Messages

1

Mitel MiVoice Business/MCD/3300 / Re: MXe 3310 issue

« on: July 14, 2011, 12:10:13 PM »

We do look at what the switch thinks its network card is doing using PRTG but I would have thought that any issues caused by that would have manifested way before now (We installed the systems in January 2011) and anyway be cleared by a reboot...

The maintainers are a small company here in the UK...  called BT.... you may have heard of them and I suspect that their standard fix process will cut in so that we will end up with a new box which doesn't actually fix the problem; I assume this will save them corporate 'face' though not with us of course.

Yep - our Software is MCD 4.2 so well in advance of 9 (I never could understand the mad version numbers of the Mitel software) its a bit of a blessing really because we can disconnect the MXe from the network and have all the phones fail over to another site. Tried that yesterday and it worked just fine

B.

2

Mitel MiVoice Business/MCD/3300 / Re: MXe 3310 issue

« on: July 14, 2011, 10:50:54 AM »

yep - the program reboot went just fine. no errors (other than normal ones about network voicemail not being licensed - well doh! I guess that is because it isn't!)

The last change on the system was on Wednesday this week, the one before that was in May, after which we took a backup - the machine has worked fine since then until yesterday so the current backup we have is complete except for the change made this week (adding another subscriber)

Regards

B.

3

Mitel MiVoice Business/MCD/3300 / MXe 3310 issue

« on: July 14, 2011, 09:57:51 AM »

Hi,

Our MXe is giving trouble, was wondering if anyone can help.....

System Description:
MXe 3310 on its own WAN, Clustered with 2 other MXe 3310s. WAN Link 100Mbit to hub MXe synchronous. MCD Software rev 4.2
Handsets all 5320/5330 PoE

Symptoms:
Box is pingable

Incoming, Outgoing and Extension - Extension calls work fine

Web management interface is very slow (30-60 minutes to login) or non responsive, usually the latter.

Yesterday (when maintainer was here) on the RTC repeated  ps showed the CallEngine process running at >80% cpu which, for a *nix process, is bad news and explains the lack of responsiveness from the system.

When a user logs out of a handset (all users are hot desk) the handset will let them log in, however keys are not displayed and we get a "please wait while upgrades are being performed..." message on the handset; the handset does get the right DN and functions as expected.

Can't connect to MXe via Telnet  (port 2002) (login fail for valid logins) or the web interface (times out) so no visibility of logs. My serial lead seems to disagree with the serial port on the MXe.

The other two MXes in the cluster are complaining (understandably) about SDS replication errors

Things we have tried:
issued a reboot command from the RTC - everything seemed OK until maintainer started a backup; backup hung on "Multiline device key assignments" according to the logging on the RTC.

So the maintainer says replace the HDD or the System... obviously I am reluctant to do either if there is another fix possible... for example are there any RTC commands that can check out the HDD state (like fsck) on a running system just in case the Multiline Handset Key definition database is corrupted by bad sectors or some other issue?

TIA

BenM

4

Mitel MiVoice Business/MCD/3300 / Is alpha tagging really this broken?

« on: February 28, 2011, 03:39:35 AM »

Hi,

It appears that to alpha tag an incoming number from, say, Ben's mobile (say 1111222333), we need to add a tel. dir. entry in the form 9~11111222333. This appears to be true even for numbers which already have a system speed dial & Tel. Dir. entry.

Managing the alpha tagging now becomes a major overhead which is not a big plus for the MXes and a source of considerable ear stress from the users. What makes this 'feature' additionally painful is the fact that the three systems that the MXe devices replaced could all alpha tag straight out of the box - if a number was known to the system either as a Personal or a System speed dial it would be alpha tagged.

Am I missing something obvious or do we have to resign ourselves to an additional overhead activity for managing the alphatag tel. dir. entries?

B.

5

Mitel MiVoice Business/MCD/3300 / Re: Difference in call pitch

« on: February 04, 2011, 02:43:54 AM »

Hi Ray,

It is definitely the low pass filtered "wideband" handset that is the problem - move the handset onto a 5320 and the issue follows it.

I guess it must be a 'feature'.

B.

6

Mitel MiVoice Business/MCD/3300 / Re: Difference in call pitch

« on: February 03, 2011, 10:25:24 AM »

OK - So I get minus several million out of 10 for observation.... the 5330 comes with a 'wideband' handset, where 'wideband' obviously means "low pass filtered"

B.

7

Mitel MiVoice Business/MCD/3300 / Difference in call pitch

« on: February 03, 2011, 09:43:29 AM »

Hi,

We are just installing a network of 3 MXes and 250 5320/5330 handsets spread over three locations.

I have noticed that when I take calls on a 5330 the apparent pitch and timbre of the person on the other end is different to when I take calls on the 5320 - deeper and slightly burred, husky? - more 'sexy' if you like which is appropriate for some callers but I would rather the MD didn't sound like that when he calls my 5330

Caller 5320 - Listener 5320 - Both ends sound fine
Caller 5330 - Listener 5320 - Caller sounds fine to the Listener; Listener sounds husky to the caller
Caller 5320 - Listener 5330 - Caller sounds husky to the listener
Caller 5330 - Listener 5330 - Both sound husky

I have confirmed with other colleagues that I am not dreaming - the clarity and pitch on the 5320 is much better and more natural.

The 'feature' is apparent both locally and between sites.

We have no compression on the calls on the network, and the network is a completely uncongested 100mbit switched infrastructure locally and between sites.

Is this a 'feature' of the 5330? is it adjustable by a configuration setting on the MXe?

Any ideas gratefully received - and if it is something I have to live with then so be it.

Regards