Hey Guys,

I seem to have hit a stumbling block setting up a RightFax server V9.3 and a
Brooktrout TR1034 card.
I cant get the T-1 to come up.
The way its set up is the BrookTrout card goes to a VWIC2-2MFT-T1/E1-T1 port
on my 2851.
I am using CUCM 5.1.1 and MGCP on that T1 port on the 2851. My config on the
2851 is as follows.

controller T1 0/1/1
framing esf
clock source internal
linecode b8zs
pri-group timeslots 1-24 service mgcp
!

interface Serial0/1/1:23
no ip address
isdn switch-type primary-4ess
isdn protocol-emulate network
isdn incoming-voice voice
isdn bind-l3 ccm-manager
no cdp enable


On the Brooktrout card on the "PortA" tab I have the following:
Switch Type : AT&T #4 ESS
Protocol (Variant):  Bellcore national ISDN-1 Standard
Emulation: CPE
Line Coding B8ZS

On the "Clock settings" tab i have:
Clock Mode: Master
Clock Source : Network Trunk Port A
Clock Compatibility: None


I tried getting their tech support to help but they pointed fingers at the
CUCM and said they couldnt help me any further.

Thanks,

Joel P

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Okay,

Ignore this, i had an incorrect crossover cable. Made a correct one and now
the t-1 is up on both sides.
Realized it after I replied to Senthil.

Joel P.


On 12/28/07, Joel Perez <tman701@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey Senthil,
>
> Here is my output:
>
> ISDN Serial0/1/1:23 interface
>         ******* Network side configuration *******
>         dsl 3, interface ISDN Switchtype = primary-4ess
>         L2 Protocol = Q.921 0x0000  L3 Protocol(s) = CCM MANAGER 0x0003
>     Layer 1 Status:
>         DEACTIVATED
>     Layer 2 Status:
>         TEI = 0, Ces = 1, SAPI = 0, State = TEI_ASSIGNED
>     Layer 3 Status:
>         0 Active Layer 3 Call(s)
>     Active dsl 3 CCBs = 0
>     The Free Channel Mask:  0x00000000
>     Number of L2 Discards = 0, L2 Session ID = 2
>     Total Allocated ISDN CCBs = 0
>
> Another thing I forgot to mention was that the board comes with a straight
> thru cable but i tried also a crossover cable.
> Same results.
>
> Joel P
>
>
>  On 12/28/07, senthil natarajan <senccie@gmail.com> wrote: 
>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]