[cisco-voip] Route patterns, translation patterns

[Candace Holman]

Justin and Wes,

Thanks.  It's true that we are using CMI for SMDI integration, so we 
have some parameters
to play with.  Your problem will probably resurface when you begin to 
get international calls that want to go to voicemail. I think with a 
VG248 you can use dial peers to translate numbers in the SMDI messages.

Unfortunately, I cannot apply a single mask to the calling party number, 
it has to be different based on the source of the call.  If the call is 
generic PSTN, blank out the CPN, but if it is from an enterprise 
exchange, keep the CPN.  The legacy VM system, will look up a mailbox 
with the last 5 digits of any CPN, if there is a number there.  So we 
have to blank out CPN for non-enterprise exchanges or there are 
mismatches galore. (some algorithm, eh?)

I'm pretty sure I need to do this with variable translation patterns.  
These patterns have to be applied on a call that call forwards to voice 
mail through the device calling search space.  A direct dial to the VM 
access number doesn't require calling party number translation.  So what 
I'd really like is a flowchart that describes how a call routes when 
there is both a translation pattern and a route pattern.

thanks,
Candace


>Candace,
>
>This sounds familiar to a problem I had with SMDI voicemail
>integration using the VG248.  Anytime a call came in via PRI PSTN with
>a calling party number greater than 10 digits, the legacy voicemail
>system (an Octel) would not answer the call.  It would RNA through all
>the voicemail ports.  Looking further at the SMDI traces on the VG248
>I would see the VG248 passing the SMDI message, with 10+ digit calling
>party.  For whatever reason, the voicemail system ignored this SMDI
>message and thus never answered the calls.
>
>I opened a case with Avaya only to be told that SMDI standards were
>either 7 or 10 digit calling party information.  I was able to contact
>the telephony person at the business who was calling us with 10+ digit
>ANI.  I explained the problem and they resolved the issue, so for now
>I don't have this problem - although, I'm sure it will resurface at
>some point.
>
>Candace, one thing I noticed when I researched the issue is that if
>you use CCM's CMI to handle the SMDI, via a serial cable into the
>CallManager, you have multiple parameters you can change including a
>mask for Calling Party number (There is probably something on CCO but
>I read it in the CIPT book).  However, if you are using VG248 to
>handle SMDI, there isn't as many parameters and AFAIK no way to change
>CALLING party number only on the leg to voicemail.
>
>Hopefully this helps.
>
>Justin
>
>  
>
>>>Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 15:15:11 -0500
>>>From: Candace Holman <candace_holman at harvard.edu>
>>>Subject: [cisco-voip] Route patterns, translation patterns
>>>To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>>>Message-ID: <437A41CF.70405 at harvard.edu>
>>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>>
>>>Can anyone send me a Cisco reference for the order in which
>>>route/translation patterns are followed?
>>>
>>>For a legacy SMDI integration we need to change calling party number >on
>>>calls, but only after they have forwarded to voice mail, and only on
>>>some of the calls.  If anyone has done something like this, can you
>>>explain how it was done, and which version CM you needed to run?
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Candace
>>    
>>