While Anthony's encoding is right, I actually think the documentation does intend to actually mean you can act as though the + was not in the phone number value as stored in AD.
I have used the query below https://{host}:8443/cucm-uds/users?numberlast=3175551234 To search for phone numbers in AD. This finds any number with right justified digits above. This should find results for +13175551234, 13175551234, and 3175551234. If there are hypens in the numbers in AD (e.g. 317-555-1234). On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:16 AM, Anthony Holloway < [email protected]> wrote: > No worries. Transitioning to app dev will be a bumpy road for a lot of UC > Engineers, we might as well help each other progress forward. > > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 9:37 PM Nathan Reeves <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> lol, cheers for that, should have picked that up earlier. Quick test >> shows that works perfectly. >> >> When the docs mention that it ignores the plus symbol, I was working on >> the assumption that it therefore would ignore the plus symbol in the actual >> number. Wrong assumption. >> >> Thanks again >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:57 PM, Anthony Holloway < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Plus signs (+) in URL query parameters (the part after the question mark >>> [?]) are treated as spaces. E.g., ?name=anthony+holloway == "anthony >>> holloway" So, you're effectively asking UDS for " 61400111111" (note the >>> leading space, and omission of the plus sign [+]). >>> >>> The work around is to use some sort of URL encoding library, which will >>> build your URL with the plus sign (+) encoded with it's percent sign (%) >>> equivelent, which happens to be %2B. >>> >>> So, your submitted UDS request would actually look like: >>> >>> https://172.20.2.21:8443/cucm-uds/users?number=%2B61400111111 >>> >>> Finally, this is not a function of UDS at all, and something you'll need >>> to know, now that you are explorely RESTful APIs which rely on URL >>> structures to work with data. >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:46 AM Nathan Reeves < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Taking a look around at what options we have to drive additional >>>> directories for our IP phones and decided to take a quick look at using UDS >>>> as the data source, accessing it via the published API. >>>> >>>> One thing I'm finding (which I can't see any bug report on), is that >>>> number searches, where the number in UDS contains a plus, does not return >>>> search results based on the query submitted. >>>> >>>> I have a user configured with a mobile number in PlusE164 (+61400111111 >>>> <+61%20400%20111%20111> for example) which is pulled into the CUCM >>>> directory via LDAP sync. >>>> >>>> The API docs note that brackets, plus symbols etc are all ignored in >>>> the search. When I access the UDS API and construct a query string in a >>>> URL along the lines of 'https://172.20.2.21:8443/ >>>> cucm-uds/users?number=61400', the returned response is 0 results. If >>>> I update the Mobile number to remove just the plus (and resync LDAP), the >>>> same search now returns my user with the mobile number correctly searched. >>>> >>>> Running 11.5(1)SU1 (haven't yet checked this against SU2), attempted to >>>> use native UDS but also tried searching while UDS Proxy is enabled. Same >>>> results either way. >>>> >>>> Anyone seen this issue or am I missing something? I can only assume >>>> that the sanitized query doesn't correctly ignore the plus symbol. >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Nathan >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> cisco-voip mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip >>>> >>> >> > _______________________________________________ > cisco-voip mailing list > [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip > >
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
