[cisco-voip] nanp routing sanity check

[Erick]

Thanks Wes.  

We probably aren't going to make a change but it's best to be prepared.

On Nov 15, 2011, at 8:01 AM, Wes Sisk <wsisk at cisco.com> wrote:

> From the NANP file LOCAL-DIRECT-DIAL is:
> 
> # 1+01XXXX+1+[2-9][02-9]XXXXX
> P:  101             TRANSIT-NETWORK-ESCAPE
> P:  XXXX            TRANSIT-NETWORK
> P:  1               LOCAL-DIRECT-DIAL
> P:  [2-9][02-9]X    OFFICE-CODE
> P:  XXXX            SUBSCRIBER
> T:  N
> 
> # 1+01XXXX+1+[2-9]X[02-9]XXXX
> P:  101             TRANSIT-NETWORK-ESCAPE
> P:  XXXX            TRANSIT-NETWORK
> P:  1               LOCAL-DIRECT-DIAL
> P:  [2-9]X[02-9]    OFFICE-CODE
> P:  XXXX            SUBSCRIBER
> T:  N
> 
> # 1+[2-9]11
> P:  1               LOCAL-DIRECT-DIAL
> P:  [2-9]11         SERVICE
> T:  N
> U:  Y
> 
> # 1+[2-9][02-9]XXXXX
> P:  1               LOCAL-DIRECT-DIAL
> P:  [2-9][02-9]X    OFFICE-CODE
> P:  XXXX            SUBSCRIBER
> T:  N
> 
> # 1+[2-9]X[02-9]XXXX
> P:  1               LOCAL-DIRECT-DIAL
> P:  [2-9]X[02-9]    OFFICE-CODE
> P:  XXXX            SUBSCRIBER
> T:  N
> 
> Regards,
> Wes
> 
> 
> On Nov 14, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Erick Wellnitz wrote:
> 
> I have need to implement a change to our routing...even though it works as designed.
> 
> Route filter to catch 7 digit numbers:
> (AREA-CODE DOES-NOT-EXIST AND COUNTRY-CODE DOES-NOT-EXIST AND LOCAL-AREA-CODE DOES-NOT-EXIST AND LOCAL-DIRECT-DIAL DOES-NOT-EXIST)
> 
> I'm not sure about the "LOCAL-DIRECT-DIAL DOES-NOT-EXIST" part.  I would think that 7 digit IS local direct dial.  Am I off base here?
> 
> Erick
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>