[cisco-voip] variable-length translation pattern

[daniele visaggio]

The reference from the SRND was only to make clear the origin of my
suspect. Initially I tought that 1XXX has higher priority than 1! but now,
after reading the SNRD, I'm not that sure. Of course the pattern from the
SRND examples are different from mine but the concept still applies imo.

I was trying to receive some confirmation/denial of my suspect.

2014-12-09 17:41 GMT+01:00 Bill Talley <btalley at gmail.com>:

> Your patterns are both 1 followed by a wildcard.  The SRNDs examples are
> NOT 1 followed by a wildcard, they are 1 followed by more specific
> wildcards or digits.
>
> 1! Is NOT equal to 12!
>
>
>
>
> Sent from an Apple iOS device with very tiny touchscreen input keys.
> Please excude my typtos.
>
> On Dec 9, 2014, at 9:35 AM, daniele visaggio <visaggio.daniele at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Always from the SRND:
>
> [...] This does not mean that the urgent pattern has a higher priority
>> than other patterns; the closest-match logic described in the section on
>> Call Routing in Unified CM still applies.
>>
>> For example, assume the route pattern 1XX is configured as urgent and the
>> pattern 12! is configured as a regular route pattern. If a user dials 123,
>> Unified CM will not make its routing decision as soon as it receives the
>> third digit because even though 1XX is an urgent pattern, it is not the
>> best match (10 total patterns matched by 12! versus 100 patterns matched by
>> 1XX). Unified CM will have to wait for inter-digit timeout before routing
>> the call because the pattern 12! allows for more digits to be input by the
>> user.
>>
>
> Both my translation patterns have urgent priority enabled, so this aspect
> should not matter. I do not understand if 1XXX has higher priority than 1!
> or viceversa, given 1234 as called number.
>
>
> 2014-12-09 16:09 GMT+01:00 Bill Talley <btalley at gmail.com>:
>
>> I would think it will always match 1! because of the urgent priority
>> setting.   Keep in mind the example you gave from the SRND list three
>> different translation patterns.  The two you have are the same as far as
>> the first two digits, no?
>>
>> Sent from an Apple iOS device with very tiny touchscreen input keys.
>> Please excude my typtos.
>>
>> On Dec 9, 2014, at 5:59 AM, daniele visaggio <visaggio.daniele at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have two translation pattern within the same partition (cucm 9.x).
>>
>> They are:
>>
>> 1XXX
>> 1!
>>
>> When an incoming call from external sip gateway comes in with called
>> number (say) 1234, the matched translation is 1!.
>>
>> At first, I thought that 1!, being less specific than 1XXX, should not
>> being matched.
>>
>> Reading through Cisco Collaboration System 9.x Solution Reference
>> Network Designs (SRND)
>> <http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/srnd/collab09/clb09/dialplan.html>,
>> I saw this:
>>
>> When determining the number of matched strings for a variable-length
>>> pattern, Unified CM takes into account only the number of matched strings
>>> that are equal in length to the number of digits dialed. Assuming a user
>>> dials 1311 and we have patterns 1XXX, 1[2-3]XX, and 13!, the following
>>> table shows the number of matched strings of these potentially matching
>>> patterns....*In this example the variable-length pattern 13! is
>>> selected as the best match*.
>>
>>
>> Changing temporarily the translation pattern with a leading # and then
>> going back to the original form, the pattern 1XXX started to be matched.
>>
>> What do you think, guys? is this a bug or are 1! and 1XXX equal-precision
>> matches from cucm point of view?
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20141209/1a193336/attachment.html>