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

Gatekeeper with no zone prefix


I would like to know if it's possible to handle CAC with several local-zone into a gatekeeper without using ZONE PREFIX.

I need this because my users are moving from zone to zone and we need that they doesn't have to change their E164 address so many time.

Basically we need that call routing between zone was independent from E164 address.

For example, when user with E164 address 9000 move into another zone, he need to be subjected to the new zone CAC restriction ( always with the same E164 number ).

Any suggest ?

Many thanks in advance


New Member

Re: Gatekeeper with no zone prefix


I think that you are mixing two different concepts.

The user must have the new zone CAC restriction or all calls from this new zone can be affected. It is a bad idea that the user don't follow the CAC restriction from that zone.

Another think is try to route the user with address 9000 from a zone with different prefix. I think that you would need a server that controls where are the mobile users, like that you can do with Cisco Emergency responder. I don't know what options you have in this section.

Hope this helps, please rate post if it does!

New Member

Re: Gatekeeper with no zone prefix


thanks for the reply. Our Customer has several H.323 clients ( polycom ) in different sites.

He would like to control the video bandwidth with one single Gatekepeer-CAC configuration.

We planned to create some local-region into this gatekepeer and to control the bandwith with CAC.

The requirement the Customer has is that:

- a client goes into some region/zone based his ip-address ( done with the gatekeeper "subnet" command )

- the client with a specific e164 number could move from zone to zone but he must keep the same e.164 number ( we cannot do call-routing based on zone-prefix, i suppose ).

I hope to be more clear than previous message.



New Member

Re: Gatekeeper with no zone prefix


I need more information about the scheme.

If you have only a h323 network where the gk do the address resolution and call routing, and all endpoints (the polycom clients) are registered in it, you don't need anymore.

The endpoint it register with thier e164 number and when they call to another h.323 endpoint the gk resolves the address. No zone prefix is needed.

another thing is that the endpoints go through a gw and this gw do the call routing.

I think also that you can not use the zone subnet command to choose the zone for the endpoint. This command is for select what RRQ acepts but you need to configure in the endpoint the zone to register. Has you tried it? All my polycom endpoints go to the same zone and can not choose the zone

Hope this helps, please rate post if it does!

New Member

Re: Gatekeeper with no zone prefix


I "partially" solved the problem.

I need the zone subnet command because I need that endpoints goes into specific zone based on their IP address ( network ):

- network / 16 --> zone 1

- network / 16 --> zone 2



Then I made CAC based upon different bandwidth requirements into each zone.

What I still miss is a client notification when there isn't enought bandwith, or better:

A client-A into zone-1 make a call to client-B into zone-2.

- If the bandwidth requirement for that call falls outside limitation imposed for zone-1 ( interzone bandwidth ), client-A get notification for "congestion" as we wanted.


- If the bandwidth requirement for that call falls outside limitation imposed for zone-2 ( interzone bandwidth configured for zone-2 ), client-A cannot make the call BUT he doesn't get any notification .

It seems the the client get notification only if that notification came from their zone. I also tryied the command "bandwidth check-destination" but with no result.

Any idea ?

Thanks a lot