Re: Answering a DID call...

joemccann · ‎04-19-2004

I am having a little trouble getting Unity to answer an incoming DID call. I am using Callmanager 3.3(3) and Unity 4.0(3) being integrated by TSP version 7.0(3b). Occasionally a call will get through seemingly when the first coulple of voicemail ports are being utilized. However, 98% of the time the caller hears a short ring and an immediate fast-busy. If I configure Unity not to answer and let it roll to the next available port, then it works every time. Anybody seen this before?

Ginger Dillon · ‎04-19-2004

Good morning -

My first thought is to check your ports and see if all are connected to CallManager. Also in CCM, check to make sure all of your ports are Forwarded Busy/No Answer to the next available port. Do this for all except the last port. Do you have any ports hung? We experienced a problem with a port hanging, same versions of software as you and we were hitting defect CSCed54449 and CSCed41828. The

workaround was to upgrade to Unity 4.03 sr1 and then apply ES64. But I would check with TAC on your specific application event log errors. If you have a hung port, you would be seeing some messages that indicate a port has been busy for xxxxx time as well as a message indicated the port has been disconnected from CCM. When you say an incoming DID call, is the caller calling a subscriber on your system and then being routed to voicemail? Or is the caller reaching an Automated Attendant call handler or something like that?

Hope that helps,

Ginger

Ginger Dillon · ‎04-19-2004

P.S. Here is the diagnostic file I sent to Cisco for the hung port condition.

anup.anand · ‎04-19-2004

Are you using an MGCP gateway and how are the calls getting routed to Unity ? Are you using a translation pattern or using a CTI port ?

joemccann · ‎04-20-2004

I am using an MGCP gateway. I am using a translation pattern. Do you have something specific in mind?

anup.anand · ‎04-20-2004

Check the service parameter "DisableAlertingPI". It needs to be TRUE.

joemccann · ‎04-20-2004

That seems to have fixed my problem. A problem that Cisco TAC is still trying to resolve. Thanks a lot.