Is there any likelyhood that an enhancement to Unity could be provided that would allow a fax tone to be detected when the call is forwarded from CCM due to a no-answer? This would allow the use of a single DID and require Unity to detect and process fax. The goal is to avoid the use of an on-ramp gateway or use a voice gateway connected to a fax board in the Unity server. Thanks for any insight!<br><br>Dave Cronberger<br><br>Cisco Systems<br>Systems Engineer
The feature you talk about I refer to as CNG detection and it is on the feature request list that the marketing folks have. Theres actually a few things that would need to be done on both AV and Ciscos side of the house to make this fly right.
1. The Cisco gateway needs to recognize fax tone, which I believe at least some do. 2. The gateway needs to send a message to the AvCiscoTSP indicating a fax tone was received. 3. The AvCiscoTSP would need to send a message to the MIU (AVs Media Interface Unity). 4. The MIU would pass that tone event up to the Unity conversation which would then act on it.
In short thats a change in the Skinny protocol, the AVCiscoTSP, our MIU and the conversations.
The MIU and conversation changes Id like to see be made regardless since this is a pretty common request across the boards. The new Dialogic stuff does support fax tone detection/notification (which is why this feature is on the list being considered by marketing). I cant speak to the changes on Ciscos side necessary to make this happen.
Basically the way I have it speced out on the administration side is a new key would be added to the user input section for subscribers and call handlers in addition to 0-9, * and # there would be CNG. When that event triggers you could route it anywhere you want either to a fax machine or to a port on a fax server or wherever. This could be used in conjunction with the "Smart DTMF follow on" capabilities to route directly to an inbox if the fax server being used by the site had an Exchange gateway as well.
Im not sure when this is going to bubble up on the priority list for us, but Id like to see it happen. As usual, please be sure to ping the Features@ActiveVoice.com mailbox and let them know youd like to see this happen. I'm not sure who to ping on the Cisco side of the house for feature requests like this...
Here's a very "high-level" idea that I would like to bounce off everyone guys:
Here's an idea of a process: 1) ISDN Gateway that supports CNG (ie: 36xx with NM-HDV) 2) Gateway detects CNG and forwards call to the users 'virtual' extension assigned to him/her (A fake extension in Call Manager) 3) Call Manager forwards this call out an analog gateway (ie: FXS ports on VG200) AND appends certain DTMF digits onto the end. 4) The VG200 ports are connected to ActiveFax via analog fax board (ie: CPI-400PCI) which supports DTMF routing. 5) Fax deposited in appropriate users mailbox based on DTMF routing.
This is just a thought, and might be totally off base. Although if there is no obvious 'gotchas' with this, I plan on testing this as soon as our faxboard arrives next week.
This is a perfectly valid work around and in fact looks pretty similiar to what we have to do with switches that don't support DID translation into DTMF (and the sites don't want to cough up for DID lines).
Couple of things that can bite you here... the timing is tricky. If you're releasing to a hunt group of analog fax extensions you may have a wait till you get to an open line and if that window is too big you'll start blasting DTMF down before the analog fax line has picked up and is "listening" for DTMF. You can (and probably will have to) configure the fax driver to wait longer than the default 5 seconds to get DTMF information for this reason...
Also, you have to be careful about answering incoming fax calls without knowing if you have a fax resource to handle it properly or not. If you guys go off hook, then are going to turn around and drop the call to a hunt group of analog lines, if there are no lines available to take the call, you'll drop it. If the sending party is a fax server, most of the time it assumes this was a (now annoyed) human that picked up the phone and it wont deliver any more faxes to that number. That's bad. So long as you're sure you have more than enough analog lines to handle the traffic, this is cool, but be sure to take that into consideration.
Outside of that, there's no reason this can't work.
Thanks Jeff. I'm deffinately going to give it a try, specifically using a Cisco 3660 router providing both PRI and FXS ports. I'll be digging into the IOS to see if there are either any timing, or 'offhook' detection abilities with this config.
You have reached the Cisco Logistics Support Center.. To Check Status of
your RMA, visit Product Returns & Replacements (RMA). Need help? Contact
us by Phone or Email. North Americas Phone: 1800 553 2447 Option 4
Email: email@example.com Europe Phone: +3...
The short answer is that you don't.... That isn't entirely true while at
the same time it kind of is, but for the most part you don't configure
the softkeys. You enable or disable them via TCL. Here is the long
answer. Be sure to read the whole thing or e...
Topology: IP Phone > Switches > Microsoft NPS setup to forward 802.1x
proxy to > ISE 2.1 patch 3 Authentication: EAP-TLS using Cisco MIC SANs
Phone Models 802.1X support? 802.1x flavor Addtl Comment EAP-MD5 EAP-TLS
Cisco 3905 Y Y N Cisco 6911 Y Y N Cisco ...