« Back to Cisco JTAPI Questions

JTAPI on CallManager 3.3.3

Combination View Flat View Tree View
Threads [ Previous | Next ]
JTAPI on CallManager 3.3.3
Answer
10/16/08 7:14 AM
Hello,
I have the misfortune to need to port one of our existing JTAPI applications to CallManager 3.3(3). I had hoped it might be as simple as downloading the JTAPI plugin, running the installer then copying the jtapi.jar file that gets written to \Windows\java\lib.
Unfortunately, it just doesn't work - the error I get I find quite inexplicable:

"java.lang.ClassFormatError: javax/telephony/ResourceUnavailableException (Illegal Field name "3Eb")"

This exception states that the class javax.telephony.ResourceUnavailableException has a field whose name is "3Eb"! Java identifiers must not begin with a numeric digit, so obviously the VM will throw this error. I have gone to the trouble of decompiling the jar file, and, sure enough, the field name is "3Eb". Even worse, many other classes have members whose names begin with digits.

I have checked the release notes for this JTAPI version, and they explicitly state that Sun Java 1.2 and 1.3 or supported. What do you think is going on here?

Thanks,
Flag

Re: JTAPI on CallManager 3.3.3
Answer
10/21/08 5:47 PM as a reply to Callum Katene.
If the classes are obfuscated, I'd expect weird decompilation results. That however doesn't explain your issue with the jtapi.jar. Are you using one of the outdated jre's to run the application or are you using something newer?

And I don't think anybody will rip off your head if you politely suggest that this CCM be upgraded ASAP.. the 3.x train has been EOL'ed a long time ago and if you ask me, developing against an underfeatured and outdated version isn't such a good investment of time. I don't know how Cisco handles this but I figure at some point support will be cut off as well, so if you run into any other issue that is a bug and you cannot work around, I would presume that you'd just have to live with it - and for me that's the point where I tell the customer that I rather not do the project unless they upgrade to a version where I can have support from the manufacturer if I need it.
Flag