which I thought I understood them.


Any help/advice/ on understanding or configuration of the system would be much appreciated.


Confused Person...



Cheers,


David.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
Christopher Edg... Tue, 09/27/2011 - 07:54
User Badges:
  • Silver, 250 points or more

Hi David,


Do you have your SBCS case number handy?  If the engineer didn't collect your backups and FXO logs, perhaps you can e-mail the engineer so he can attach to the case.  I'll ask engineering to set up a config like this in the lab.


Thanks,


Chris

David Trad Tue, 09/27/2011 - 14:43
User Badges:
  • Gold, 750 points or more
  • Cisco Designated VIP,

    2013 Small Business

Hi Chris,


Private message sent...


Cheers,


David.

Christopher Edg... Tue, 09/27/2011 - 15:22
User Badges:
  • Silver, 250 points or more

Hi David,

PM replied.  (Community support is aware PM's don't trigger e-mail alerts when recieved.)


Chris

Actions

This Discussion