Glen,
I just spoke to one
of my providers that uses a Cisco Gatekeeper and which I have no problems
with and got the following spec info from him.
Cisco Internetwork
Operating System Software
IOS (tm) 7200
Software (C7200-IS-M), Version 12.2(15)T5, RELEASE SOFTWARE
(fc1)
TAC Support: http://www.cisco.com/tac
Copyright 1986-2003 by cisco Systems,
Inc.
Compiled Wed
11-Jun-03 19:39 by eaarmas
Image text-base:
0x60008954, data-base: 0x61BF0000
ROM: System
Bootstrap, Version 12.2(4r)B2, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc2)
BOOTLDR: 7200
Software (C7200-KBOOT-M), Version 12.2(15)T5, RELEASE SOFTWARE
(fc1)
cisco 7206VXR
(NPE400) processor (revision A) with 245760K/16384K bytes of
memory.
Processor board ID
29497839
R7000 CPU at 350Mhz,
Implementation 39, Rev 3.3, 256KB L2, 4096KB L3 Cache
6 slot VXR midplane,
Version 2.7
I have no problems
with this gatekeeper when I set his gatekeeper in Gnugk as a
neighbor or as being a parent to my Gnugk. It
works great. Now, the other provider that's running
a 7206 but with the same IOS version is the one I have problems sending
traffic to. I asked the provider that I do not have problems with
about their configuration and he stated the following:
They do not configure anything to give you access to our DGK. Only
the tech prefix.
You are the one that make the configuration on
your side to send traffic.
The configuration lines you sent me are used in
case I send traffic to you...which is not our
case.
Now I'm not sure how the tech prefix
configuration he specified must be configured in his Cisco Gatekeeper.
But the fact that I have no problems with
a Cisco 7200 Gk but do with 7206 both using same Cisco IOS
version makes me think that this might just be a Cisco Gatekeeper
configuration issue on the 7206 and not Interpretability problems.
Freddy
From: openh323gk-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:openh323gk-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Glen Sykes
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 5:50 PM
To: openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: LRJ from Cisco Gk
Hi Freddy,I have not managed to get this to work yet either. I did post something along the lines of what you have put a while ago but no reply.I am looking to integrate GNUGK as a child GK to a parent Cisco GK but have not been able to test this yet.However I would recommend that the Cisco GK is upgraded to 12.3(7) or (8), for no other reason that it the more recent version supports H.323 version 4.Has the GNUGK been tested for interop with Cisco GK's?Cheers,Glen
From: Freddy Parra [mailto:fparra@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 12 July 2004 18:33
To: openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: LRJ from Cisco GkGlen,Thanks for your reply. I verified the following configuration with the provider, and they say this is exactly how they have it.But this still does not work, it still gives LRJ and the provider also has problems sending calls to gnugk. Just so that you know they are currently running a Cisco Gatekeeper on a 7206 12.2(15)T5.Has anyone gotten a 7206 Cisco gatekeeper to work with gnugk as a neighbor?Freddy-----Original Message-----
From: openh323gk-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:openh323gk-users-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Glen Sykes
Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 11:58 AM
To: openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: LRJ from Cisco GkHave you defined the GNUGK as a remote zone in the Cisco Config?i.e."zone remote GNUGK domain.com [ip address of GNUGK]"also you will need to tell the cisco GK of the zone prefix associated with the GNUGK with the command "zone prefix GNUGK 12345*"The text in italics indicate the H.323 name of the zone associated with the GNUGK.Hope this helps,Glen
From: Freddy Parra [mailto:fparra@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 09 July 2004 16:35
To: openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: openh323gk-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: LRJ from Cisco GkHi,I am getting the following LRJ message from a cisco gatekeeper that I have setup in gnugk as a neighbor gk.2004/07/08 16:29:30.793 1 RasSrv.cxx(1413) GK ARQ Received
2004/07/08 16:29:30.793 4 gkauth.cxx(473) GkAuth default check ok
2004/07/08 16:29:30.793 3 RasSrv.cxx(2340) GK Send to xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:1719locationRequest {
requestSeqNum = 563
destinationInfo = 1 entries {
[0]=dialedDigits "0723#0115034112222"
}
nonStandardData = {
nonStandardIdentifier = h221NonStandard {
t35CountryCode = 181
t35Extension = 0
manufacturerCode = 18
}
data ="" 5 octets {
67 6e 75 67 6b gnugk
}
}
replyAddress = ipAddress {
ip = 4 octets {
xx xx xx xx ....
}
port = 1719
}
sourceInfo = 1 entries {
[0]=h323_ID 9 characters {
0041 0053 0035 0034 0030 0030 004d 0049 AS5400MI
0041 A
}
}
canMapAlias = TRUE
gatekeeperIdentifier = 11 characters {
004e 0055 004d 0049 004e 0044 0047 004b NUMINDGK
0032 0033 0032 232
}
canMapSrcAlias = FALSE
}2004/07/08 16:29:30.794 5 RasSrv.cxx(2354) GK Sent Successful
2004/07/08 16:29:30.794 2 RasSrv.cxx(447) GK Send LRQ to 1 neighbor(s)
2004/07/08 16:29:30.858 2 RasSrv.cxx(2400) GK Read from xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:1719
2004/07/08 16:29:30.858 3 RasSrv.cxxlocationReject {
requestSeqNum = 563
rejectReason = notRegistered <<null>>
}2004/07/08 16:29:30.859 3 RasSrv.cxx(2340) GK Send to xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:49799
admissionReject {
requestSeqNum = 48921
rejectReason = calledPartyNotRegistered <<null>>
}I know that if your setting up gk to gk communication, there is no registration needed between both gatekeepers. So the reason code doesn'tmake any sense to me. Does anyone have any idea what could be the most likely cause of getting a notRegistered LRJ message from a cisco gatekeeper.Thanks.Regards,Freddy
