[cisco-voip] Making a message appear anonymous/unknown via single inbox

[Ted Nugent]

Will do thanks!
On Jan 23, 2013 5:57 PM, "Chris Ward (chrward)" <chrward at cisco.com> wrote:

>  Let me try it out in my lab tomorrow and get back to you. Remind me
> Friday morning if you don’t hear from me. J****
>
> ** **
>
> +Chris****
>
> Unity Connection TME****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Ted Nugent [mailto:tednugent73 at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2013 5:09 PM
> *To:* Chris Ward (chrward)
> *Cc:* Cisco VoIPoE List
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Making a message appear anonymous/unknown via
> single inbox****
>
> ** **
>
> Chris thanks for the reply, Yes it is stripping the info washing it
> through a TP, the phone I'm calling shows "Private". While using the TP
> method I'm basically using the Direct to voicemail  (*XXXX) VM profile
> which is CFWDAll to VM on a CTI-RP. ****
>
> For example 7999 is translated to *7999>*XXXX>CTIRP>CFwdALL VM****
>
>  ****
>
> However using the Huntpilot way, I have a HP going directly to HL/LG
> containing the VM Ports and a Directed routing rule going to the subscriber
> greeting. The HP is configured calling party name/line presention to
> restricted, same as i did with the TP****
>
>  ****
>
> As mention both have the same affect?****
>
>  ****
>
> This is an SCCP integration with CUC and we get the same results via
> external calls from an MGCP controlled PRI and SIP/SCCP phones****
>
>  ****
>
> Any thoughts?****
>
> Thanks****
>
> Ted****
>
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Chris Ward (chrward) <chrward at cisco.com>
> wrote:****
>
> Ted,****
>
>  ****
>
> Removing the calling party information from the call before it gets to CUC
> is definitely the way to do this. So, I think you are on the right track.*
> ***
>
>  ****
>
> Now, as to why it’s not working, there are a few things you could try. As
> a test, I would setup a translation pattern to strip the calling
> information and then forward it to your desk phone (making sure you don’t
> receive calling party information) so you can make sure that the
> translation pattern is doing what you think it is.****
>
>  ****
>
> Also, how are you routing this specific call to CUC? Are you using a dummy
> CTI RP and just setting it to CFA to CUC? And is the integration SCCP or
> SIP to CUC?****
>
>  ****
>
> +Chris****
>
> Unity Connection TME****
>
>  ****
>
> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Ted Nugent
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2013 12:37 PM
> *To:* Cisco VoIPoE List
> *Subject:* [cisco-voip] Making a message appear anonymous/unknown via
> single inbox****
>
>  ****
>
> CM 8.6, Unity Connection 8.6 and Exchange 2010****
>
> Customer has an anonymous tip line that is using single inbox and would
> like the messages to showup as anonymous or unknown as opposed to showing
> the callers name and/or phone number.****
>
> I've attempted to strip off the calling party info by washing it through a
> translation pattern and setting the calling party name/line presention to
> restricted and that doesn't work, I also attempted to setup a Hunt Pilot
> and setting the calling party presention to restricted as well and in both
> scenarios the email arrives displaying the callers info. Does anyone have
> any ideas to accomplish this? Either via CM, Unity Connection or Exchange?
> ****
>
> TIA Ted****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> ** **
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20130123/ff838691/attachment.html>