type the commands in form 43 in the comments field to turn the options on but remember to go back in and turn them off. If you telnet in you will see a lot of info. This one is the one I use the most to show the layer 2/3 info:
tsp l2l3 on
Hi Panda,
Yes, thank you, I figured that out after reading what I believe was a post from yourself "pandabear1" on the Tek-Tips forums where you included the part about putting the string in the comments. It never even occurred to me to enter it there; to me a comment is a comment, apparently Mitel thinks differently.
Anyway, I was able to get a trace of the call and confirm that the Mitel is rejecting the call. The question then is why?
I played around with different N/M/X values in Form 15, and found the following:
N - "should" work with a value of 4, but doesn't seem to make any difference
M - "should" work with a value of 0, but 6 is the only number than yields a result, though not the correct result
X - "should" be *1, but that doesn't seem to make any difference
The combination of M = 6, with N and X set to any value or no value, results in incoming calls ringing to the front desk (again, this is a hotel). Theoretically with N = 4, M = 0, and X = *1, the Digit Translation Table should then direct the call to extension 6002 (yes, this is a valid internal extension). If I use those settings for N, M, and X, the incoming call fails. If I set M = 6, the call rings through to the front desk.
The trace shows the following on an incoming call:
1 01101100 Information Element: Calling Party Number:
2 IE Length : 12 octets
3 0------- Extension bit : Continued
-000---- Type of number : unknown
----0000 Numbering plan : unknown
3a 1------- Extension bit : Not Continued
-00----- Presentation : Allowed
---000-- Spare
------00 Screening : User provided, not screened
4 ******** Phone number : [XXXXXXXXXX]
1 01110000 Information Element: Called Party Number:
2 IE Length : 5 octets
3 1------- Extension bit : Not Continued
-000---- Type of number : Unknown
----0000 Numbering plan : Unknown
4 ******** Phone number : [8682]
In the above trace sample, I replaced my number with XXXXXXXXXX for security reasons, but it did show the correct number I was calling from. The Called Party Number of 8682 is the correct last four digits of the DID on the T1, so it appears the gateway is passing the correct four digits.
So why are the calls not following the intended path?
Any insights are greatly appreciated.
Thanks.