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

New Member

Forward on failure

IPCC express stand 3.1,ccm 3.3.3

I'm trying to use the forward on failure of my cti route point to go to unity on failure and vice versa but the call go always to the forward no answer. (I closed the crs server,the engine, I also tried to close the cti manager...)Has anyone succeed to use the forward on failure of the cti route point (witch is my Jtapi trigger)? One more question. In witch situation does the forward on failure is use for the cti port? Thanks.


Re: Forward on failure

It is best practice to enter the failure number for the route point in the CFNA, CFB, and CFonFailure. Cisco has done testing and it does not ALWAYS follow the failure.

Andy Dignan


New Member

Re: Forward on failure

Hi Andy. I read the document, done some testing and never been able to get the failure. I even retrieve the no answer on cti rp and the call got thru the busy. So what I understand is that I must consider the no answer as a failure when defined. What about the CTI port? I never been able to go thru the no answer and/or failure. Normal??? Is it ever looked at? Thanks.


Re: Forward on failure

Forward on Failure is when the call manager is trying to place a call and the CTI Route point itself is failing, it will follow the CFF. This does not happen as often and is typically related to a failure on the CallManager side. When the IVR is down or a PG is down it treats that as a busy call, not a failure. I have some documentation from Cisco when they were doing tests and basically it points to the fact that you need to configure CFB, CFNA, CFF on a Route Point to guaruntee you will catch all failures. As for CTI Ports it isn't typically necessary to set it on the ports, the Route Point is sufficient.

Regards, Andy