[cisco-voip] CSS precedence

Tue May 8 09:16:17 EDT 2007

or another way to say it, more specific, matching fewer possible numbers

-Fred Nielsen


On 5/8/07, Matt Slaga (US) <Matt.Slaga at us.didata.com> wrote:
>
>  Yes, [2-9] is a closer match than X.
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *
> CarlosOrtiz at bayviewfinancial.com
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 08, 2007 9:05 AM
> *To:* Fred Nielsen
> *Cc:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net; Voll, Scott;
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] CSS precedence
>
>
>
>
> Yeah,  I am not new to this so it makes perfect sense.  I think the key
> was the "exact match" on the route pattern.  I looked at the route patterns
> and they are slightly different.  On a previous system that I administered I
> always had a consistent route pattern for long distance so the CSS of the
> line would take precedence.  I assumed that this inherited config was
> consistent but that's not the case.  Here was the difference.
>
> 9.1[2-9]XX[2-9]XXXXXX - Matching
>
> 9.1[2-9]XXXXXXXXX - Not matching
>
> I assume it matches because of the 2-9 highlighted above versus the X.
>
> Thx......
>
>
>
>   *"Fred Nielsen" <fwn at feasible.net>*
> Sent by: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
>
> 05/07/2007 10:09 PM
>
> To
>
> "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>, CarlosOrtiz at bayviewfinancial.com
>
> cc
>
> "Voll, Scott" <Scott.Voll at wesd.org>, cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>
> Subject
>
> Re: [cisco-voip] CSS precedence
>
>
>
>
>
>
> concatenated CSS is line + device.  Partitions in the line CSS are ordered
> above the device CSS, but this is only considered if you have an exact
> match.  In other words, only when your dialed string matches two identical
> patterns is the partition order itself really taken into account.
>
> I suspect what is happening for you is that whatever you are dialing is
> matching a more specific pattern within the partitions listed in the device
> CSS, thereby bypassing a more widely matched pattern that you are hoping to
> match on the line CSS.
>
> Let us know if this makes some sense.
>
> -Fred Nielsen
>
> On 5/7/07, *Lelio Fulgenzi* <lelio at uoguelph.ca> wrote:
> and forwarding CSS = forwarding CSS. no concatenation at all. that would
> make sense. ;)
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> ....there's no such thing as a bad timbit...
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Voll, Scott <Scott.Voll at wesd.org>
> *To:* CarlosOrtiz at bayviewfinancial.com ; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> *Sent:* Monday, May 07, 2007 4:24 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] CSS precedence
>
> Lines + phone CSS = Device CSS.  Check the phone CSS to not include the
> Partitions you want each phone line to be able to go out.
>
>
>
> Scott
>
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *
> CarlosOrtiz at bayviewfinancial.com*
> Sent: *Monday, May 07, 2007 12:50 PM*
> To:* cisco-voip at puck.nether.net *
> Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] CSS precedence
>
>
>
>
> Meant to say CallMgr 4.1.3 (sr2)
>
> *CarlosOrtiz at bayviewfinancial.com* <CarlosOrtiz at bayviewfinancial.com>
> Sent by: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
>
> 05/07/2007 03:45 PM
>
>
>
> To
>
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>
> cc
>
>
>
> Subject
>
> [cisco-voip] CSS precedence
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I am testing a remote location gateway by adding a DID from that location
> to my phone.  I assigned the remote site CSS to the remote line and also
> have a CSS assigned to my phone.  When I take the *REMOTE LINE* offhook
> and dial, it is exiting my local gateway.   In previous experience I have
> done this and it will exit the remote gateway per CSS precedence rules.  Am
> I missing something here or is this a bug?
>
> Carlos_______________________________________________
> 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
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *Disclaimer: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain
> confidential and privileged information and is for use by the designated
> addressee(s) named above only. If you are not the intended addressee, you
> are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and
> that any use or reproduction of this email or its contents is strictly
> prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in
> error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and deleting
> it from your computer. Thank you. *
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20070508/c594a182/attachment.html