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

SIP Invite format

Hello guys,

I have a problem to one of my customer.

Recently we have extend the number range and since this date we have trouble with inbound calls.

Called number is only specified in "To" field and not in "URI" field, "URI" field contains the general number used to authenticate on the trunk.

This makes all calls routed to general number.

what we received:

Received:

INVITE sip:222620920@217.xxx.xxx.114:5060 SIP/2.0

Record-Route: <sip:85.xxx.xxx.1;lr=on;ftag=as08e0eb54>

IP-src:85.xxx.xxx.16

PORT-src:5060

Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 85.xxx.xxx.1;branch=z9hG4bK50ef.f063de33.0

Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 85.xxx.xxx.16:5060;branch=z9hG4bK5f0bda0f;rport=5060

From: "Wywolanie" <sip:0032495243137@85.xxx.xxx.16>;tag=as08e0eb54

To: <sip:222620213@85.xxx.xxx.1>

038753: Jan 19 11:12:41: //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/SIP/Msg/ccsipDisplayMsg:

Received:

INVITE sip:222620920@217.xxx.xxx.114:5060 SIP/2.0

Record-Route: <sip:85.xxx.xxx.1;lr=on;ftag=as23ac57c4>

IP-src:85.xxx.xxx.16

PORT-src:5060

Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 85.xxx.xxx.1;branch=z9hG4bKabbb.1eeffe5.0

Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 85.xxx.xxx.16:5060;branch=z9hG4bK369f97dd;rport=5060

From: "Wywolanie" <sip:0032495243137@85.xxx.xxx.16>;tag=as23ac57c4

To: <sip:222620921@85.xxx.xxx.1>

Do you this kind of rules can work or not ?

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/voicesw/ps5640/products_configuration_example09186a0080982499.shtml

Thanks for your help

Hervé Jacquemin

2 REPLIES
New Member

SIP Invite format

Hi,

what I knew, the systems are using address in URI to route the calls, in your case:

INVITE sip:222620920@217.xxx.xxx.114:5060 SIP/2.0

I think something in Telco side. did you ask them?

Do you have the same problems with the numbers before expansions?

New Member

SIP Invite format

hi,

It's what we supposed but the provider said "we change nothing"...

but the problem appeared first time after the range expansion.

383
Views
0
Helpful
2
Replies
CreatePlease login to create content