[cisco-voip] E.164 dialing

Tue Jul 15 10:37:30 EDT 2008

Hi Tim

Why E.164 ? Size and scope dictate I need to go at least 10 digits, with UCM 7 they support E.164. Also E.164 is standards based so all the other components that will be sharing this dialplan such as OCS, Tandberg, Mitel, and Nortel should get along.

SRND - Yes I have reviewed UCM versions 5 through 7 of the SRND

Corporate numbering - Thanks for that URL very interesting but somewhat misleading. If you note in section S.3  it states that "Corporate numbering is a new type of service dedicated primarily to businesses with private telecoms networks. The corporate numbering range would allow businesses to have their own identifiable part of the Scheme to meet their telecoms needs and allow greater flexibility in the use of the numbers. It could also ease the integration of businesses' public and private numbering schemes" which leads me to believe we can use these numbers just as we would using 10.0.0.0 subneting but as you read further through the document it becomes less clear. :)

Thanks Ryan

________________________________
From: smithsonianwa at gmail.com [mailto:smithsonianwa at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Tim Smith
Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 2:05 AM
To: Ryan O'Connell
Cc: Justin Steinberg; cisco-voip at puck-nether.net; Matt Slaga (US)
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] E.164 dialing

Hi Ryan...

"Corporate Numbering" is not a private numbering space.. I believe it is some sort of service, like personal numbering..
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/oftel/publications/numbering/2003/05nums0303.htm.#3

Have you taken a look at the CUCM SRND? It has some good stuff on dial plans with site codes etc..

Why make everything E164...?

Cheers,

Tim

On 7/14/08, Ryan O'Connell <Roconnell at unislumin.com<mailto:Roconnell at unislumin.com>> wrote:

Yes agreed and understood, in fact the plan is based on UC version 7. So back to my questions though, with E.164 NANP and E.164 with UK does anyone know if there are private numbers reserved? As far as I can see any Area code that repeats itself has not been assigned to any NANP number as of yet except for 888. They have been set aside as ERC (Easily Recognizable Codes) numbers. This being said it doesn't clearly define if these numbers will ever be introduced as NANP numbers. So based on this using 444 XXX XXXX in NANP we should be safe. As for the UK it seems as though they set aside a block for "Corporate Numbering" 05x xxxx xxxx.

Thoughts?

Ryan

________________________________

From: Justin Steinberg [mailto:jsteinberg at gmail.com<mailto:jsteinberg at gmail.com>]
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 7:45 AM
To: Ryan O'Connell
Cc: Matt Slaga (US); cisco-voip at puck-nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck-nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] E.164 dialing

I agree with Matt.  so many changes in UC7, I would hold off making any significant dialplan changes until that release.

On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Ryan O'Connell <Roconnell at unislumin.com<mailto:Roconnell at unislumin.com>> wrote:

That's what I'm saying is that I shouldn't need the "+" if the number is a fully qualified E.164 number.

Thoughts?

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Slaga (US) [mailto:Matt.Slaga at us.didata.com<mailto:Matt.Slaga at us.didata.com>]
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 6:33 AM
To: Ryan O'Connell; cisco-voip at puck-nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck-nether.net>
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] E.164 dialing

Unfortunately, you are going to have to wait for UCM 7.0 to have full
E164 support.  Currently UCM throws up when it gets a '+'.

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>] On Behalf Of Ryan O'Connell
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 3:54 PM
To: cisco-voip at puck-nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck-nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-voip] E.164 dialing

Hello,

I am working on a Dialplan that is based on E.164 numbers. Essentially
all internal DN's will be the fully qualified E.164 number without the
"+" so for NANP that will be 11 digits and in Europe it will consist of
country-code followed by local exchange. Using partitions and CSS's to
maintain interal 4 digit dialing intra-site and full E.164 inter-site.
For DID's the above plan is pretty straight forward but for non-DID's I
can't seem to find any ranges within the NANP that are designated as
private addresses. So if I want to assign 100 DN's to be voicemail ports
or lobby phones or whatever I was wondering what I should make these
numbers so that it doesn't overlap with any PSTN numbers.

If anyone can share thoughts or their experiences in this area that
would be helpful thanks

Ryno
_______________________________________________
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

-----------------------------------------
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.
_______________________________________________
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

_______________________________________________
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/20080715/4f0a1081/attachment.html>