February 2015 - VoiceOps - lists.voiceops.org

Maintenance for Performance Technologies SEGway
by scott＠socket.net May 17, 2017

May 17, 2017

We have been using a set of PTI SEGway x201s with point code emulation for a number of years now. We also have an unlicensed spare in stock. The maintenance contract renewals are due and the two quotes I've received are quite high. I know of at least one other company that has chosen to drop the vendor maintenance and take care of that in-house. I would like to hear from anyone that is currently using SEGways and find out what they chose to do for maintenance. I would also be very interested to hear of any bad experiences from chosing the in-house option. Thanks. Scott Stratman Network Facilities Manager SOCKET 573-999-4376 scott at socket.net 1-800-SOCKET-3 www.socket.net

3 2

T1 Crossover Cable
by jay＠west.net April 20, 2015

April 20, 2015

On 10/31/14, 11:35 AM, Alexander Lopez wrote: > I have always done 1 to 4, 2 to 5. > > But as I read below this is incorrect. > > To add further confusion, google returns both as valid. > > So what is the correct one? Technically, 1-to-5 and 2-to-4 is correct but either should work. The other way swaps tip and ring which won't make a difference in this or most applications. Odd-numbered pins are tip, even are ring. Mostly white conductors with color stripes should go the odd pins (tip). -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay at impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV

2 1

Key System Using Polycom VVX
by colton.conor＠gmail.com April 14, 2015

April 14, 2015

Can anyone recommend an onsite IP PBX that fully supports the Polycom VVX series of phones? When I say support I mean auto configure, do firmware updates, etc...I know most all IP PBX's will at least be able to use the VVX as a SIP extension. The clients wants to emulate a key system. The IP PBX should support SIP trunks of course for connection to the PSTN. The client also wants the ability to use a local MoH source, paging, and other common key system features that hosted systems don't do very well. I was thinking switchvox, but they don't have phone feature packs for the VVX line only the older phones. Adtran has the 7060, but according to the latest release notes: ADTRAN branded VVX phones (model names ADTRAN VVX 300, ADTRAN VVX 310, ADTRAN VVX 400, ADTRAN VVX 410, ADTRAN VVX 500, and ADTRAN VVX 600) work with NetVanta 7000 series AOS release version R10.8.0 and beyond without requiring an additional license key purchase. The equivalent Polycom branded phones will not work with release R10.8.0. If you are currently using the equivalent Polycom branded phones with the NetVanta 7000 series, you will need to either remain on a pre-R10.8 release version or use the ADTRAN branded version of the VVX phones until a licensing mechanism can be added to allow the use of Polycom branded VVX models. Looks like that won't be a good option since the client already has regular Polycom VVX phones not the ones with Adtran's badge on them. Any recommendations?

14 16

TCP registration timer survey
by slocoach＠gmail.com Feb. 27, 2015

Feb. 27, 2015

Hi, We're looking at significantly increasing the TCP NAT'd endpoint registration expires value on access SBCs for a couple reasons. 1) Reduce RPS on the SBC 2) Better support mobile voip apps (specifically on iOS) We're more or less a Polycom shop. Other than the mobile app only our BLF traffic has been using TCP and our reg-expire is at 90 seconds. The app seems to tolerate an expire of 1200 with no issues, and we'll be testing the Polycoms to see if we're breaking anything there. ( read there's a historical, 2009, issue with Polycoms and reg-expire above 120 ) All that said - I'm curious if anyone here has TCP reg-expire experiences they'd like to share. Regards, Russ

1 0

Anyone seeing L3 TF trouble?
by april＠teliax.com Feb. 27, 2015

Feb. 27, 2015

We're having difficulties terminating toll-free calls to CICs 5102 and 0444 starting earlier today. We terminate direct via tandem. All other CICs seem totally fine, just Level 3 and legacy WilTel having issues. Calls are flat-out rejected or completing with super high PDD off-tandem. I haven't seen anything on their internal network events, and based on their troubles earlier this week I figured I'd poke around the list.

1 0

SIP Trunk - Asterisk (Got SIP response 400 "Bad Request" back from 10.50.3.161:5060)
by smwamba＠sihebs.co.tz Feb. 27, 2015

Feb. 27, 2015

Hello , I will appreciate to get assisted with trunk setup, am getting bad request response on both incoming and outgoing callls Have tried all option possible but no luck My network diagram ------------------------------ softphone < --------> Asterisk PBX (On device&user mode) <------------> Cisco Router< ------------------------------> Service Provider (10.50.37.84) (10.50.37.82) (10.50.37.81 inside) (10.50.3.161) My SIP Trunks:(Using IP Authentication) Outbound setting ------------------------ host=10.50.3.161 type=friend qualify=yes dtmfmode=rfc2833 context=from-pstn insecure=port,invite disallow=all allow=alaw&ulaw&g729 sip_general_additional.conf ------------------------------------------- vmexten=*97 faxdetect=no context=from-sip-external callerid=Unknown notifyringing=yes notifyhold=yes tos_sip=cs3 tos_audio=ef tos_video=af41 alwaysauthreject=yes useragent=GHJ-2.11.0(11.8.1) disallow=all allow=ulaw allow=alaw allow=g729 allow=gsm allowexternaldomains=no autodomain=no callerid=asterisk callevents=yes jbenable=no defaultexpiry=120 allowguest=yes srvlookup=yes minexpiry=60 maxexpiry=3600 registerattempts=0 registertimeout=20 g726nonstandard=yes videosupport=no maxcallbitrate=384 canreinvite=no rtptimeout=30 rtpholdtimeout=300 rtpkeepalive=0 checkmwi=10 notifyringing=yes notifyhold=yes nat=no

1 0

Level 3 Issues
by mjacobs76＠gmail.com Feb. 25, 2015

Feb. 25, 2015

Anyone else having a large issue with Level 3?

10 16

VoiceOps Digest, Vol 68, Issue 15
by mjacobs76＠gmail.com Feb. 25, 2015

Feb. 25, 2015

Been stable for about an hour. On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:41 PM, <voiceops-request at voiceops.org> wrote: > Send VoiceOps mailing list submissions to > voiceops at voiceops.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > voiceops-request at voiceops.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > voiceops-owner at voiceops.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of VoiceOps digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Level 3 Issues (Mauricio Lizano) > 2. Re: Level 3 Issues (Michael Lunsford) > 3. Re: Level 3 Issues (Ujjval Karihaloo) > 4. Re: Level 3 Issues (Mauricio Lizano) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 12:11:44 -0600 > From: Mauricio Lizano <mauricio.lizano at gmail.com> > Cc: "VoiceOps at voiceops.org" <voiceops at voiceops.org> > Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Level 3 Issues > Message-ID: > <CAOc2wFYbCtgss_tVx= > 8CbQtbPwkKAPTQ1Vaxbibn51s1P607uA at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > I'm seeing stuff normalize. Is everybody else seeing the same? Has anybody > gotten a response from Level 3? > > Thanks, > Mauricio > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Zak Rupas <zak at simplesignal.com> wrote: > > > anyone engaged with Level 3 TAC being told any updates or reason why? I > > keep calling and get robo responses > > > > Zak Rupas > > VoIP Engineer > > *SimpleSignal* > > Anywhere: 303-242-8606 > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Feby Francis < > feby.francis at crosstel.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Looks like Level-3 inbound TF service is down for last 30 min. > >> > >> > >> > >> Anyone else with same problem. > >> > >> > >> > >> Feby Francis > >> > >> > >> > >> *From:* VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] *On Behalf Of > *Michael > >> Jacobs > >> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2015 12:06 PM > >> *To:* voiceops at voiceops.org > >> *Subject:* [VoiceOps] Level 3 Issues > >> > >> > >> > >> Anyone else having a large issue with Level 3? > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> VoiceOps mailing list > >> VoiceOps at voiceops.org > >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > VoiceOps mailing list > > VoiceOps at voiceops.org > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops > > > > > > > -- > Mauricio Lizano > 8821-6575 > http://cr.linkedin.com/pub/mauricio-lizano/14/162/5b5 >

1 0

VoiceOps Digest, Vol 68, Issue 15
by Jeff.Hanslik＠pressone.net Feb. 25, 2015

Feb. 25, 2015

Update to my L3 ticket: "Contact method: EMAIL & PORTAL Client contacted: NOC Update provided: Client reported experiencing Dead air on TF calls routing over the Dallas NBS. Next action: Level3 IP found SONUS INVITES were not reaching the clients. This issue has been cleared at this time. Approximate time frame of occurrence 15:50-17:16 GMT. Level3 Engineers are currently investigating why the traffic was not offered to the client's network. We will provide additional information as we receive it. At this time the issue has been cleared and calls are completing. Thank you, Service Assurance Level(3)Communications" Best Regards, Jeff Hanslik (813) 933-6767 x2127 jeff.hanslik at pressone.net "Enjoy today . . . it won't come back" -----Original Message----- From: VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of voiceops-request at voiceops.org Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 1:42 PM To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: VoiceOps Digest, Vol 68, Issue 15 Send VoiceOps mailing list submissions to voiceops at voiceops.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to voiceops-request at voiceops.org You can reach the person managing the list at voiceops-owner at voiceops.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of VoiceOps digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Level 3 Issues (Mauricio Lizano) 2. Re: Level 3 Issues (Michael Lunsford) 3. Re: Level 3 Issues (Ujjval Karihaloo) 4. Re: Level 3 Issues (Mauricio Lizano) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 12:11:44 -0600 From: Mauricio Lizano <mauricio.lizano at gmail.com> Cc: "VoiceOps at voiceops.org" <voiceops at voiceops.org> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Level 3 Issues Message-ID: <CAOc2wFYbCtgss_tVx=8CbQtbPwkKAPTQ1Vaxbibn51s1P607uA at mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" I'm seeing stuff normalize. Is everybody else seeing the same? Has anybody gotten a response from Level 3? Thanks, Mauricio On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Zak Rupas <zak at simplesignal.com> wrote: > anyone engaged with Level 3 TAC being told any updates or reason why? I > keep calling and get robo responses > > Zak Rupas > VoIP Engineer > *SimpleSignal* > Anywhere: 303-242-8606 > > > > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Feby Francis <feby.francis at crosstel.com> > wrote: > >> Looks like Level-3 inbound TF service is down for last 30 min. >> >> >> >> Anyone else with same problem. >> >> >> >> Feby Francis >> >> >> >> *From:* VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] *On Behalf Of *Michael >> Jacobs >> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2015 12:06 PM >> *To:* voiceops at voiceops.org >> *Subject:* [VoiceOps] Level 3 Issues >> >> >> >> Anyone else having a large issue with Level 3? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> VoiceOps mailing list >> VoiceOps at voiceops.org >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > VoiceOps mailing list > VoiceOps at voiceops.org > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops > > -- Mauricio Lizano 8821-6575 http://cr.linkedin.com/pub/mauricio-lizano/14/162/5b5

1 0

Level 3 Issues
by ivan.kovacevic＠startelecom.ca Feb. 25, 2015

Feb. 25, 2015

That makes sense. We use CHI as primary. Best Regards, Ivan Kovacevic Vice President, Client Services Star Telecom | www.startelecom.ca | SIP Based Services for Contact Centers *From:* Greg Lohrenz [mailto:gregl at aitech.net] *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2015 12:17 PM *To:* Ivan Kovacevic *Cc:* Michael Jacobs; voiceops at voiceops.org *Subject:* Re: [VoiceOps] Level 3 Issues Level3 Dallas is having problems routing voice traffice in and out of Dallas. Inbound voice origination traffic should be re-routing to their Chicago presence. Problems started around 950am central time this morning. *Greg Lohrenz ? CEO* 9855 West 78th Street, Suite 300 Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Office: 952-829-5511 ext. 200 Fax: 952-829-5601 *gregl at aitech.net <gregl at aitech.net>* <http://www.aitech.net/>*A Better Voice and Data Alternative ?* On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Ivan Kovacevic < ivan.kovacevic at startelecom.ca> wrote: TF, DID, LD... ? Our TFNs seem to be working fine. What?s the issue, voice quality or completion? Best Regards, Ivan Kovacevic Vice President, Client Services Star Telecom | www.startelecom.ca | SIP Based Services for Contact Centers | *From:* Michael Jacobs [mailto:mjacobs76 at gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2015 12:09 PM *To:* Ivan Kovacevic *Cc:* voiceops at voiceops.org *Subject:* Re: [VoiceOps] Level 3 Issues Voice issues is what I am looking at. On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Ivan Kovacevic < ivan.kovacevic at startelecom.ca> wrote: Can you be more specific? Data, voice? (assuming voice, but what kind) Best Regards, Ivan Kovacevic Vice President, Client Services Star Telecom | www.startelecom.ca | SIP Based Services for Contact Centers *From:* VoiceOps [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] *On Behalf Of *Michael Jacobs *Sent:* Wednesday, February 25, 2015 12:06 PM *To:* voiceops at voiceops.org *Subject:* [VoiceOps] Level 3 Issues Anyone else having a large issue with Level 3? _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

1 0