MENU
A customer reports that outbound calls from Cisco UCM to Cisco Unified Border Element are not getting early medi
a. During troubleshooting, the customer finds that Cisco UCM is sending a delayed offer SIP INVITE. Cisco Unified Border Element responds with a 183 Session Progress with SDP message. However, the customer finds that Cisco UCM does not respond to the 183 messages. Which action must the customer perform to resolve the problem?
Suggested Answer: C
Get Premium 300-815 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
40 comments · newest first
CE
Ceola
11 months ago
Surprised this is still a problem in 2023!
CA
Cassie
11 months ago
Wait, are we sure the 183 messages are even being received?
LA
Laurel
11 months ago
I thought midcall-signaling passthru was the way to go?
HE
Hershel
11 months ago
Definitely go with option B, that should fix it!
LE
Leslie
12 months ago
Sounds like a classic early offer issue.
LY
Lynelle
12 months ago
I’m a bit confused about the PRACK option. I remember it being important for handling 1xx responses, but I’m not sure if it applies here.
TI
Timothy
1 year ago
I feel like changing the SIP profile settings on UCM could be the right move, especially since it mentions disabling early offer support. That sounds familiar from a similar question we practiced.
CL
Cletus
1 year ago
I think we discussed that enabling midcall-signaling passthru on the CUBE might help, but I can't recall if that's the best approach for this specific scenario.
MA
Mary
1 year ago
I remember something about early offer and delayed offer issues from our practice sessions, but I'm not sure which option directly addresses the 183 response problem.
WI
Willis
1 year ago
I feel pretty confident about this one. The customer needs to change the SIP profile settings on Cisco UCM to disable the early offer support, which should fix the issue with the 183 Session Progress message not being handled properly.
NU
Nu
1 year ago
This is a tricky one. I'm not entirely sure which option is the best approach, but I'll carefully consider the details and try to eliminate the incorrect choices.
NI
Nieves
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused by the details here. I'll need to carefully review the options to make sure I understand the right solution for this problem.
RE
Reuben
1 year ago
This question seems pretty straightforward. I think the key is to understand the issue with the delayed offer SIP INVITE and the Cisco UCM not responding to the 183 Session Progress message.
SH
Shannon
1 year ago
Okay, based on the information provided, I think the answer is B. Disabling the 'Early Offer support for voice and video calls' on the Cisco UCM SIP profile should resolve the issue with the delayed offer SIP INVITE.
CH
Cherrie
1 year ago
I've got this! The answer is B - 8 Scope 3 categories. I'm confident in that, but I'll quickly skim through the materials just to be sure.
SO
Sophia
1 year ago
This question seems straightforward. I think the answer is D - an inventory Accounts Payable accrual account.
FR
Francoise
1 year ago
It's like a game of SIP ping-pong, but the winner is the one who actually gets the call to work. Option B is the ace serve we need to win this match.
TH
Thersa
1 year ago
I'm going with B. Changing the SIP profile settings on Cisco UCM is the simplest solution here. No need to mess with the Cisco Unified Border Element if the issue is on the Cisco UCM side.
AN
Antonio
1 year ago
Option B seems to be the way to go. Disabling the early offer support on the Cisco UCM SIP profile should force it to use a delayed offer, which should play nice with the Cisco Unified Border Element.
LI
Lizette
1 year ago
User 4: Agreed, let's make that change and test the outbound calls again.
VA
Valene
1 year ago
User 3: Agreed, let's try that solution and see if it resolves the issue.
KA
Kassandra
1 year ago
User 3: Let's give it a try and see if it resolves the problem.
JU
Jutta
1 year ago
User 2: That makes sense, it should help with the delayed offer and compatibility with the Border Element.
BE
Beckie
1 year ago
User 1: I think we should go with option B and disable early offer support on the SIP profile.
JE
Jettie
1 year ago
User 2: That sounds like a good idea. It might help with the delayed offer issue.
CH
Chau
1 year ago
User 1: I think we should try option B and disable early offer support on the SIP profile.
DE
Denise
2 years ago
Haha, it's like Cisco is playing a game of SIP charades with us. The answer has to be B, otherwise it's just going to be a never-ending loop of 183 messages.
CH
Chery
1 year ago
User 4: Chery is right, otherwise it's just going to be a never-ending loop of 183 messages.
LE
Leota
1 year ago
User 3: B) On Cisco UCM, change the 'Early Offer support for voice and video calls' field on the SIP profile that is applied to the SIP trunk to Disabled.
LA
Lai
1 year ago
User 2: A) On Cisco Unified Border Element, configure midcall-signaling passthru.
FE
Felton
1 year ago
User 1: Haha, it's like Cisco is playing a game of SIP charades with us.
GE
Georgiann
2 years ago
But wouldn't configuring midcall-signaling passthru on Cisco Unified Border Element also solve the issue?
MA
Martina
2 years ago
I disagree, I believe the correct answer is D.
FL
Fletcher
2 years ago
I think the correct answer is B. Disabling the 'Early Offer support for voice and video calls' on the Cisco UCM SIP profile should resolve the issue, as the customer is seeing a delayed offer SIP INVITE being sent.
XU
Xuan
1 year ago
B: Yeah, that makes sense. It seems like the delayed offer SIP INVITE is causing the problem.
JA
Jamie
1 year ago
A: I think the correct answer is B. Disabling the 'Early Offer support for voice and video calls' on the Cisco UCM SIP profile should resolve the issue.
GE
Georgiann
2 years ago
I think the answer is B.
TY
Tyra
2 years ago
I'm not sure, but option D could also be a valid solution to consider.
JE
Jess
2 years ago
I agree with Leonora, changing the 'Early Offer support for voice and video calls' field might resolve the issue.
LE
Leonora
2 years ago
I think the customer should choose option B.