I do it to, but did you know that RTP-NTE to SIP-KPML is not supported on CUBE as of yet?
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/voice/cube/configuration/cube-book/dtmf-relay.html#concept_264617919921874995299551391601561__table_16E37E2F33CE4E0B836D2E5A809E7252 On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Justin Steinberg <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > >
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
