Hey Brian – hope you’re doing well. This is a difficult issue to reproduce so a pcap would be tricky to obtain.
I’ll try and recreate the issue in a lab and see what results I get from an SDL process creation standpoint. Thanks! - Dan From: bmead...@gmail.com [mailto:bmead...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Brian Meade Sent: Monday, December 01, 2014 5:51 PM To: Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) Cc: Daniel Pagan; cisco-voip voyp list Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] H245Interface & Related Processes Also should be fairly easy to capture via a packet capture on Cluster 1 if this is easily reproducible for the call flow. Brian On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 5:32 PM, Ryan Ratliff (rratliff) <rratl...@cisco.com<mailto:rratl...@cisco.com>> wrote: Short answer without confirming in the lab is yes, when I send you my H245 address I expect you to start a TCP connection to me on that port so we can start H245. -Ryan On Dec 1, 2014, at 5:12 PM, Daniel Pagan <dpa...@fidelus.com<mailto:dpa...@fidelus.com>> wrote: Folks: Hoping to get some insight on SDL process creation for H245… Scenario is three CUCM clusters communicating over ICTs. Call is routed from Cluster-1 to Cluster-2… then Cluster-2 to Cluster-3. Cluster-3 sends the H245 address & port info via H225 ALERTING to Cluster-2, which then sends its own to Cluster-1. Issue is Cluster-1 never establishes the H245 session with Cluster-2. The H245 address and port is received on Cluster-1 but no H245 processes are being created for the MSD/TCS exchange. According to SDL traces on Cluster-2, the latest state of H245 on the node *sending* the ALERTING message is “waitForTransportEstablishment”. On Cluster-1, the H245Interface process is never created according to SDL traces, so we never even reach the opportunity for TCS media caps exchange. MXTimeout occurs shortly after. Question is… For a node receiving an H245 address & port info via H225 (the calling cluster…), is creation of the H245Interface and/or related H245 process dependent on CUCM *first* establishing the new, 2nd TCP socket with the remote H.323 endpoint that advertised the H.245 port. In other words, at an SDL level, is H245Interface created only after the 2nd TCP session is successfully established at the transport level for H245 TCP communication? Knowing this would help me assess the likelihood of the issue being related to issues at the TCP level. Thanks! - Dan _______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip _______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
