[cisco-voip] problem with part and css (the none partition)
Davis, Michael
Michael_Davis at eLoyalty.com
Mon Dec 5 12:24:12 EST 2005
That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan Ratliff [mailto:rratliff at cisco.com]
Sent: Mon 12/5/2005 9:03 AM
To: Davis, Michael
Cc: Lelio Fulgenzi; Mark Snow; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] problem with part and css (the none partition)
IPC is actually based on the 7970 IP phone. You are correct it talks
skinny, not CTI/Jtapi.
-Ryan
On Dec 4, 2005, at 5:55 PM, Davis, Michael wrote:
IIRC, the IP Communicator was at some point based on the old Selsius
Cisco 30 SP+ rather than CTI. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong.
I know this is definitely the case for CAD Media Termination clients,
but am not certain about IP Communicator.
Either way, IP Communicator is configured as a hardware device and
uses SCCP rather than JTAPI for control. So in my mind it is a
Software only IP Phone, not a "true" JTAPI controlled CTI device. So
your testing is consistent with what I've seen. However, things like
IP Blue, Cisco Softphone, CTI Ports/CTI Route Points and the JTAPI
apps such as IPCC/IPCCX, etc) that control them are going to be
affected.
I know the original post was specific to IP Communicator, but with
all the discussion around how CSSes are processed, I thought I should
add the caveat.
HTH clarify,
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net on behalf of Lelio Fulgenzi
Sent: Sun 12/4/2005 4:06 PM
To: Mark Snow; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Cc:
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] problem with part and css (the none
partition)
And the other question is....I'm assuming this doesn't affect
IPCommunicator? I ran a test in the lab and it created the PSS
according to line+device. Is this because IP communicator is not a
CTI application like Softphone? Are my results what you would expect?
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Snow <mailto:highspeedsnow at gmail.com>
To: 'Lelio Fulgenzi' <mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca> ; cisco-
voip at puck.nether.net
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 4:20 PM
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] problem with part and css (the none
partition)
The answer probably lies with the PM, but I don’t know why or when …
_____
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-
bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 2:04 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] problem with part and css (the none
partition)
Is there any particular reason why they've gone this way with the
CTIs? Are they eventually going to change it?
----- Original Message -----
From: Davis, Michael <mailto:Michael_Davis at eLoyalty.com>
To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 3:02 PM
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] problem with part and css (the none
partition)
I don't have a whole lot of experience with 3.1, but I have
recently been "burnt" by forgetting the CTI vs non-CTI search order. :-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Snow [mailto:highspeedsnow at gmail.com]
Sent: Sun 12/4/2005 1:47 PM
To: Davis, Michael; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Cc:
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] problem with part and css (the none
partition)
Good Point!
For those of you out there running versions prior to 3.1 when it
was still
'Call Mangler'.
Also if you are running those previous versions, try Forwarding
your phone
to it's own DN and then calling it from another phone - just for
fun! ;)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-
> bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Davis, Michael
> Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 1:36 PM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] problem with part and css (the none
partition)
>
> Also,
> Prior to CCM 3.1, Device Level CSS were placed ahead of Line
Level CSS.
As of
> 3.1, Line Level CSSes are placed ahead of Device Level, EXCEPT
for CTI
devices
> (Softphone, CTI Ports, Route Points, etc,) which use the old
method.
>
> Mike
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net on behalf of Mark
Snow
> Sent: Sun 12/4/2005 1:13 PM
> To: 'Lelio Fulgenzi'; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Cc:
> Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] problem with part and css (the none
partition)
>
>
>
> Guys,
>
>
>
> The <none> partition is actually a real partition, it is
there by
default and
> is assigned to the very bottom of every CSS.
>
>
>
> So if you had a RP of '91X' in the INTERAL_PT belonging to
the
> HQ_911_CSS and Phone 1 at HQ had this CSS assigned, but you
also had a RP
of
> '911' in in the <none> Partition (PT) and the user at Phone 1 at
HQ dialed
911, he
> would actually be routed to the 911 RP in the <none> PT due to
the fact
that it
> appears last in the HQ_911_CSS and is a longer match.
>
>
>
> It is similar to the <null> MRG, which belongs at the very
bottom of
every
> MRGL.
>
>
>
> MTC and HTH some :-)
>
>
>
> -Mark Snow
>
> CCIE Voice # 14073
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-
> bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
> Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 12:19 PM
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] problem with part and css (the none
partition)
>
>
>
> Oh yeah, and don't forget the <None> partition. It's not
really a
partition,
> but it encompasses as DNs and patterns that have not been
assigned to a
> partition. There is no easy way to block access to these DNs
unless you
create
> duplicate entries in another partition and block those (which we
have
done). I
> can't remember the search algorithm and whether the <None>
partition is
simply
> placed last in the ordered list and searched accordingly or if
it is
searched only
> after no match is made in the other partitions. A search on CCO
docs could
tell
> you this probably.
>
>
>
> We've moved towards a dialplan model that has next to no
DNs in the
> <None> partition. The only ones we have in there are our campus
emergency
> number and our helpline number. In the event that a phone goes out
> misconfigured, chances are very high they will be able to call
these
numbers.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Lelio Fulgenzi <mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>
>
> To: James Grace <mailto:jgrace at digitelusa.net> ;
cisco-
> voip at puck.nether.net
>
> Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 1:13 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] problem with part and css
>
>
>
> Think of it this way, a calling search space is
simply an
ordered
> list of partitions which the line or device searches through for
a match
of the
> dialed digits. If you look through the traces, you will see the
term PSS
which I
> believe stands for Phone Search Space. This is made up of the
line's
ordered list of
> partitions and then the device's ordered list of partitions. For
example:
>
>
>
> CSS1=PartA,PartB,PartC
>
> CSS2=PartX,PartY,PartZ
>
> Device assigned CSS1
>
> Line assigned CSS2
>
> the PSS would be: PartX,PartY,PartZ,PartA,PartB,PartC
>
>
>
> So the idea you propose is a valid one. We use it
here.
Assign the
> device access to everything and then deny the line access to
particular
services.
> We isolate the 'everything' to PSTN access and actually allow
oncampus
access
> through the line's partition.
>
>
>
> You have to make sure that the denies are at least as
specific as
> the allows. And by denies, I mean, creating a route pattern that
has the
'block'
> option checked.
>
>
>
> Post back if you need more...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: James Grace
<mailto:jgrace at digitelusa.net>
>
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>
> Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 12:35 PM
>
> Subject: [cisco-voip] problem with part
and css
>
>
>
> we have a cm 4.1.2 es 41
>
> i was just told by a tac rep that 4.1. and
higher
uses both
> css on line and device.
>
> what does this mean????
>
>
>
> i have my device as unrestricted and all
of the part
in it.
> and then i have my line configure with a customize css, ie maybe
no int
calls or LD
> calls.
>
> the problem im having is that when i make
a ld or
int call,
> uses the device. and when i make a ipphone call ( 4 dgit
dialing between
sites) it
> uses the line. I dont understand this. nore do i understand the
statement IT
> USES BOTH LINE AND DEVICE. can someone Please clear this up
for me.
> Thanks in advance
>
>
> _____
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/
cisco-voip
>
>
> _____
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
More information about the cisco-voip
mailing list