[cisco-voip] CDR Record for transferred call question

[Erick Bergquist]

Thanks Wes.

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com> wrote:
> A fine question for cm-cdr-sdp at cisco.com.
>
> Regards,
> Wes
>
> On Tuesday, February 24, 2009 7:14:14 PM, Erick Bergquist
> <erickbee at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Well, back to the original topic, upon further investigation the CDR
> info matches up for transfers on calls between phones (not voicemail
> legs) but when the call leg is transferred to voicemail is when the
> identifiers don't match as expected per the docs.
>
> Just was wondering if anyone had ran into this behavior with the raw
> data, not interested in the who's who in the reports.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Mark Holloway <mh at markholloway.com> wrote:
>
>
> Under normal circumstances, 1234 should be charged as the referring party.
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 9:18 AM
> To: Erick B.
> Cc: cisco-voip mailinglist
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CDR Record for transferred call question
>
>
>
> transferred calls CDRs are a pain. and a possible toll fraud vehicle if not
> monitored/audited.
>
> take for example, extension 1234 calls an LD number then transfers to
> extension 4567.
>
> unless you track the transfer, the call is not logged properly. questions do
> arise, if you can track the transfer who do you charge? 1234 or 4567?
>
> i know this doesn't help, but i would hope that CallManager CDRs would keep
> the same callLegIdentfiers when necessary.
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> "Bad grammar makes me [sic]" - Tshirt
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Erick B." <erickbee at gmail.com>
> To: "cisco-voip mailinglist" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 10:47:25 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: [cisco-voip] CDR Record for transferred call question
>
> Hi,
>
> I am working with ISI Infortel, and having issue with reporting on
> transferred calls. They are saying that in the CDR flat files
> generated that the following fields should match up across all the
> call legs involved in a transfer.
>
> origLegCallIdentifier and the destLegIdentifier fields should match
> across the call legs.
>
> In the CDR file, there are 3 legs part of the transferred call and the
> origLegCallIdentifer field matches on the 1st and 3rd leg but is
> different on the 2nd leg which is the phone that transferred the call
> to the final phone. This is on Call Manager version 5.1.1 and I've
> also compared against same sample call flow on version 6.1.2.1000-13
> and 7.0(2) and the CDR flat file records look the same. I've also
> tested with transfer softkey for the whole call flow and using hold
> and new call then transfer and the CDRs look the same so the method
> used doesn't effect the CDRs it appears.
>
> According to Cisco docs, it seems like it is working as it should as
> the examples in the docs match what I see and descriptions in the
> Cisco CDR PDF describe how these get generated, etc. But there is a
> section of the PDF that has the following for both of these fields,
> "If the leg of a call persists across several sub-calls, and
> consequently several CDRs (as during a call transfer), this value
> remains constant."  which I don't understand what it  means if these
> fields are different in the CDRs. I've opened a TAC Case and they
> confirmed everything is working as it should but the vendor is going
> back to this statement and states the fields should match up across
> all call legs so they can match up all the call legs for the report
> involved in the transferred call.
>
> The PDF is here,
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/service/6_0_1/car/carcdrdef.pdf
>
> Just wondering if anyone else has ran into this before or not.
>
> Thanks.
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>