[cisco-voip] IP Communicator Bug or WAD

Fri Feb 11 13:28:04 EST 2011

Now you've broken your translation pattern so people have to wait for the T302 
timer to finish. If you haven't modified it, which most people I know do not, 
then they'll have to wait for 15s for the translation pattern to work.

________________________________
From:Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
To:Paul <asobihoudai at yahoo.com>
Cc:Matthew Ballard <mballard at otis.edu>; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
Sent: Fri, February 11, 2011 10:09:40 AM
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IP Communicator Bug or WAD

urgent priority was the ticket.

Thanks

Scott

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Paul <asobihoudai at yahoo.com> wrote:

Your call is matching 5XXX because the translation pattern is in the none
>partition. The translation patterns are marked as urgent priority as default so
>as soon as you dial 5 and any other three digits, it will use that pattern
>configured. You need to place those translation patterns in another partition
>that isn't reachable from the calling search space of the device you're calling
>from. As it has been stated, the none partition is implicitly placed in all
>calling search spaces. So long as you keep 5XXX in the none partition, you
>prevent any calls starting with 5 with more than 4 digits.
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>From:Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
>To:Matthew Ballard <mballard at otis.edu>
>
>Cc:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>Sent: Fri, February 11, 2011 9:16:08 AM
>
>Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IP Communicator Bug or WAD
>
>But unfortunately it is matching 5031234567 to 5XXX instead of 503123.4[0-7]XX.
> both of which are Translation patterns in the <NONE> partition.  Why would 
5XXX
>
>be more specific?
>
>Scott
>
>
>On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Matthew Ballard <mballard at otis.edu> wrote:
>
>From what I remember, UCM combines all CSSes available to the phone, including
>that of both the DN in use and the phone, where <None> is automatically
>included, and only after combined it organizes the list by most specific to
>least specific.
>>
>>So in the case below, as 51111 is more specific than 5XXXX, 51111 will match
>>first.
>>
>>Matthew Ballard
>>
>>
>>From:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
>>[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
>>Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 7:59 AM
>>To: Scott Voll
>>
>>Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>>
>>Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IP Communicator Bug or WAD
>>
>>The <None> partition is at the end of every calling search space and is 
>searched
>>
>>if no match is found in the partitions explicitly included.
>>
>>The one thing I'm not clear on is if the <None> partition is searched for a
>>better match or if it is searched only if no matches are found.
>>
>>For example:
>>    * Route Pattern 5XXXX in Group_A_Partition
>>    * DN 51111 in <None> partition
>>    * CSS Group_A_CSS contains Group_A_Partition.
>>    * DN 52222 assigned CSS of Group_A_CSS
>>    * DN 52222 dials 51111
>>    * what will 52222 reach? the route pattern or the DN 51111?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>---
>>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)
>>
>>
>>
>________________________________
>
>>From: "Scott Voll" <svoll.voip at gmail.com>
>>To: "Ryan Ratliff" <rratliff at cisco.com>
>>Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>>Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 10:49:57 AM
>>Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IP Communicator Bug or WAD
>>
>>That is NOT what I wanted you to say.
>>
>>Quick Follow up question.  Since I'm new to this environment, How does the 
NONE
>
>>partition work with other partitions in a CSS?  is the None Partition at the 
>end
>>
>>and I could "fix" this by putting the 503123.4567 translation into a 
partition?
>>Thanks
>>
>>Scott
>>
>>On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 7:44 AM, Ryan Ratliff <rratliff at cisco.com> wrote:
>>It's a matter of whether the digits are sent enbloc or not.  I don't believe
>>CIPC supports enbloc so it will always send digits one at a time (just like
>>other phones do when dialing offhook) and thus will always hit your 5XXX
>>translation pattern.
>>
>>-Ryan
>>
>>On Feb 11, 2011, at 10:27 AM, Scott Voll wrote:
>>
>>So I'm troubleshooting why my Corporate Directory does not work (10 digits 
from
>
>>AD LDAP)
>>
>>If I pick up the 7962 and dial 5031  the 7961 hits the 5XXX translation 
pattern
>
>>and goes to VM.  BUT if I enter 5031234567 and press Dial, it hits the
>>503123.4567 translation pattern and dials correctly the 4567.  Both 
Translation
>
>>patterns are in the None partition.
>>
>>BUT if I do the same thing on the IP communicator client weather I pick up and
>>dial or enter and dial it hits the 5XXX translation because it dials the 
>numbers
>>
>>one digit at a time rather than the full 10 digits like the 7961.
>>
>>Looks to be a Bug with the IPC client or is it Working As Designed?
>>
>>Ultimately I’m trying to dial the 10 digits from Corporate directory which 
gets
>
>>the 10 digits from AD LDAP.
>>
>>Any idea of a work around?  I
>>
>>TIA
>>
>>Scott
>>
>>PS.  CM 7.1.5, IPC 7.0.5.1, 7961 running 9.0.3S
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>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
>
>
>
>
>

____________________________________________________________________________________
We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love 
(and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list.
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265 