I meant call manager group for the device pool of the phone.

On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:12 PM, sean hurricane <[email protected]>wrote:

> gatekeeper
>  zone local CCM ipexpert.com 172.1.100.1
>  zone remote PSTN-WAN ipexpert.com 9.9.9.9 1719
>  zone prefix PSTN-WAN 011*
>  zone prefix CCM 10* gw-priority 10 gk-trunk_3 <---PUB have highest priority
>
>  zone prefix CCM 10* gw-priority 9 gk-trunk_4
>  zone prefix CCM 10* gw-priority 0 CME
>  zone prefix CCM 20* gw-priority 10 gk-trunk_3 <---PUB have highest priority
>  zone prefix CCM 20* gw-priority 9 gk-trunk_4
>
>  zone prefix CCM 20* gw-priority 0 CME
>  zone prefix PSTN-WAN 3*
>  zone prefix PSTN-WAN 617*
>  zone prefix PSTN-WAN 911*
>  zone prefix PSTN-WAN 999*
>  gw-type-prefix 1#* default-technology
>  no shutdown
>
> your priority statement here will only affect calls coming from CME, to make 
> PUB the primary call processor, in your call manager group
> for the Phone, move PUB to the top of the list. you can verify this by making 
> a call to the CME site and use sh gatekeeper calls on the GK
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:49 PM, 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Send CCIE_Voice mailing list submissions to
>>        [email protected]
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>        http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_voice
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>        [email protected]
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>        [email protected]
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of CCIE_Voice digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>   1. Re: LAB in five days (Craig Hill (crahill))
>>   2. Re: LAB in five days (sean hurricane)
>>   3. Re: Gatekeeper ,priority gw problem (jeremy co)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 10:41:02 -0700
>> From: "Craig Hill (crahill)" <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] LAB in five days
>> To: "sean hurricane" <[email protected]>,
>>        <[email protected]>
>> Message-ID:
>>        <
>> 73b12e1848ff144e84ef158b079a6e7c05bed...@xmb-sjc-213.amer.cisco.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> I have taken it 2 times and I was very close to making it the last
>> round. I would advise you to do the following:
>>
>> 1. Have a plan on how your going to attack the exam and stick to it. My
>> first attempt I went in with no plan and it cost me time.
>> 2. Practice speed drills after you formulate your plan, try to
>> incorporate changes each time that will keep you thinking ahead.
>> 3. Practice complete lab build ups and time yourself. My personal goal
>> for my second attempt, other than passing, was to be done with the
>> Infrastructure, QOS, and CME/CUE before lunch. I didnt register a single
>> non-cme phone until about the 6th hour, but that was the way I planned
>> it.
>> 3. Read the whole test and look for dependencies. When you spot them,
>> make a note of them.
>> 4. You will more than likely run into some problems, write them down and
>> move on. Don't get wrapped up in troubleshooting for more than a few
>> minutes or else you will kill your time. Your lunch break is probably
>> the best time to think about what could be wrong.
>> 5. Watch the free IP Expert seminars for voice, there is some invaluable
>> information in there.
>> 6. Follow the SRND for your qos values when doing your calculations.
>> There is a lot of contradictory information out there and I have even
>> seen people on this board hand out advice on what they think it should
>> be, which you will be wrong if you follow it. I scored perfect on the
>> qos sections and I practiced my calculations based completely from the
>> SRND values. Again, watch the videos on IP expert.
>>
>>
>> Good luck.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: [email protected]
>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of sean
>> hurricane
>> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 12:26 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] LAB in five days
>>
>>
>>
>> My lab is in five days, any advice? especially from those who have
>> passed. i have some issues especially with IPCC but for the most part i
>> have most of the topic down cold. I will appreciate any advice even from
>> those who failed, at least i wont have to repeat their mistake.
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL:
>> http://onlinestudylist.com/pipermail/ccie_voice/attachments/20090417/06046ec9/attachment-0001.htm
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:51:49 -0400
>> From: sean hurricane <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] LAB in five days
>> To: Michael Ciarfello <[email protected]>
>> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>> Message-ID:
>>        <[email protected]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>>
>> I don't believe i said anything about NDA, regarding IPCC, integration is
>> not my problem and i can do most of the scripting, i am not just at a
>> confident level where i can say scripting is a non-issue. if the script
>> are
>> as lengthy and difficult as ipexpert lab then i may struggle and just roll
>> the dice on that portion of the lab. if not with lady luck on my side i
>> should triumph.
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Michael Ciarfello
>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>> >  I have no nda stuff to share (either should anyone else) so no need for
>> > private e-mail.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Taken from my experience:  If it?s your first time you will meet the
>> > following:
>> >
>> >  Unfamiliar with environment.  Unfamiliar with the PC, can?t beat the
>> > nervousness, the anxiety, the frustrations you will encounter, the
>> > anxiousness?no matter how you say to yourself that you are ok.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Remember you only have a 20 point margin.  If you get IPCC questions and
>> > they are worth 5-10-whatever points, your margin dropped by a LOT.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > You will encounter small problems on the test that didn?t happen during
>> > your studies.  These take time to fix (because you are an expert and
>> know
>> > how to fix them) but eat up your time.  A lot of people say most people
>> > don?t finish due to running out of time.  I knew how to do EVERY
>> question.
>> > I didn?t have time to properly test everything?taking a lot of questions
>> on
>> > faith that they worked.  I also couldn?t get things to work that I knew
>> how
>> > to do from customer experience and practiced in the lab many times and
>> when
>> > I got home and tried it, it also worked. Could have also been just
>> mental
>> > blocks.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I?d say at the 5 hour mark, you better have a running tally of how many
>> > points you think you have.  If not over 80, you better work on the low
>> > hanging fruit to try to get those points back.  At the 6 hour mark, your
>> > configurations are supposed to be complete and you test for 2 hours.  If
>> > your tally is not above 80, then you get into my situation of taking
>> some
>> > things on faith, testing others and resolving issues on others.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > You should know whether you passed or failed during the test.  If you
>> think
>> > you got everything correct and you end up failing (which I?ve heard from
>> > people,) then you were kidding yourself somewhere.  You should know in
>> your
>> > configurations and your testing whether it worked or not. There are
>>  always
>> > the points for ?what the proctor was looking for?, but I don?t think
>> there
>> > are 20 points worth of those.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I wish you luck, but your statement ?but for the most part i have most
>> of
>> > the topic down cold? you will wish you never wrote.  It will haunt you.
>>  And
>> > I do believe some of the test is luck and things falling into place vs
>> > giving trouble just to give trouble.  Karma is huge.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
>> > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *sean hurricane
>> > *Sent:* Friday, April 17, 2009 12:29 PM
>> > *To:* [email protected]
>> > *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] LAB in five days
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > my e-mail address is [email protected] if anyone wants to contact me
>> > privately.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:25 PM, sean hurricane <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > My lab is in five days, any advice? especially from those who have
>> passed.
>> > i have some issues especially with IPCC but for the most part i have
>> most of
>> > the topic down cold. I will appreciate any advice even from those who
>> > failed, at least i wont have to repeat their mistake.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL:
>> http://onlinestudylist.com/pipermail/ccie_voice/attachments/20090417/1b87b087/attachment-0001.htm
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 03:55:21 +1000
>> From: jeremy co <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Gatekeeper ,priority gw problem
>> To: Cliff McGlamry <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Message-ID:
>>        <[email protected]>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>> I have a prefix for it so why it didn't show up?
>>
>> gatekeeper
>>  zone local CME cisco.com 150.1.64.114
>>  zone local CCM cisco.com
>>  no zone subnet CME default enable
>>  zone subnet CME 150.1.66.254/32 enable
>>  no zone subnet CCM default enable
>>  zone subnet CCM 150.1.64.11/32 enable
>>  zone subnet CCM 150.1.64.12/32 enable
>>  zone prefix CME 2404....
>>  zone prefix CCM 3... gw-priority 10 GK_Trunk_2
>>  zone prefix CCM 3... gw-priority 9 GK_Trunk_1
>>  zone prefix CCM 408*
>>  zone prefix CME 5... gw-priority 10 RS2
>>  zone prefix CME 6... gw-priority 10 RS2
>>  zone prefix CME 6... gw-priority 0 GK_Trunk_1 GK_Trunk_2
>>  gw-type-prefix 1#* default-technology
>>  no shutdown
>>
>> GATEWAY TYPE PREFIX TABLE
>> =========================
>> Prefix: 1#*    (Default gateway-technology)
>>  Zone CCM master gateway list:
>>    150.1.64.11:3865 GK_1
>>  Zone CCM prefix 3... priority gateway list(s):
>>   Priority 9:
>>    150.1.64.11:3865 GK_1
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 12:55 AM, Cliff McGlamry <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >  They can overlap.  It's okay for it to be that way as long as you have
>> > zone prefixes defined.  Or give it a different prefix....but you need
>> one in
>> > there for it to show up under that command.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > *From:* jeremy co <[email protected]>
>> > *To:* marwa <[email protected]>
>> > *Cc:* [email protected]
>> > *Sent:* Friday, April 17, 2009 10:37 AM
>> > *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Gatekeeper ,priority gw problem
>> >
>> > 1# is a default prefix for call manager, I added it already in CCM
>> config
>> >
>> >
>> > Jeremy
>> >
>> > On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 12:31 AM, marwa <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> hi,
>> >> to see it add the tech prefix under the interface in cme
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >>
>> >> *From:* jeremy co <[email protected]>
>> >> *To:* Cliff McGlamry <[email protected]> ; Sergio Polizer<
>> [email protected]>
>> >> *Cc:* Marwa Ahmed <[email protected]> ; Arshad Dhunna<
>> [email protected]>;
>> >> [email protected]
>> >> *Sent:* Friday, April 17, 2009 4:24 PM
>> >> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Gatekeeper ,priority gw problem
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> interface Loopback0
>> >>  ip address 150.1.66.254 255.255.255.0
>> >>  h323-gateway voip interface
>> >>  h323-gateway voip id CME ipaddr 150.1.64.114 1719
>> >>  h323-gateway voip h323-id RS2
>> >>  h323-gateway voip bind srcaddr 150.1.66.254
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> CME is registered.
>> >>
>> >> C2600#sh gatekeeper end
>> >>                     GATEKEEPER ENDPOINT REGISTRATION
>> >>                     ================================
>> >> CallSignalAddr  Port  RASSignalAddr   Port  Zone Name         Type
>> >> Flags
>> >> --------------- ----- --------------- ----- ---------         ----
>> >> -----
>> >> 150.1.64.11     2059  150.1.64.11     3776  CCM               VOIP-GW
>> >>     H323-ID: GK_Trunk_1
>> >>     Voice Capacity Max.=  Avail.=  Current.= 0
>> >> 150.1.66.254    1720  150.1.66.254    50245 CME               VOIP-GW
>> >>     E164-ID: 6003
>> >>     E164-ID: 6004
>> >>     H323-ID: RS2
>> >>     Voice Capacity Max.=  Avail.=  Current.= 0
>> >> Total number of active registrations = 2
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I made a call with dot configuration and it worked.
>> >> ANy way why I cannot see CME under sh gatekeeper gw?
>> >>
>> >> Sergio I have them under gw interface
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Any idea?
>> >>
>> >> Cheers
>> >>
>> >> Jeremy
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Cliff McGlamry <[email protected]
>> >wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>  Just because the dots show up doesn't mean they will work....but
>> heck,
>> >>> give it a try.  We all might learn something.
>> >>>
>> >>> If CME won't register, what does the output of the show gateway
>> command
>> >>> on CME show?  And please post the configuration of the interface where
>> you
>> >>> engaged the h323-gateway commands.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>  ----- Original Message -----
>> >>> *From:* jeremy co <[email protected]>
>> >>>   *To:* Marwa Ahmed <[email protected]> ; Cliff McGlamry<
>> [email protected]>; Arshad
>> >>> Dhunna <[email protected]>
>> >>> *Cc:* [email protected]
>> >>> *Sent:* Friday, April 17, 2009 9:51 AM
>> >>> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Gatekeeper ,priority gw problem
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> complete configuration is here:
>> >>> SUB is not started though.
>> >>>
>> >>> gatekeeper
>> >>>  zone local CME cisco.com 150.1.64.114
>> >>>  zone local CCM cisco.com
>> >>>  no zone subnet CME default enable
>> >>>  zone subnet CME 150.1.66.254/32 enable
>> >>>  no zone subnet CCM default enable
>> >>>  zone subnet CCM 150.1.64.11/32 enable
>> >>>  zone subnet CCM 150.1.64.12/32 enable
>> >>>  zone prefix CME 2404....
>> >>>  zone prefix CCM 3... gw-priority 10 GK_Trunk_2
>> >>>  zone prefix CCM 3... gw-priority 9 GK_Trunk_1
>> >>>  zone prefix CCM 408*
>> >>>  zone prefix CME 5... gw-priority 10 RS2
>> >>>  zone prefix CME 6... gw-priority 10 RS2
>> >>>  zone prefix CME 6... gw-priority 0 GK_Trunk_1 GK_Trunk_2
>> >>>  gw-type-prefix 1#* default-technology
>> >>>  no shutdown
>> >>>
>> >>> GATEWAY TYPE PREFIX TABLE
>> >>> =========================
>> >>> Prefix: 1#*    (Default gateway-technology)
>> >>>   Zone CCM master gateway list:
>> >>>     150.1.64.11:3865 GK_1
>> >>>   Zone CCM prefix 3... priority gateway list(s):
>> >>>    Priority 9:
>> >>>     150.1.64.11:3865 GK_1
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> configuration with dot style is working. like 3... instead of 3*
>> >>>
>> >>> but I cannot see CME under show gatekeeper gw command
>> >>>
>> >>> Any idea?
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Jeremy
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 8:00 AM, Marwa Ahmed <[email protected]
>> >wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>  hi,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> is the cme registered? also do u have another local zone called CME
>> >>>> other than CCM
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ------------------------------
>> >>>> *From:* [email protected] on behalf of jeremy
>> co
>> >>>> *Sent:* Thu 4/16/2009 7:55 PM
>> >>>> *To:* [email protected]
>> >>>> *Subject:* [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Gatekeeper ,priority gw problem
>> >>>>
>> >>>>   Hi,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I cannot make trunk prefix and GW priority showing up under  "sh
>> >>>> gatekeeper gw"
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  zone local CCM cisco.com
>> >>>>  zone prefix CME 6... gw-priority 10 RS2
>> >>>>  no shutdown
>> >>>>
>> >>>> GK#sh gatekeeper g
>> >>>> GATEWAY TYPE PREFIX TABLE
>> >>>> =========================
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I got nothing here
>> >>>>
>> >>>> any idea?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Jeremy
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL:
>> http://onlinestudylist.com/pipermail/ccie_voice/attachments/20090418/c70671de/attachment.htm
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CCIE_Voice mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_voice
>>
>>
>> End of CCIE_Voice Digest, Vol 38, Issue 101
>> *******************************************
>>
>
>

Reply via email to