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. If you'd prefer to explore, try our test area to get started. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

TEHO with Local Routing Group

Hi,

I was watching an online training video of setting TEHO using Local Routing Group on CUCM 8.6. However somehow I think he configured it wrong.

In his example,

He used a centralized call processing infrastructure for NY (hosts the CUCM) and CA offices. NY and CA router groups are created to contain local gateways respecitively and also assigned to corresponding device pool. When configuring Route List for the remote patterns (Pattern to reach CA numbers from NY, vice versa), he only created one RL for both patterns and only added the Standard Local Route Group to the RL… Then wrap up the configure.

To me, in order to make TEHO work, there should be one RL for each location (one for NY and one for CA) and the NY route group needs to be added into the CA RL and CA Route group needs to be added into NY RL and both RL has SLRG as secondary option.

Am I crazy or the video did it wrong...

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
Cisco Employee

TEHO with Local Routing Group

Good catch, with what is described here, when someone in CA calls a number in CA, the CA route list would be matched and the route list would be selected which contains Standard Local Route Group (SLRG) and the device pool for CA would be checked and the CA route group would be selected.  That works as expected.  Now if a CA phone calls a NY number, the route pattern would be matched, the route list the route pattern points to would be SLRG, so the device pool of the originating device would be checked.  The CA device pool being that a CA phone placed the call would be checked for the local route group and that would be set for a CA route group, so the call would go out of a CA gateway.

What usually is done is that the route list for TEHO for the CA phone would contain, the NY route group and then SLRG in that order.  That way the call would be extended to NY first out their local gateway for TEHO and then extended to the CA local gateway if the NY gateway fails.  For NY to CA TEHO, the CA route group would be added to another route list, this time with the CA gateway first in the list followed by SLRG.

2 REPLIES
Cisco Employee

TEHO with Local Routing Group

Good catch, with what is described here, when someone in CA calls a number in CA, the CA route list would be matched and the route list would be selected which contains Standard Local Route Group (SLRG) and the device pool for CA would be checked and the CA route group would be selected.  That works as expected.  Now if a CA phone calls a NY number, the route pattern would be matched, the route list the route pattern points to would be SLRG, so the device pool of the originating device would be checked.  The CA device pool being that a CA phone placed the call would be checked for the local route group and that would be set for a CA route group, so the call would go out of a CA gateway.

What usually is done is that the route list for TEHO for the CA phone would contain, the NY route group and then SLRG in that order.  That way the call would be extended to NY first out their local gateway for TEHO and then extended to the CA local gateway if the NY gateway fails.  For NY to CA TEHO, the CA route group would be added to another route list, this time with the CA gateway first in the list followed by SLRG.

New Member

TEHO with Local Routing Group

Thanks, so I am not crazy...

297
Views
0
Helpful
2
Replies