[cisco-voip] partitioning system DNs and route patterns...

Tue Feb 9 17:03:48 EST 2010

The way we’re set up is 1 partition for all DN’s, another for voice ports and then ~18 other partitions with translations/route patterns (I designed this on CM 6 so no “local gateways”). We have a completely permissive CSS on the phone itself and a blocking CSS on the lines. If you want me to go into more detail, just let me know.

From: Lelio Fulgenzi [mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 2:58 PM
To: Go0se
Cc: cisco-voip voyp list; Fuermann, Jason
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] partitioning system DNs and route patterns...

Organization plus restriction. The one drawback with fewer partitions is that when you allow a user to call a partition, you allow them to call all numbers in that partition (obviously). So if I have two types of system DNs, right now, by keeping them in separate partitions, I can allow someone to call one group without letting them be able to call the other group. Do I need that granularity? Probably not. That's what I'm trying to find out by asking the list. Who knows, it might serve as a template for people who are new to CallManager and can use it as a starting point. I know I wish I had something like that when I started.

With respect to restrictions, it's more for setting expectations. For example, by making voice mail ports not dialable, we don't have to worry about some group on campus creating procedures which include dialing the voice mail ports directly and having to worry about dealing with complaints/issues when we migrate to a new set of voice mail ports when we upgrade. If they were dialable, people could (and would) start dialing the ports directly (for whatever godawful reason).

Looking forward to what others are doing.....

---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
                              - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Go0se" <me at go0se.com>
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>, "Jason Fuermann" <JBF005 at shsu.edu>
Cc: "cisco-voip voyp list" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2010 3:21:22 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] partitioning system DNs and route patterns...

The simpler the better… but what other than organization are you trying to accomplish? Do you need to restrict who can call whom? Do you have overlapping DNs?

I’ve always been partial to putting all DNs in one flat partition and restricting internal/local/LD/Intl calling with the overlapping line and device CSS’s… and if you are running CM7.x I love love love the new local gateway feature – greatly reduces the number of CCSs if you have multiple buildings/offices/locations with multiple PSTN connections.

Thanks,

Go0se

My blog:
http://atc.go0se.com<http://atc.go0se.com/>

Help Hopegivers International feed the orphans of India, adopt a hope home today:
 http://www.hopegivers.org<http://www.hopegivers.org/Get-Involved/Adopt-A-Hope-Home/Available-Hope-Homes.htm>

From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 1:57 PM
To: Jason Fuermann
Cc: cisco-voip voyp list
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] partitioning system DNs and route patterns...

Agreed. That's why it's something I'd like to migrate to. I'm hoping others who have tried something similar can say either "works for me" or present any gotchas.

---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
                              - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason Fuermann" <JBF005 at shsu.edu>
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
Cc: "cisco-voip voyp list" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>, "Jeff Garvas" <jeff at cia.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2010 2:34:11 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] partitioning system DNs and route patterns...

I would go with keep it as simple as possible. Otherwise, it will look good now, but in two years it’ll be so messed from all the mistakes that the organization won’t matter.

From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 1:18 PM
To: Jeff Garvas
Cc: cisco-voip voyp list
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] partitioning system DNs and route patterns...

It's not now, but I wanted to be more descriptive.

Plus, the 1024 character limit is not the only reason, simplifying is also another reason. Right now, we have to think about which partition a system DN belongs to, and even then, mistakes are made because of how the partitions are listed.

---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
                              - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Garvas" <jeff at cia.net>
To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
Cc: "cisco-voip voyp list" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2010 2:15:04 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] partitioning system DNs and route patterns...

Lelio,

How are you running out of characters?  Is your naming convention substantially detailed?
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>> wrote:

When we first deployed our dial-plan we took a very compartmentalized approach and created different partitions for system DN/Patterns based on their role/use and then assigned the partitions appropriately. Assuming the max chars in PSS still being 1024 characters, I'm re-thinking things and am hoping to get some feedback from the group.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100209/02a1c712/attachment.html>