[cisco-voip] Urgent Priority on Translation Patterns

[Mike Lydick]

We have done similar call routing in the form of short dials for 10 digit
assigned stations. You will not want to us translations for any number
ranges that overlap because of the urgent priority. For the translations
that overlap think of using CTI routepoints or ports and class of services
for these to devices (virtual) to prioritize the number translations lower
(or higher). If you give the Number range and examples of the overlap I am
sure the group will get more specific on a solution.

>Hi Wil,

> Dummy probably wont help here.. I was thinking more for blocking and class
>of restriction use.
>
>What number ranges are you using here.. what are the overlaps?
>Are you just adding a digit to existing numbers to make them 5 digits - or
>is it a new range?
>
>You want it so that...
>NEC users can dial either 4 or 5 digits?
>Cisco users can dial either 4 digits (for NEC extensions) or 5 digits (for
>cisco)?
>
>You should probably just add an access code to the old 4 digit extensions
>from Cisco > NEC..
>Sure it is a change.. but they are changing anyway.
>
>Depending on overlaps.. temporarily might be able to use a ! for your route
>pattern, and reduce Interdigit timer
>This should let you match 5 digit extensions on Cisco, or 4 digits on NEC
I>t wont let you match 4 digits on Cisco though.. not sure if you want that.
>Also depends how long it will be in place..
>
>Cheers,
>
>Tim
>
>
>On 8/22/08, William Roy <William.Roy at l7.com.au> wrote:
>
>  I have thought about a dummy gateway but was not sure how to implement.
> What I am trying to achieve is that we are moving a customer from a 4
digit
> dial plan to a 5 digit dial plan. The new system is CUCM 6.1 install with
> all of the IP phone now using  5 digits and we are integrated with an NEC
> PBX with an MGCP ISR gateways, the phones on the NEC are still using 4
> digit. On the IP phones we want to be able to dial either the old 4 digit
or
> the new 5 digit number. What I had setup was a 4 digit translation that
> added the 5 digit, then if it matched an IP phone it rang the IP phone, if
> it did not match an IP phone extension it sent it on a route pattern to
the
> MGCP gateway and stripped off the 5 digit. That part worked for 4 digits
> dialing however it broke dialing a 5 digit extension of an IP phone, as
some
> of the leading digits matched both the translation pattern plus the first
> digit in the 5 digit extension. So what I have currently setup is removed
> the translation, put in a  4 digit route pattern which points at the MGCP
> gateway, the call setup gets routed over the NEC and then routed back  to
> the CUCM cluster if the call is for an IP phone, CUCM translates the
number
> to a 5 digit number inbound from the gateway. The downside of this is that
> we use up two channels on the E1 per call between IP phones when dialled
> using 4 digits. Hope the above makes sense.
>
>
>
>  So I suppose if possible I need to setup the following...
>
>
>
> 4 digit route pattern to a dummy gateway,
>
> Called number gets translated to a 5 digit pattern.
>
> Call gets sent back to the CUCM, if the extension matches an IP phone
> extension ? ring phone
>
> If the 5 digit number is not an extension on the CUCM ? match a 5 digit
> route pattern send call to the MGCP gateway connected to the NEC and strip
> of 5th digit.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Wil
>
>
>
> *From:* Tim Smith [mailto:smithsonianwa at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, 22 August 2008 4:16 PM
> *To:* William Roy
> *Cc:* cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Urgent Priority on Translation Patterns
>
>
>
> Translation patterns are always urgent.
>
> You could possibly use a Route Pattern instead? dummy gateway maybe?
>
>
>
> Really depends exactly what you are trying to do
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> Tim
>
>
>
> On 8/22/08, *William Roy* <William.Roy at l7.com.au> wrote:
>
> Is there anyway that Urgent priority can be turned off on a translation
> pattern in CUCM 6.x? The doco suggests that it cannot be.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Wil


-- 
Best Regards,

Mike Lydick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20080822/851ae281/attachment.html>