<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3020" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Yup, everything is matching as expected. It's the rule that
doesn't seem to be taking affect. I got the following debugs below. It seems it
doesn't like the 'reject' option. When I modify the rule to change the dialed
number to something, say 18005551212, it works fine. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I never would have though it would be so hard to block
outbound numbers!</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>
<HR>
</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>configs</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>before: with reject rule it fails as per debug
attached.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>voice translation-rule 684<BR> rule 1
reject /^91684......./ </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>after: with search/replace, it works fine.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>voice translation-rule 684<BR> rule 1 /^91684......./
/918005551212/<BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV>
<HR>
</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>debug with 'reject' rule:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>3640-vgw#debug voice translation<BR>VoIP Translation Rule
debugging is enabled<BR>3640-vgw#<BR>Feb 12 13:06:39:
//-1/xxxxxxxxxxxx/RXRULE/regxrule_get_profile_from_trunkgroup_internal: Voice
port 0x6536494C does not belong to any trunk group<BR>Feb 12 13:06:39:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_stack_pop_RegXruleNumInfo: stack=0x654626F4;
count=1<BR>Feb 12 13:06:39:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_stack_push_RegXruleNumInfo:
stack=0x654626F4; count=0<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_stack_push_RegXruleNumInfo:
stack=0x654626F4; count=1<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_profile_translate_internal: number=61003
type=unknown plan=unknown numbertype=calling<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_get_RegXrule: Invalid translation ruleset
tag=0<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_profile_match_internal: Error: ruleset for
calling number not found<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_profile_translate_internal: No match:
number=61003 type=unknown plan=unknown<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_profile_translate_internal:
number=916845551212 type=unknown plan=unknown numbertype=called<BR>Feb 12
13:06:44: //-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_match: Skipping a call blockrule;
number=916845551212 rule precedence=1<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_profile_match_internal: No match
found<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_profile_translate_internal: No match:
number=916845551212 type=unknown plan=unknown<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_profile_translate_internal: number=
type=unknown plan=unknown numbertype=redirect-called<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_get_RegXrule: Invalid translation ruleset
tag=0<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_profile_match_internal: Error: ruleset for
redirect-called number not found<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_profile_translate_internal: No match:
number= type=unknown plan=unknown<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_dp_translate: calling_number=61003
calling_octet=0x0
called_number=916845551212
called_octet=0x80 redirect_number=
redirect_type=0 redirect_plan=0
redirect_PI=0 redirect_SI=0<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_vp_translate: No profile found in voice port
or trunk group for outgoing direction<BR>Feb 12 13:06:44:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_vp_translate: calling_number=61003
calling_octet=0x0
called_number=916845551212
called_octet=0x80 redirect_number=
redirect_type=0 redirect_plan=0<BR>Feb 12 13:06:53:
//-1/9E91EBED809B/RXRULE/regxrule_stack_pop_RegXruleNumInfo: stack=0x654626F4;
count=2</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>
<HR>
</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>Lelio
Fulgenzi, B.A.<BR>Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario
N1G 2W1<BR>(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX
(JNHN)<BR>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<BR>...there's no such thing as a bad timbit...<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=asobihoudai@yahoo.com href="mailto:asobihoudai@yahoo.com">Paul
Choi</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, February 12, 2007 1:09
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [cisco-voip] dial-peers and
more specific vs less specificmatching</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Lelio,<BR><BR>Did you try testing your translation patterns to
see<BR>if you can get a match at least before you
dialed?<BR><BR>Cheers,<BR>Paul<BR>--- Lelio Fulgenzi <<A
href="mailto:lelio@uoguelph.ca">lelio@uoguelph.ca</A>> wrote:<BR><BR>>
Ok, so I tried things out, and it seemed it was<BR>> still hitting the
longdistance dial peer (debug was<BR>> showing a match of two dial-peers),
so to simplify<BR>> things, I removed the long distance dial-peer<BR>>
(91..........) altogether and confirmed I couldn't<BR>> dial long distance,
but when I tried dialing a<BR>> number that matched the dialpeer that
should have<BR>> been blocked, the call went through! ayieeeeeee.<BR>>
<BR>> The only thing I can think of is that the<BR>> blocking/rejecting
rules are not taking effect for<BR>> some reason.....any ideas out
there?<BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
<BR>><BR>------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>
<BR>> config:<BR>> <BR>> voice
translation-rule 684<BR>> rule 1 reject
/^91684/<BR>> !<BR>> voice
translation-profile<BR>>
uogdev_block_ibac_684_vtp<BR>> translate called
684<BR>> !<BR>> dial-peer voice 91684901
pots<BR>> corlist outgoing
uogdev-block-ibac-css<BR>> translation-profile
outgoing<BR>> uogdev_block_ibac_684_vtp<BR>>
huntstop<BR>> destination-pattern
91684.......<BR>> port 3/0:23<BR>>
forward-digits 11<BR>>
!<BR>><BR>------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>
debug output:<BR>> Feb 12 10:43:56:<BR>>
//-1/ACDBBF608086/DPM/dpMatchPeersCore:<BR>>
Calling Number=, Called Number=916845551212,<BR>> Peer Info
Type=DIALPEER_INFO_SPE<BR>> ECH<BR>> Feb 12
10:43:56:<BR>>
//-1/ACDBBF608086/DPM/dpMatchPeersCore:<BR>>
Match Rule=DP_MATCH_DEST; Called<BR>>
Number=916845551212<BR>> Feb 12 10:43:56:<BR>>
//-1/ACDBBF608086/DPM/dpMatchCore:<BR>> Dial
String=916845551212, Expanded<BR>> String=916845551212, Calling
Number=<BR>> Timeout=FALSE, Is
Incoming=FALSE, Peer Info<BR>>
Type=DIALPEER_INFO_SPEECH<BR>> Feb 12 10:43:56:<BR>>
//-1/ACDBBF608086/DPM/MatchNextPeer:<BR>>
Result=Success(0); Outgoing Dial-peer=91684901<BR>> Is
Matched<BR>> Feb 12 10:43:56:<BR>>
//-1/ACDBBF608086/DPM/dpMatchPeersCore:<BR>>
Result=Success(0) after DP_MATCH_DEST<BR>> Feb 12
10:43:56:<BR>>
//-1/ACDBBF608086/DPM/dpMatchPeersMoreArg:<BR>>
Result=SUCCESS(0)<BR>> List of Matched
Outgoing Dial-peer(s):<BR>> 1:
Dial-peer Tag=91684901<BR>> Feb 12 10:43:56:<BR>>
//-1/ACDBBF608086/DPM/dpMatchPeersCore:<BR>>
Calling Number=, Called Number=916845551212,<BR>> Peer Info
Type=DIALPEER_INFO_SPE<BR>> ECH<BR>> Feb 12
10:43:56:<BR>>
//-1/ACDBBF608086/DPM/dpMatchPeersCore:<BR>>
Match Rule=DP_MATCH_DEST; Called<BR>>
Number=916845551212<BR>> Feb 12 10:43:56:<BR>>
//-1/ACDBBF608086/DPM/dpMatchCore:<BR>> Dial
String=916845551212, Expanded<BR>> String=916845551212, Calling
Number=<BR>> Timeout=TRUE, Is Incoming=FALSE,
Peer Info<BR>> Type=DIALPEER_INFO_SPEECH<BR>> Feb 12
10:43:56:<BR>>
//-1/ACDBBF608086/DPM/MatchNextPeer:<BR>>
Result=Success(0); Outgoing Dial-peer=91684901<BR>> Is
Matched<BR>> Feb 12 10:43:56:<BR>>
//-1/ACDBBF608086/DPM/dpMatchPeersCore:<BR>>
Result=Success(0) after DP_MATCH_DEST<BR>> Feb 12
10:43:56:<BR>>
//-1/ACDBBF608086/DPM/dpMatchPeersMoreArg:<BR>>
Result=SUCCESS(0)<BR>> List of Matched
Outgoing Dial-peer(s):<BR>> 1:
Dial-peer Tag=91684901<BR>>
<BR>><BR>------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>
<BR>><BR>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<BR>> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph
*<BR>> Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<BR>> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060
FAX
(JNHN)<BR>><BR>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<BR>>
<BR>> ...there's no such thing as a bad timbit...<BR>>
<BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> From:
Ted Nugent <BR>> To: Lelio Fulgenzi ; <A
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A>
<BR>> Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 11:16
PM<BR>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] dial-peers and more<BR>>
specific vs less specific matching<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Yep,
I personally like to make things a bit more<BR>> granular to
give it more of a PT/CSS feel, works<BR>> better for me. I'd
probably go this route, might<BR>> have<BR>> fat fingered
something but I think you'll get the<BR>> idea<BR>> <BR>>
voice translation-rule 900<BR>> rule 1 reject
/^91900/<BR>> !<BR>> voice translation-profile
block<BR>> translate called 900<BR>>
!<BR>> <BR>> dial-peer cor
custom<BR>> name
long-dist<BR>> name toll-fraud<BR>>
<BR>> dial-peer cor list
call-long-dist<BR>> member
long-dist<BR>> !<BR>> dial-peer cor list
call-toll-fraud<BR>> member
toll-fraud<BR>> !<BR>> dial-peer cor list
Unrestricted-Users<BR>> member
long-dist<BR>> !<BR>> dial-peer cor list
Restricted-Users<BR>> member
long-dist<BR>> member
toll-fraud<BR>> !<BR>> dial-peer voice 91901
pots<BR>> corlist outgoing
call-long-dist<BR>> destination-pattern
91[2-9]..[2-9]......<BR>> port
3/0:23<BR>> forward-digits 11<BR>>
<BR>> dial-peer voice 1900 pots<BR>>
corlist outgoing call-toll-fraud<BR>> translation-profile
outgoing block<BR>> huntstop<BR>>
destination-pattern 91900.......<BR>> <BR>>
call-manager-fallback<BR>> cor incoming
Restricted-Users 1 3000 <-900s<BR>>
blocked<BR>> cor incoming Unrestricted-Users
1 3000 <-900s<BR>> allowed<BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> --- Lelio Fulgenzi <<A
href="mailto:lelio@uoguelph.ca">lelio@uoguelph.ca</A>> wrote:<BR>>
<BR>> > Ok then, so basically, I create a dial-peer
that<BR>> > allows all long distance dialing, and
then<BR>> create<BR>> > dial-peers that block the area
codes I want to<BR>> block<BR>> > and then make sure that
those dial-peers match<BR>> the<BR>> > same CoR as the
phones I want to prevent dialing<BR>> > those area codes.
For everyone else, I make sure<BR>> > their CoR is a subset
of the dial-peer cor so<BR>> they<BR>> > do not match and
therefor by pass the blocking<BR>> >
dial-peer.<BR>> > <BR>> >
<BR>> > ----- Original Message -----
<BR>> > From: Ted Nugent <BR>>
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi ;<BR>> <A
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A>
<BR>> > Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 10:17
PM<BR>> > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] dial-peers
and more<BR>> > specific vs less specific
matching<BR>> > <BR>> >
<BR>> > Ahhh... ok... sorry been a long
weekend.. :-)<BR>> > Well in this case I would
probably use voice<BR>> > translation rules.
<BR>> > <BR>> > voice
translation-rule 5500<BR>> > rule 1 reject
/919005655555/<BR>> > !<BR>>
> voice translation-profile block<BR>>
> translate called 5500<BR>>
> !<BR>> > dial-peer voice
976001901 pots<BR>> > corlist outgoing
call-toll-fraud<BR>> > translation-profile
outgoing block<BR>> >
huntstop<BR>> > destination-pattern
919005655555<BR>> > <BR>> >
<BR>> > <BR>> >
<BR>> > --- Lelio Fulgenzi <<A
href="mailto:lelio@uoguelph.ca">lelio@uoguelph.ca</A>>
wrote:<BR>> > <BR>> > > But
I still don't see how to block them for<BR>> the<BR>>
> > other extensions.....I would thinking<BR>>
blocking<BR>> > > specific outbounding area
codes is a regular<BR>> > thing.<BR>>
> > <BR>> > >
----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >
> From: Ted Nugent <BR>> >
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi ;<BR>> > <A
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A>
<BR>> > > Sent: Sunday, February
11, 2007 9:34 PM<BR>> > >
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] dial-peers and<BR>> more<BR>>
> > specific vs less specific matching<BR>>
> > <BR>> > >
<BR>> > > Your 919005655555 DP is
assigned to your<BR>> > >
call-toll-fraud COR List so you'd need to<BR>> >
assigned<BR>> > > that cor list
to the DN... You mentioned<BR>> it<BR>> >
the<BR>> > > other<BR>>
> > way around before??<BR>>
> > <BR>> > >
call-manager-fallback<BR>> >
> cor incoming call-toll-fraud 1
3000<BR>> > > <BR>>
> > <BR>> > >
<BR>> > > <BR>>
> > <BR>> > >
--- Lelio Fulgenzi <<A
href="mailto:lelio@uoguelph.ca">lelio@uoguelph.ca</A>><BR>>
wrote:<BR>> > > <BR>>
> > > Well, I'm basically looking for an
easy<BR>> way<BR>> > to<BR>>
> > > blocking calling to specific
numbers,<BR>> for<BR>> > >
example,<BR>> > > > 900
numbers. But not only do I want to<BR>> block<BR>>
> > them, I<BR>> >
> > want to be able to assign them to<BR>>
another<BR>> > CoR so<BR>> >
> > that while they are blocked for the
most<BR>> > people,<BR>> >
> I<BR>> > > > can assign
the CoR to others. It has to<BR>> be a<BR>> >
> > scalable solution though, since we may<BR>>
want<BR>> > to<BR>> >
> > prevent access to other specific area<BR>>
codes<BR>> > but<BR>> >
> > assign them to others.<BR>>
> > > <BR>> >
> > <BR>> > >
> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>>
> > > From: Ted Nugent
<BR>> > > > To:
Lelio Fulgenzi ;<BR>> > > <A
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A>
<BR>> > > > Sent:
Sunday, February 11, 2007 11:12<BR>> AM<BR>>
> > > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip]
dial-peers<BR>> and<BR>> > more<BR>>
> > > specific vs less specific
matching<BR>> > > >
<BR>> > > >
<BR>> > > > That
is the expected behavior, I try<BR>> to<BR>> >
think<BR>> > > of<BR>>
> > > it as<BR>>
> > > PT/CSS, the call_long_dist
COR does<BR>> not<BR>> > have<BR>>
> > > visibilty<BR>>
> > > to the 976001901 DP because
its in a<BR>> > different<BR>>
> > > COR, it<BR>>
> > > can only see the DP in its
COR list.<BR>> I'm<BR>> > not<BR>>
> > 100%<BR>> >
> > certain what your trying to
accomplish<BR>> > however<BR>>
> > if<BR>> > >
> you<BR>> > >
> do not assign COR to a dailpeer it<BR>> will
be<BR>> > > visible<BR>>
> > > by<BR>> >
> > all COR lists, sorta like putting it<BR>>
in<BR>> > the<BR>> > >
null<BR>> > > >
PT.<BR>> > > >
<BR>> > > >
<BR>> > > >
<BR>> > > > ---
Lelio Fulgenzi <<A
href="mailto:lelio@uoguelph.ca">lelio@uoguelph.ca</A>><BR>>
> wrote:<BR>> > > >
<BR>> > > > >
Trying to get my head around these<BR>> > >
dial-peers,<BR>> > > >
and<BR>> > > >
> just when I thought I knew what I<BR>> was<BR>>
> > doing....<BR>> >
> > > <BR>> >
> > > I created a few dial-peers,
some<BR>> more<BR>> > >
specific<BR>> > > >
than<BR>> > > >
> others, in the hopes that I could<BR>> >
> selectively<BR>> > > >
route<BR>> > > >
> calls based on the CoR list<BR>> assigned. We<BR>> >
do<BR>> > > > >
something similar in CallManager and<BR>> I<BR>> >
was<BR>> > > > hoping
to<BR>> > > > >
emulate things as much as possible.<BR>> >
> > > <BR>> >
> > > A simple example (pardon
spelling<BR>> > errors):<BR>>
> > > > <BR>>
> > > > dial-peer cor
custom<BR>> > > >
> name long_dist<BR>>
> > >
> name toll_fraud<BR>>
> > > > <BR>>
> > > > dial-peer cor list
call_long_dist<BR>> > >
> > member
long_dist<BR>> > >
> > <BR>> > >
> > dial-peer cor list call_toll_fraud<BR>>
> > >
> member long_dist<BR>>
> > >
> member toll_fraud<BR>>
> > > > <BR>>
> > > > dial-peer voice 91901
pots<BR>> > > >
> corlist outgoing call_long_dist<BR>>
> > > >
destination-pattern 91..........<BR>> >
> > > port 3/0:23<BR>>
> > > > forward-digits
11<BR>> > > > >
<BR>> > > > >
dial-peer voice 976001901 pots<BR>> >
> > > corlist outgoing
call_toll_fraud<BR>> > >
> > huntstop<BR>> >
> > > destination-pattern
919005655555<BR>> > >
> > port 3/0:23<BR>> >
> > > forward-digits
11<BR>> > > > >
<BR>> > > > >
phones with an incoming dialpeer of<BR>> >
> > call_long_dist<BR>> >
> > > can still call this 1900
number,<BR>> because<BR>> > >
it's<BR>> > > >
> matching the 91.......... dial-peer.<BR>> >
> > > <BR>> >
> > > is that the way things are
supposed<BR>> to<BR>> > work?<BR>>
> > > even if<BR>>
> > > > there is a more
specific dial-peer<BR>> (that<BR>> > >
doesn't<BR>> > > >
> match it's cor list), it will use a<BR>> less<BR>>
> > > specific<BR>>
> > > > dial-peer that does
match?<BR>> > > >
> <BR>> > > >
> that seems odd to me.<BR>> >
> > > <BR>> >
> > ><BR>> >
> > <BR>> >
> ><BR>> > >
<BR>> > ><BR>> >
<BR>> ><BR>>
<BR>><BR>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>
> > > > Lelio Fulgenzi,
B.A.<BR>> > <BR>> === message truncated
===><BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> >
cisco-voip mailing list<BR>> > <A
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A><BR>>
><BR>> <A
href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</A><BR>>
> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
<BR>><BR>____________________________________________________________________________________<BR>>
It's here! Your new message! <BR>> Get new email alerts
with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.<BR>> <BR>> <A
href="http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/">http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/</A><BR>>
> _______________________________________________<BR>> cisco-voip
mailing list<BR>> <A
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A><BR>>
<A
href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</A><BR>>
<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR> <BR>____________________________________________________________________________________<BR>Need
Mail bonding?<BR>Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo!
Answers users.<BR><A
href="http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091">http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091</A><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>cisco-voip
mailing list<BR><A
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A><BR><A
href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>