locked
Migrate users to unified messaging only -- not OCS RRS feed

  • Question

  • Nortel Option 61 Rel 3.0; OCS 2007 R2; Audiocodes Mediant 1000 gateway; Enterprise Voice

    I need to migrate some of our users from our current Nortel voicemail system to UM. These users will not be OCS users. They will only be accessing their voicemails from Unified Messaging instead of from our current voicemail system. In doing some research, suggestions are being made that I might need a second trunk to the UM server for these users. I just need to know if there's an easier way to point these unanswered calls to the UM server along with configuring them for Unified Messaging in the Exchange Management Console.
    Thursday, September 17, 2009 6:19 PM

Answers

  • I think I've got this done. After creating the pilot number in the PBX that points to the gateway, I also needed to configure that pilot number on the Tel to IP Routing table pointing it to the UM server. I also needed to configure that number on the Manipulation Table for Tel to Ip Calls as well. But the main trick to this is that I had to add both a secure and an unsecured dialplan to the user's Exchange UM mailbox as well. That works for me. (I'm using an AudioCodes gateway.)
    • Marked as answer by twscrb Thursday, October 15, 2009 2:13 PM
    Thursday, October 15, 2009 2:13 PM

All replies


  • I don't know the exact answer to your question - but on Geoff's website he posted an article about Asterisk talking directly to Exchnage UM without using OCS.

    http://blogs.technet.com/gclark/archive/2008/10/22/asterisk-1-6-0-exchange-2007-sp1-unified-messaging.aspx


    While this references Asterisk - it does contain a lot of useful information which might help you setup a direct link for your people so they do not have to use OCS.

    Hope it helps...


    Regards

    Paul Adams

    Thursday, September 17, 2009 6:32 PM
  • What you'd need is an appropriate number of PRI ports on your Option 61 connected to a media gateway.  You would change the pilot number (voicemail extension) of the user to point to a number that routes across the PRIs to the gateway, which would in turn send the calls to Exchange UM via SIP.
    Mike Stacy | Evangelyze Communications | http://www.evangelyze.net/cs/blogs/mike
    Thursday, September 17, 2009 8:22 PM
    Moderator
  • I understand, you have a Audiocodes Mediant for the OCS 2007 R2 Integration with Exchange UM. You can configure a second UM Gateway in Exchange only for these non OCS Users wich will point to the Audiocodes and configure a special number that points to the subscriber access of this Exchange gw.

    Thursday, September 17, 2009 9:50 PM
  • What you'd need is an appropriate number of PRI ports on your Option 61 connected to a media gateway.  You would change the pilot number (voicemail extension) of the user to point to a number that routes across the PRIs to the gateway, which would in turn send the calls to Exchange UM via SIP.
    Mike Stacy | Evangelyze Communications | http://www.evangelyze.net/cs/blogs/mike

    I got this to work but I need to simplify it a little bit. In the PBX I still need to find a way to point user's extensions to a single number that then can cross the trunk into UM. The way that I'm doing it I would have to create a separate transfer extension for each user so that extension is not duplicated in the Exchange Management Console. But using those individual 'transfer' phantom extensions seems to be the only way to get the unanswered calls to UM.
    Friday, September 18, 2009 6:57 PM
  • The Nortel should be sending the information about the originally dialed number/extension over the PRI to the gateway.  The gateway converts that into a Diversion header that is sent to the Exchange UM pilot number (the same number for all users).  Exchange uses the diversion info to determine which user the original call was sent to and directs the caller to that person's voicemail.

    It sounds to me like something along the chain isn't passing the right info and/or the format doesn't match the way you have users enabled for UM.
    Mike Stacy | Evangelyze Communications | http://www.evangelyze.net/cs/blogs/mike
    Friday, September 18, 2009 7:03 PM
    Moderator
  • hi
    Any update for your issue?

    Regards!
    Friday, September 25, 2009 10:13 AM
    Moderator
  • hi
    Any update for your issue?

    Regards!

    I still haven't had any success with this. I've created a single pilot voicemail number for UM. However, when the calls are transferred to that number I get the 'subscriber access' prompt and not the voicemail prompt. The problem seems to be that the single pilot number that I've created doesn't know which mailbox to hit because it's not associated with any of them. If I place the pilot voicemail number as an 'EUM address' in one of the mailboxes in the Exchange Console it works properly -- but I can obviously have a unique instance of that number in the Exchange Console. So, I know that it works. But the question now is how do I get the pilot voicemail number(same number for all users) to send the call to a specific user's voicemail?
    Tuesday, September 29, 2009 2:48 PM
  • The behavior that you're describing is exactly what happens when the diversion info is not sent.  You need to work with your Nortel and/or gateway support vendor to see which system is failing to send the proper data.  My guess is that the Nortel is not sending it to the gateway.
    Mike Stacy | Evangelyze Communications | http://www.evangelyze.net/cs/blogs/mike
    Tuesday, September 29, 2009 6:34 PM
    Moderator
  • I think I've got this done. After creating the pilot number in the PBX that points to the gateway, I also needed to configure that pilot number on the Tel to IP Routing table pointing it to the UM server. I also needed to configure that number on the Manipulation Table for Tel to Ip Calls as well. But the main trick to this is that I had to add both a secure and an unsecured dialplan to the user's Exchange UM mailbox as well. That works for me. (I'm using an AudioCodes gateway.)
    • Marked as answer by twscrb Thursday, October 15, 2009 2:13 PM
    Thursday, October 15, 2009 2:13 PM