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

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

UCM 5.1 - route list question


I know that using route lists allows having redundancy when a first H323 gateway in the route list has all its local voice ports being busy. That works fine.

I'd like to provide the same redundancy mechanism when all remote voice ports are busy. So my local H323 gateway would have free voice ports, but the call would not be successful because of remote gateway being busy/unreachable. My tests using a route list are not successful for this.

Is this supported? Using network busyout is not an option as my remote gateway is not reached through IP but rather through isdn.

Many thanks,



Re: UCM 5.1 - route list question

can you try seeting service parameter.

Clusterwide Parameters (Route Plan)

Stop Routing on Unallocated Number Flag = False

Stop Routing on User Busy Flag = Flag

This is a common workaround for H323 redundancy in route lists, just dont know for sure if it applies to your exact scenario.

New Member

Re: UCM 5.1 - route list question

Hello Shane,

Thank you for your reply and help.

Actually these settings are already set and it does work fine when local voice ports are busy.

In my scenario, local voice ports are free, but all remote voice ports are busy, meaning that the call can be placed through the local gateway, but it fails due to remote gateway being busy.

Maybe there are some settings in the local H323 gateway that could be set in order to send a "unallocated number" or "busy" flag back to the UCM....?

Kind Regards,



Re: UCM 5.1 - route list question

That is what I thought you might say. You might look into the following command:

no dial-peer outbound status-check pots

I understand the dilema but not sure on a resolution.

Perhaps someone else might have a good idea.