Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

DX80 registration in CUCM 10... using SIP URIs..

Hi guys..

I've finally got our hands on a DX80 and Im now puzzling over how to configure it to receive/make SIP calls to VCS registered end points..

 

We are running...
VCS 8.2.1... this has EX90 endpoints registered...e.g. ex90@vc.domain.com
CUCM 10.5.. this has DX80 endpoints registered and we've assigned some extension numbers...e.g 1001 and 1002


We can..
Make calls from the DX80 ( CUCM10 ) to the EX90s ( VCS ) using the SIP uri.. so dialling "ex90@vc.domain.com " works.
Make calls from the EX90s ( VCS ) to the DX80 ( CUCM10 ) using the allocated extension number.. so dialling 1001 or 1002 works.. There is a search rule configured on VCS which matches 1001@vc.domain.com and routes it towards CUCM10..

 


What I cant seem to do is get the assigned Directory URI ( in CUCM ) to work across the two environments..
So I have assigned these two Directory URIs in CUCM for our 2x DX80s.
1001 = jon@vc.domain.com
1002 = chris@vc.domain.com..

 

The two DX80s can dial each other using their newly assigned URI as they are both in the CUCM environment..

However when I try dialling jon@vc.domain.com from the VCS environment, it fails and says there is no match.

I have tried creating a matching rule in VCS ( similar to what I did to get the extension 1001 and 1002 working ) to route this over to CUCM but it doesn't seem to match in the logs

 

In order to successfully call from VCS to CUCM, I have to revert back to using the assigned extension number.. ( 1001 or 1002 )..

Can someone please advise what I have missed please..

 

Many thanks.

Jon.

 

3 REPLIES
Cisco Employee

If you configure the same

If you configure the same domain in CUCM and on VCS for your URIs, there's no differentiation to where they're registered, your VCS will think those URIs are registered to the VCS as that's the domain it handles. Same would happen in CUCM if that's the domain you configured. If the RHS matches that domain, they think "I'm the one handling that domain, they must be registered to me, no need to search anywhere else"

You need to differentiate them. ie keep the VCS domain as you have it, and on CUCM just domain.com, then configure the routing rule for that on both sides

HTH

java

if this helps, please rate

www.cisco.com/go/pdi
New Member

Hi Jaime,Thanks for the reply

Hi Jaime,

Thanks for the reply..

Funnily enough I was thinking of something similar to your reply.. and it did occur to me how it would differentiate what resides in VC land and what is in CUCM land..

Having a different domain name for our CUCM registered DX80 endpoints is not particularly desirable, therefore does that mean we would need to define entry for each endpoint to tell it to route towards CUCM..

 

Ive made a bit of progress today but it's still messy to get it to work.. but think it touches on what your are saying..

 

So...

Dialling 1001@vc.domain.com, hits the search rule on VCS which redirects it to the DX80 ( in CUCM land ) and our end point rings.

Dialling jon@vc.domain.com, does not seem to hit the search rule on VCS ( get the error, 404 Not found ) and therefore does not get routed to CUCM.. This is strange as it is basically the same as the rule Ive created for 1001.
** If it did manage to hit CUCM, I would expect it to resolve to the end point 1001, as Ive created a Directory URI associating the extension and SIP name..

 

As dialling 1001@vc.domain.com seemed to work, Ive created a new translation search rule on VCS.. So..

Dialling jon@vc.domain.com now hits a search rule,which translates the entry to…. 1001@vc.domain.com

This then matches the other rule and correctly routes over to CUCM and our DX80 endpoint rings. !.


Again, this is odd as it does prove that a variation of the jon@vc.domain.com search rule does work , so I don’t understand why a simple reroute statement doesn’t work and we're having to do a translation instead !!..

 

So kinda working but a very messy way of doing it…. And also we'd have to assign a static routing entry for each DX80 endpoint..

Any thoughts please ?

 

New Member

Hey everyone..Just thought Id

Hey everyone..

Just thought Id say that we've figured this out.. There was a setting in the CUCM SIP trunk which is not covered in the VCS-CUCM integration pdf document..

See screen shot.. as soon as I changed the setting, my URI started getting passed over correctly to CUCM.

 

Thanks all for your various suggestions..

2698
Views
5
Helpful
3
Replies
CreatePlease login to create content