Possible bug in CUCM 8.0 DNA?

I was doing a cut over from one PRI to another PRI, and while I was doing it I was cleaning up our route patterns from the lazy person who created them in the first place. So I removed the 9.@ route pattern that existed previously, and created all the required route patterns.

Once I had all of my configurations changed, I ran the DNA to ensure it was routing as I intended. To my surprise, it showed it routing through the 9.@ route pattern that was DELETED.

After further testing, everything was routing and being sent as my current route patterns were configured to do. Still, the DNA showed it going through the route pattern that did not exist.

Has anyone experienced this? Is this an intended result? How should I contact Cisco if this is indeed a malfunction?

Input is appreciated.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

shodown

Are you using Local Route Groups?

Also if they are showing a pattern that has been deleted turn on Detailed Tracing. Make a test call get the traces and take a look at them either through Triple Combo or Translator X to get a good idea of what call manager is seeing

chmorin

shodown wrote: »

Are you using Local Route Groups?

Also if they are showing a pattern that has been deleted turn on Detailed Tracing. Make a test call get the traces and take a look at them either through Triple Combo or Translator X to get a good idea of what call manager is seeing

No - I have alot of work to do already as far as their partitions, CSS and Route Group/Patterns already. I'll be implementing the local route group stuff at another time. Currently all I have is the partitions assigned to a route pattern that goes to a route group.

I'll run those tests tomorrow. I appreciate the suggestions and will tell you what I turn up.