atcomsystems.ca/forum Forums TDM Business Telephone Systems Mitel Telephones & Systems Mitel SX200 - how to view debug logs

The logs, while valuable, will not necessarily help in resolving the problem. Issues like wink timing, E&M setup and tear down, dial tone expected, toll office, DTMF, NI1, NI2, AT&T, DMS and a host of others are what make this a difficult problem to resolve. Something as simple as 250 ms. wink vs 300 ms. wink is enough to cause problems. How did you program form 15? Did you specify how many digits are expected and if you are stripping off incoming digits or adding digits, have you done that? How did you program form 19 for illegal and vacant numbers? Did you program a DID answer point? You see, there are a host of issues that must be addressed to properly resolve the problem.

I have found, in the case of DIDs not going where they are supposed to go there is usually a conflict in form 15. Also, the timing is CRITICAL if these are wink start trunks. You MUST make sure the carrier is supplying winks and correct timing. This is why I suggested a Mitel dealer take this problem on because, without a little experience, the carrier can tell you all kinds of BS and none of it is correct. Learn this, if nothing else, the carriers LIE. Your PRI should be ESF, B8ZS and should be set up as E&M. I have actually seen the PRI delivered as ESF and AMI. Any telephone crafts person will tell you this is impossible, but it can leave the CO or the POP as B8ZS and some repeater or interface module, in line, can be optioned out for AMI. It happens. To really see what is actually happening on the span, you should have a Tberd or some other piece of test equipment that can accurately tell you what is really happening. Logs will tell you a little, but the true proof is in a span analysis that can only be done with a test instrument, like a Tberd.

Rcaman

Form 15. Why is the 1st trunk programmed for different received digits and digits to be absorbed? (N and M)

The PBX vendor was able to get incoming calls to come through, albeit they weren't routing to the intended extension, they were ringing through to the front desk (this is a hotel). They were modifying how many of the incoming digits were sent and how many were being stripped, though they couldn't find a pattern to make sense of it and route it correctly. They seemed to think they weren't receiving the correct four digits of the DID coming from the gateway, although the gateway debugs show exactly that. That's what I'm trying to confirm by accessing debugs on the PBX side.

form 15:
N - is the number of digits to expect from the CO
M - is the number of digits to be absorbed
X - is the digit to insert

assumption only, N is 4 M is 0 and X is blank

just say your post, make sure you have *1 in form 2 option 67, that is the X in form 15, digit translation