[cisco-voip] unity connection zero out

[Erick Wellnitz]

That was another thought I had...very briefly.  I shied away mostly because
I have no means to test the scenario.


On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Brian Meade (brmeade) <brmeade at cisco.com>wrote:

>  This doesn’t sound like something possible from a Unity Connection
> side.  Pretty cool scenario though.  We can route next hop by ANI on the
> CUCM side though so could potentially do it there with a translation
> pattern for each site.  I’ll try that out on my lab box.
>
>
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
> Of *Lelio Fulgenzi
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 06, 2014 2:38 PM
> *To:* Erick Wellnitz
> *Cc:* cisco-voip
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] unity connection zero out
>
>
>
> Sorry, I misread... You want to reach _your_ local operator when you zero
> out, not the local operator of the called party.
>
> Because it's the voice mail ports doing the transfer for you, you're
> right, it's a difficult thing to work out.
>
>
>  ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
> Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
> University of Guelph
>
> 519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
> lelio at uoguelph.ca
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
> Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
> Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From: *"Erick Wellnitz" <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> *To: *"Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
> *Cc: *"cisco-voip" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>, "Bill Talley" <
> btalley at gmail.com>
> *Sent: *Thursday, February 6, 2014 2:29:15 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [cisco-voip] unity connection zero out
>
> It's a bit more convoluted than that.  Plus, we have too many sites aross
> the different clusters to be able to make a tiered call handler scenario
> without it becoming an administratoive headache - not to mention the users
> would complain about the number of button presses.
>
>
>
>
>
> User A is from Brussels and they reach the voicemail of User B in Paris.
> User A presses zero and transfers to the Brussels operator.  User C is in
> London, gets the voicemail of user B in Paris, presses zero and transfers
> to the London operator.
>
>
>
> This becomes a bit more 'interesting' as we add in callers on other
> clusters and PSTN callers.
>
>
>
> It's essentially ANI based routing in Unity.  I'm hoping someone can pop
> on from Cisco and tell me that this idea is madness and leave it at that.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca> wrote:
>
> The zero out in Unity Connection is governed by "caller input"
> configurations on the user's mailbox. You can also configure it so that
> they can modify this (or other caller input entries, e.g. 7 or 8 or 9, etc)
> themselves.
>
> We set up translations for each of our local operator destinations (using
> an easy to remember numbering system) and use these as the targets via bulk
> administration and templates. We also advertise those numbers because
> people want to reach remote operators at times.
>
> The only one we didn't change is the HQ, people can enter 0 there and it
> will go to HQ switchboard (which is a speech enabled auto attendant).
>
> So, in a nutshell, yes, it's possible. If I understand what you're asking.
>
> Lelio
>
>
>
>  ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst, Network Infrastructure
> Computing and Communications Services (CCS)
> University of Guelph
>
> 519‐824‐4120 Ext 56354
> lelio at uoguelph.ca
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs
> Room 037, Animal Science and Nutrition Building
> Guelph, Ontario, N1G 2W1
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From: *"Erick Wellnitz" <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> *To: *"Bill Talley" <btalley at gmail.com>
> *Cc: *"cisco-voip" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> *Sent: *Thursday, February 6, 2014 1:51:34 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [cisco-voip] unity connection zero out
>
> I'm not sure it can be done either.  UConn isn't a sophisticated call
> routing system and the CSS you can assign is baased on the called mailbox,
> call handler, etc. not the calling party.
>
>
>
> I'm trying to head off a situation where management demands something that
> was told to them incorrectly.
>
>
>
> The only way I can think of doing it would be to send 0 back to CUCM to a
> CCX script to determine calling and called number and route it that way.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Bill Talley <btalley at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> So you want the internal callers to dynamically route to their own
> local operator as opposed to the operator at the recipients site?
> Interesting question. I don't have an answer for that scenario but
> would be surprised if that's possible.
>
>
> Sent from an Apple iOS device with very tiny touchscreen input keys.
> Please excude my typtos.
>
> > On Feb 6, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Erick Wellnitz <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Okay....
> >
> > I have someone telling me that they can make it so that I can zero out
> and reach my local operator in UConn.
> >
> > Example:
> >
> > We have 5 sites, each with a local operator.  Someone from site 1 calls
> someone from site 3 and someone from site 5 also calls the same person from
> site 3.
> >
> > Both the person from site 1 and site 5 should be able to press 0 and
> reach their local operator.
> >
> > Now, I know I can make it so pressing 0 would go to the sirte 3 operator
> using PT/CSS.  I'm skeptical that the scenario described can be achieved.
> >
> > Am I missing something?
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20140206/d5a20fa4/attachment.html>