[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       cisco-voip
Subject:    Re: [cisco-voip] Adding area code to local calls and digit manipulation at route list/route pattern 
From:       Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio () uoguelph ! ca>
Date:       2021-05-24 17:53:00
Message-ID: AE7079C4-18BA-4F41-BBF4-97AC7C603F8F () uoguelph ! ca
[Download RAW message or body]

That's great to hear you solved your problem !

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 24, 2021, at 7:33 AM, Gary Parker <G.J.Parker@lboro.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph. Do not \
> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the \
> content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to IThelp@uoguelph.ca 
> 
> Thanks Lelio, that was the problem. As per \
> https://www.ciscopress.com/articles/article.asp?p=1745737&seqNum=8 
> "
> The three levels of digit manipulation are not cumulative. Only one level of digit \
> manipulation will be applied. The hierarchy for these digit manipulations are as \
> follows: 
> • Digit manipulation settings on the route pattern take effect only when the \
> route list details do not have any defined digit manipulations. A transformation \
> CSS applied at the gateway/trunk or device pool will also cause the digit \
> manipulations applied at the route pattern level to be skipped. • If the \
> transformation CSS at the gateway or trunk matches, but the route list details have \
> configured digit manipulations, the manipulations configured at the route list \
> details are used. Route pattern digit manipulations are ignored. • If any \
> manipulation matches through a gateway or trunk transformation CSS, all other digit \
> manipulations are ignored. "
> 
> I had assumed (wrongly) that changes were applied in order from route pattern, \
> through route list/group and gateway/trunk, and were additive. 
> My reading of the above suggests that a transformation at Route List level \
> overrides both Route Pattern *and* gateway/trunk transformations. Which is odd to \
> me as, from a call flow perspective, the Route List sits in between Route Pattern \
> and gateway/trunk. 
> Anyway, I set up a new route pattern, route list and route group specifically for \
> these local calls that matched my LOCAL route filter and am applying the \
> transformation successfully at the route group. 
> One other wrinkle that turned up while applying this was that the dot and @ \
> position indication seems to be lost when transforming at the route group level. \
> While I could successfully apply GBNP:PreDot as a digit strip option at Route \
> Pattern level, trying to do the same at Route List/Group removes *all* digits. As a \
> consequence I'm instead using a Called Party Transform Mask to get the last six \
> digits of the dialled string and prefixing that with the appropriate area code. 
> It's working, but it feels inelegant.
> 
> Gary
> 
> 
> > On 21 May 2021, at 19:39, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio@uoguelph.ca> wrote:
> > 
> > I didn't go through your email in detail, but, just in case, it might help.
> > 
> > I remember when I tried to do digit manipulation, I found that the manipulation \
> > was always dropped before as it went to the next level. Or something like that. \
> > Then, when I read the help pages, it spelled it out, something like, this takes \
> > precedence over this. 
> > For example, on the route list detail:
> > 
> > The settings on this page override the settings of the same name on the Route \
> > Pattern/Route Pilot page. These settings are used for calls routed through this \
> > member of the current Route List only. 
> > If you want the prefix digits to be seen by the TSP, then I think you have to put \
> > them on the final egress, i.e. trunk.  
> > It's been a while though.
> 
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]