[SIPForum-discussion] Call manager express call-forward to Broadworks voicemail

Alejandro Parra parrita at gmail.com
Thu Feb 18 21:01:50 UTC 2010


Looks like CME is sending the INVITE for the Call foward with the diversion
header using the proper extension , which is good,
what I'm seeing is that the provider sends a SIP/2.0 401 Unauthorized
requesting for Digest Authentication and that's pretty much everything there
is to see on the debug, I would have expected to see the CME sending another
INVITE with the digest credentials, so that the call would proceed but as I
said there is nothing else on the debug, which makes me think that either
the CME did not do that or that is not the complete debug.

On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 11:37 AM, David Bauman <dbauman at wanetics.com> wrote:

>
>
> calling from 323 to 115.  call-forward on 115 sends to *55115
>
> 089421: Feb 18 11:27:54.345 CST: //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/SIP/Msg/ccsipDisplayMsg:
> Sent:
> INVITE sip:*55115 at mysipprovider.net:5060 SIP/2.0
> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.1:5060;branch=z9hG4bK9B4D1A65
> From: "WAN" <sip:323 at mysipprovider.net>;tag=20C63B8C-2631
> To: <sip:*55115 at mysipprovider.net>
> Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:27:54 GMT
> Call-ID: C8222C2C-1BE911DF-93DDEB42-A7948323 at as-3.mysipprovider.net
> Supported: 100rel,timer,resource-priority,replaces,sdp-anat
> Min-SE:  1800
> Cisco-Guid: 3357642756-468259295-2480532290-2811527971
> User-Agent: Cisco-SIPGateway/IOS-12.x
> Allow: INVITE, OPTIONS, BYE, CANCEL, ACK, PRACK, UPDATE, REFER, SUBSCRIBE,
> NOTIFY, INFO, REGISTER
> CSeq: 101 INVITE
> Max-Forwards: 70
> Timestamp: 1266514074
> Contact: <sip:323 at 192.168.1.1:5060>
> Diversion: <sip:115 at mysipprovider.net
> >;privacy=off;reason=unconditional;counter=1;screen=no
> Expires: 180
> Allow-Events: telephone-event
> Content-Type: application/sdp
> Content-Disposition: session;handling=required
> Content-Length: 449
>
> v=0
> o=CiscoSystemsSIP-GW-UserAgent 2019 5995 IN IP4 192.168.1.1
> s=SIP Call
> c=IN IP4 192.168.1.1
> t=0 0
> m=audio 18296 RTP/AVP 0 100 101
> c=IN IP4 192.168.1.1
> a=rtpmap:0 PCMU/8000
> a=rtpmap:100 X-NSE/8000
> a=fmtp:100 192-194,200-202
> a=rtpmap:101 telephone-event/8000
> a=fmtp:101 0-16
> a=ptime:20
> a=X-sqn:0
> a=X-cap: 1 audio RTP/AVP 100
> a=X-cpar: a=rtpmap:100 X-NSE/8000
> a=X-cpar: a=fmtp:100 192-194,200-202
> a=X-cap: 2 image udptl t38
>
> 089422: Feb 18 11:27:54.385 CST: //-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/SIP/Msg/ccsipDisplayMsg:
> Received:
> SIP/2.0 401 Unauthorized
> Via:SIP/2.0/UDP 192.168.1.1:5060;branch=z9hG4bK9B4D1A65
> From:"WAN"<sip:323 at mysipprovider.net>;tag=20C63B8C-2631
> To:<sip:*55115 at mysipprovider.net>;tag=532795348-1266514074373
> Call-ID:C8222C2C-1BE911DF-93DDEB42-A7948323 at as-3.mysipprovider.net<Call-ID%3AC8222C2C-1BE911DF-93DDEB42-A7948323 at as-3.mysipprovider.net>
> CSeq:101 INVITE
> WWW-Authenticate:DIGEST
> qop="auth",nonce="BroadWorksXg5tts26dTiqx0gbBW",algorithm=MD5,realm="BroadWorks"
> Content-Length:0
>
>
> On Feb 18, 2010, at 11:25 AM, Alejandro Parra wrote:
>
> Can you get a "debug ccsip messages" from the router, basically we will
> have to see if the INVITE  is being sent to  Broadworks with the diversion
> header included with the number they need to identify the voicemail mailbox.
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 9:51 AM, David Bauman <dbauman at wanetics.com>wrote:
>
>> Has anyone gotten this to work using Broadworks direct voicemail transfer
>> *55?  I can get the direct voicemail transfer call to be placed over a SIP
>> Trunk to Broadworks, but Broadworks sees this is a regular call, and not a
>> transfer or diversion.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> David Bauman
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> This is the SIP Forum discussion mailing list
>> TO UNSUBSCRIBE, or edit your delivery options, please visit
>> http://sipforum.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
>> Post to the list at discussion at sipforum.org
>>
>
>
> David Bauman
> WANetics, LLC.
> 312.546.6015
> www.wanetics.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://sipforum.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20100218/57c49e88/attachment.html 


More information about the discussion mailing list