[cisco-voip] Urgent Priority on Translation Patterns

[William Roy]

I don't think the RP with a ! will work. All the Cisco IP phones are configured with a 5 digit extension all the NEC phones are configured with 4 digits, so if somebody on an IP phone dials another IP phone by 4 digits only, the extension dialled wont exist until it has been flipped to 5 digits.  If this is happening on the RP wont the extra digit be added once it has matched on the RP and being sent over to the PBX?

Cheers
Wil

From: smithsonianwa at gmail.com [mailto:smithsonianwa at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Tim Smith
Sent: Monday, 25 August 2008 5:45 PM
To: William Roy
Cc: Mike Lydick; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Urgent Priority on Translation Patterns

Yeah.. not always possible I know.. but you could use the technically not possible excuse to cause them a little bit of pain with their old dialling habits.. that way they decide on their own to use the new scheme :)

I see the CTI RP thing.. but I'm just wondering if the route pattern with the ! will do the same thing.. but without the CTI RP, and forwarding...

Since your relying on T302 anyway now...
RP with a ! will produce more matches and not get urgently routed..
If extension exists, it will match and route
If not - T302 will expire, and RP will route to PBX.

Cheers,

Tim.

On 8/25/08, William Roy <William.Roy at l7.com.au<mailto:William.Roy at l7.com.au>> wrote:

I like your thinking Tim - retrain the user :)



The beauty of using the CTI RP and a call forward, it allows you to convert to a 5 digit number, check to see if any IP phones are configured with the extension, if not then matches a route pattern that sends the call over to an extension on the NEC.



From: smithsonianwa at gmail.com<mailto:smithsonianwa at gmail.com> [mailto:smithsonianwa at gmail.com<mailto:smithsonianwa at gmail.com>] On Behalf Of Tim Smith
Sent: Monday, 25 August 2008 4:31 PM
To: William Roy
Cc: Mike Lydick; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Urgent Priority on Translation Patterns



Hi Guys..



That is a good tip..



But wouldnt this just work with a route pattern

[14567]XXX!



Add a prefix digit of 6 under called party tranform..

Then the call wouldnt be forwarded.



It would still rely on interdigit timeout... but either way.. thats a good opportunity to train the users... ? 5 second wait to dial 4 digits... or take an extra 1 second to enter the 5th digit and it goes straight away? :)





Cheers,



Tim.




On 8/25/08, William Roy <William.Roy at l7.com.au<mailto:William.Roy at l7.com.au>> wrote:

Big thanks to Mike and this alias. Have implemented the use of CTI route points to convert a 4 digit number into a forwarded 5 digit number. I did not realise that masks could be used in call forwards. So what I have set up is the following:



CTI Route point with a DN of [14567]XXX

This has a CFA set to 6XXXX.



E.g If a person dials 6005 this converts to 66005,  this matches a DN on an IP Phone - call completes.

      If a person dials 4041 this converts to 64041, this does not match an IP phone, it now matches a route pattern that sends it over to the NEC and strips off the leading 6 again.



I have the interdigit timeout currently set to 5 seconds and we are having to wait for this to expire when dialing 4 digits, is there away with the above solution to use a # at the end of the pattern on the CTI route point to make it complete quicker? From my quick testing this was not working as having the # at the end of the DN messed up the mask on the CFA.



Regards,

Wil



From: Mike Lydick [mailto:mike.lydick at gmail.com<mailto:mike.lydick at gmail.com>]
Sent: Friday, 22 August 2008 7:19 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>; William Roy
Subject: Re: Re: Urgent Priority on Translation Patterns



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.


--
Best Regards,

Mike Lydick

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20080826/e084cf66/attachment-0001.html>