yes, CUBE can do RFC2833/NTP to a Telco and SIP-KPML to CUCM. I do this for calls that terminate on CCX IVR since CCX does not support RFC2833. With only rtp-nte on the dialpeer from CUBE to CUCM, CUCM will invoke a MTP. Adding sip-kpml to the dial-peer will allow RTP directly from CUBE to CCX without any MTP in the middle.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Ed Leatherman <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Daniel, that helps a lot in understanding the feature. I'm curious > if CUBE will also translate digits to KPML in this case if the leg to CUCM > has that negotiated. Wish I had a lab built out for this :) > > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Daniel Pagan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Ed: >> >> >> >> I specifically worked with the dynamic payload option for a few cases >> that came my way. Based on my findings, when a dynamic payload type (such >> as 100/101/etc.) is received by CUBE, it will check if the next-hop >> dial-peer has the asymmetric payload feature enabled and, if it is, will >> pass the received payload type through to the next call-leg. Take a look at >> my screen shot below. This was taken from some old notes where AT&T was the >> customer’s carrier. >> >> >> >> >> >> The call flow above shows two call-legs, and *the arrows represent an >> offer/answer exchange*. >> >> >> >> With asymmetric payload enabled on both call legs, the 100 offer from ATT >> is passed to CUCM despite 101 being the default PT for NTE. In the SDP >> answer from CUCM, we’re getting PT 101 -- since asymmetry is enabled on the >> DP to ATT in this call flow, we pass the 101 through to ATT despite having >> received PT 100. >> >> >> >> This results in asymmetry on our negotiated PT for each call-leg. >> >> >> >> *Let’s change it up a bit… A second example.* >> >> If asymmetry was disabled on the dial-peer to CUCM but enabled to ATT, we >> would receive 100 PT from ATT, send 101 to CUCM, receive 101 from CUCM, and >> send 101 to ATT. The resulting PTs would be symmetrical between CUBE and >> CUCM, but asymmetrical between CUBE and ATT. >> >> >> >> See screenshot below for a third example: >> >> >> >> >> >> This example shows asymmetric payload disabled on both call-legs using >> the same call flow. CUBE receives PT of 100 from ATT -- the outbound >> dialpeer has asymmetry disabled, so it transmits the PT specified for that >> dial-peer (default 101 or any hardcoded dynamic PT) to CUCM. We then >> receive 101 from CUCM and, since our inbound dial-peer has asymmetry >> disabled, CUBE sends 100 to match the original PT it received. Asymmetry is >> disabled so CUBE is not passing the received dynamic PT through to the >> next-hop dial-peer - we have symmetry on both call legs for our NTE PT. >> >> >> >> Note that CUBE has no issues receiving one dynamic PT for NTE and sending >> another (ex: receiving PT 100 and transmitting 101 for RTP-NTE) on the same >> call leg. >> >> >> >> Hope this helps >> >> >> >> - Dan >> >> --------end attach--------- >> >> >> >> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:[email protected]] *On >> Behalf Of *Ed Leatherman >> *Sent:* Monday, July 18, 2016 3:10 PM >> *To:* Cisco VOIP <[email protected]> >> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] DTMF interworking on CUBE - asymmetric payloads >> >> >> >> I'm trying to get my head wrapped around some DTMF interworking >> features... >> >> >> >> I have this setup: >> >> >> >> UCM ------ CUBE ------- 3rd party system >> >> >> >> For both call legs through CUBE I'm advertising kpml and rtp-nte for >> dtmf-relay >> >> >> >> The 3rd party sometimes sends me rtp payload type 101 for nte's, and no >> kpml, and things work (as a bonus I observed CUBE correctly interworking >> the nte's from the pbx into KPML, so uccx didn't break). >> >> Sometimes they send type 98 and no kpml, and things don't work. >> >> >> >> I'm trying to understand what is happening and what feature should fix it >> (without breaking other things) >> >> >> >> Assumption: >> >> "dtmf-relay rtp-nte kpml" is telling CUBE to offer/accept rtp type 101 >> only for nte. I observe that CUBE negotiates KPML only for the associated >> call leg back to UCM and doesn't bother with rtp-nte, so its just like any >> other codec that CUBE doesn't care about. >> >> >> >> So.. if third party system ONLY sent me dtmf-relay with payload type 98, >> could I just set the rtp payload type for this to 98 on the inbound dial >> peer? would CUBE then correctly switch these up to 101 headed back to UCM? >> >> >> >> How can I (or can I at all) make this work in my particular case were I >> could receive both? >> >> I see "asymmetric payload dtmf" thrown about as a possible solution, but >> I'm having trouble understanding what it actually does. It sounds like it >> passes these payload types through CUBE, so UCM could be getting rtp >> payload type 98 - it knows what to do with it? It seems like then CUBE >> wouldn't be able to translate things to KPML this way... >> >> >> >> I'm reading >> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/voice/cube/configuration/cube-book/voi-dymc-payld-dtmf.html >> but I guess I'm just not drinking enough coffee today (or too much) and I'm >> not getting what exactly this command does. >> >> >> >> Anyone know how that asymmeteric command works? >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Ed Leatherman >> > > > > -- > Ed Leatherman > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-voip mailing list > [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip > >
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
