Maybe just setup this 7206 as a permanent endpoint and prepare a special rewrite rule that will prepend the tech prefix. Maybe they don't want you to send any LRQ before setting up a call. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Freddy Parra" <fparra@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 1:35 AM 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> 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 -----Original Message----- 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 Gk Glen, 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 Gk Have 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 Gk Hi, 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:1719 locationRequest { 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.cxx locationReject { 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't make 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 ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com _______________________________________________________ List: Openh323gk-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=8549 Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/
