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

MGCP Gateway instead of H323

Hi team, we have H323 gateways in our CUCM 8.6.1. What is the benefit to change it to MGCP? We are using Cisco Routers 3925.

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions

Take a look at the following

Take a look at the following write up from Mr. Bell.  This should answer your question. 

http://www.netcraftsmen.net/blogs/entry/cisco-voice-gateway-protocol-choices-h323-vs-sip-vs-mgcp.html

Also, take a look at this document.

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/voice/gateway-protocols/70628-h323-mgcp-compare.html

I hope this helps.

 

 

5 REPLIES

Take a look at the following

Take a look at the following write up from Mr. Bell.  This should answer your question. 

http://www.netcraftsmen.net/blogs/entry/cisco-voice-gateway-protocol-choices-h323-vs-sip-vs-mgcp.html

Also, take a look at this document.

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/voice/gateway-protocols/70628-h323-mgcp-compare.html

I hope this helps.

 

 

My colleague Bill's blog as

My colleague Bill's blog as noted above is worth the read.  You will get a mixed bag of answers on here from folks who believe that you should always use H323 to those who only have used MGCP because of it's simplicity when setting it up.  To summarize some of Bill's points:

If you have a remote site and need SRST, it's usually easier to just use H323 (or SIP) because you're gonna need much of that config anyway to get much value out of SRST.

If you are not comfortable with IOS and/or have limited support staff, MGCP has some value.  It centralizes the call control and routing whereas H323/SIP push it to the edges.

There isn't really a one size fits all answer here.

Hailey

New Member

Thx Davi, we have remote

Thx Davi, we have remote offices and use SRST and have limited support staff on the edges, there is why we are looking on MGCP solution. Do you think that our scenery would not support MGCP?

It's not really a matter of

It's not really a matter of "supporting" MGCP or not...it's a matter of preference.  If you're going to use SRST then my preference is to just use H.323 for the remote site gateway. You can do MGCP with failover to SRST and that's OK too.  When you do that, you use MGCP and CUCM for standard call control/processing but then fall back to an H.323 config on the same gateway for SRST call processing...hence, that's why I'd say just use H.323 to start with.

Hailey

New Member

I understood your point David

I understood your point David. Did you already use  the SRST Manager? I'm wondering if that gonna help us implement the SRST with MGCP.

295
Views
10
Helpful
5
Replies
CreatePlease to create content