[cisco-voip] do video endpoints like SX20 and roomkit display alerting information of called number?

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

OK - coming at this from a different angle...

For those of you who have multiple video endpoints like SX20 and roomkits 
installed, when you dial between those units and other DNs, like Jabber or 
hardphones, do you not see the Alerting Name programmed on the far end called 
party displayed on your screen?

I could have sworn this worked in the past.

---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, 
Twitter and Facebook

[University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]

<>___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display for route patterns

[daniele visaggio]

mhhh then try to play with Remote Number Calling Party Transformation CSS.

Create a calling party transformation pattern to change the number from
"prefix + number" to just "number". Keep it in a relevant partition and
assign the CSS to Remote Number Calling Party Transformation CSS on device
page.

Set the advanced service parameter 'Apply Transformations on Remote Number'
to True. Default is False.

This is for cosmetic reasons only. Typical use: user dials e.g. 911 and tp
globalizes to +911 BUT my user doesn't want to see the + sign  on the
phone's display. So I discard the + with a calling transformation pattern
applied there.

Hope it is helpful.

Il giorno lun 24 set 2018 alle ore 21:44 Lelio Fulgenzi 
ha scritto:

>
> I was afraid you were going to ask that. :(
>
> It’s not something I’m prepared to change since it’s going to affect
> enterprise wide dialing and how things are displayed.
>
> I was hoping to be able to do this without modifying that parameter.
>
> That being said, I did try it on our dev server and rather than keeping
> the original dialed digits, it kept the SIP uri equivalent. Which is
> another problem altogether.
>
> I might be stuck with prefix showing. :(
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> On Sep 24, 2018, at 3:41 PM, daniele visaggio 
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> did you try setting the *Always Display Original Dialed Number *service
> parameter to True?
>
>
>
> Il giorno lun 24 set 2018 alle ore 20:49 Lelio Fulgenzi 
> ha scritto:
>
>>
>>
>> Hmmm, went through the effort of building a route group and route list
>> and adding the prefix digits I need on the route group member configuration
>> of the route list.
>>
>>
>>
>> But still, the prefix digits appear on the display of the dialing device.
>> ☹
>>
>>
>>
>> How do I get rid of displaying those prefix digits? I was pretty sure
>> this was the way.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Lelio
>> Fulgenzi
>> *Sent:* Friday, September 21, 2018 11:20 AM
>> *To:* Florian Kroessbacher ; Brian Meade
>> 
>> *Cc:* cisco-voip voyp list 
>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display
>> for route patterns
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hmmm, looks like another programming option.
>>
>>
>>
>> I was hoping for a built-in option. ☹
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Florian Kroessbacher 
>> *Sent:* Friday, September 21, 2018 10:52 AM
>> *To:* Brian Meade ; Lelio Fulgenzi 
>> *Cc:* cisco-voip voyp list 
>> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display
>> for route patterns
>>
>>
>>
>> Hy out there
>>
>> what about CURRI if u were on >10
>>
>> Am 20. Sep. 2018, 23:43 +0200 schrieb Lelio Fulgenzi :
>>
>>
>>
>> I half want to try the old trick of a CTI route point and use forwarding,
>> but not sure I want to intercept that complexity.
>>
>> *-sent from mobile device-*
>>
>>
>>
>> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>>
>> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>>
>> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
>> N1G 2W1
>>
>> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>>
>>
>>
>> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>>
>>
>> On Sep 20, 2018, at 5:32 PM, Brian Meade  wrote:
>>
>> For name modification, CUCM doesn't have much.  Probably would need a LUA
>> script to update the name in the SIP messaging.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 9:33 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> It’s been a while, and I know I can use route lists and route groups to
>> customize called party number display but I can’t recall what my options
>> are, if any, to customize the called party name 

Re: [cisco-voip] Rate-limit voice calls by callerID?

[Kent Roberts]

Create a dial peer on cube to match the calling number, then use the call 
limits in the dial peer to limit the number.

Don’t forget to make it a lower preference, then your main ones, or it will 
never hit.Hunt stop in the dial peer so it doesn’t roll over….

Test after hours with your cell phone or something…



You could also use a TCL script if you have that knowledge.




> On Sep 24, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Ed Leatherman  wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> This is a shot in the dark here but has anyone seen a product that can 
> rate-limit SIP calls based on the calling party number?
> 
> We've had a few recent incidents where a scammer has put our telephone 
> exchange into their robocall system and blasted us with presumably thousands 
> of call attempts spoofing a government or foreign agency's Washington DC 
> phone number, for example, the VA or the Chinese Embassy. Aside from the 
> nuisance of the robocalls, this crushes our SIP concurrent call paths until I 
> block the number on CUBE. I was thinking if there were a way to rate limit 
> calls from a calling party number that would probably let the legitimate 
> calls in, for the most part, but squelch anything that would DOS us. This 
> doesn't seem to be in the normal CUBE toolset so to speak. 
> 
> I'm looking at a company called SecureLogix that might be able to do 
> something like this. Are there any actual SBCs that can handle something like 
> that? 
> 
> Any other solutions to this issue?
> 
> -- 
> Ed Leatherman
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

[cisco-voip] Rate-limit voice calls by callerID?

[Ed Leatherman]

Hi everyone,

This is a shot in the dark here but has anyone seen a product that can
rate-limit SIP calls based on the calling party number?

We've had a few recent incidents where a scammer has put our telephone
exchange into their robocall system and blasted us with presumably
thousands of call attempts spoofing a government or foreign agency's
Washington DC phone number, for example, the VA or the Chinese Embassy.
Aside from the nuisance of the robocalls, this crushes our SIP concurrent
call paths until I block the number on CUBE. I was thinking if there were a
way to rate limit calls from a calling party number that would probably let
the legitimate calls in, for the most part, but squelch anything that would
DOS us. This doesn't seem to be in the normal CUBE toolset so to speak.

I'm looking at a company called SecureLogix that might be able to do
something like this. Are there any actual SBCs that can handle something
like that?

Any other solutions to this issue?

-- 
Ed Leatherman
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX Call Redirect and Called Address Reset

[Anthony Holloway]

I can't change it, because I need that pattern for calls that we do send
that way.  So, I need my cake, and to be able to eat it too.  As a work
around, I am just creating one off DNs for the patterns in question*.  In
the real world, it's not 1XXX, rather, this is an environment which
thought +E164 formatting was a monolithic approach to numbering plans, and
therefore all non-DIDs follow the format +1NPA555.  When I use this
non-DID pattern for the purpose of sending calls from UCCX to a Voice
Enabled Directory handler, it's matching the +1.651[2-9]XX Route
Pattern for PSTN local calls.  From UCCX, we also send calls to the PSTN,
and that's why I cannot just remove the pattern, else it breaks our ability
to call the PSTN.

*I'm also considering creating a +1651555 pattern, which does nothing
to the digits, and will cover all non-DID, but I'm unsure at the moment the
scope of impact this will have, as opposed to just creating one-off
patterns.

On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 2:53 PM Bill Talley  wrote:

> 
>
> Maybe I’m oversimplifying the work around (having not seen your
> environment), but could you not just set your redirect CSS to one that
> doesn’t have visibility of the 1XXX route pattern?
>
> FWIW, I have agreed with your assessment 100%.  It makes no sense at all
> why CCM is performing DA/DM on dialed numbers while also ignoring routing
> info.  It would make a little more sense if the call was matching the route
> pattern due to use of the redirect css and routing the call out the route
> list/gateway, but with it ONLY modifying called party info, that’s crazy as
> hell.
>
> Sent from an iOS device with very tiny touchscreen input keys.  Please
> excude my typtos.
>
> On Sep 24, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-v...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Damn! You played a Reverse card on me!  Well played.
>
> Well, here's how it made me feel.  You were just testing the use of
> different CSSs, which caused a difference in Digit Analysis.  You didn't
> provide any logs to review, but I assume you have a different CSS on each
> of the: CTI Port, VGW, and IP Phone; as most designs would call for.
>
> I did some testing with the Redirect CSS setting on the CTI Ports as well,
> and here are some findings.
>
> I have three phone numbers in this test:
>
>- +16515551901 is my IP Phone
>- +16515551902 is my VM Pilot (Call Redirect Destination)
>- +16515551903 is my Voice Mailbox (Call Redirect Reset Called Address
>to)
>
> I have two Partitions in this test:
>
>- *calling* has my IP Phone and my VM Pilot
>- *port* has my CTI Port
>
>Note that I do not have a pattern even built to match the voice
>mailbox, so it should go to CUC unmolested (which it does).
>
> I have two CSSs in this test:
>
>- *calling* CSS which can only reach *calling* PT (on my calling
>device (my phone))
>- *port* CSS which can only reach *port* PT (on my CTI Port)
>
> *Example call with CTI Port Redirect CSS set to Calling Party (uses my
> phone CSS to reach VM pilot and called address)*
> 27900093.006 |11:10:33.852 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis:
> match(pi="1",fqcn="+16515551901", cn="+16515551901", plv="5",
> pss="calling", TodFilteredPss="calling", dd="+16515551903",dac="1")
> 27900093.007 |11:10:33.852 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: analysis results
>
> 27900103.012 |11:10:33.853 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: match(pi="1",
> fqcn="+16515551901", cn="+16515551901",plv="5", pss="calling",
> TodFilteredPss="calling", dd="+16515551902",dac="1")
> 27900103.013 |11:10:33.853 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: analysis results
>
> *Example call with CTI Port Redirect CSS set to Redirect Party (uses CTI
> Port CSS to try and reach, but fails, the VM pilot and called address)*
> 28020535.006 |11:13:51.421 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis:
> match(pi="1",fqcn="+16515551901", cn="+16515551901", plv="5", pss="port",
> TodFilteredPss="port", dd="+16515551903",dac="1")
> 28020535.007 |11:13:51.421 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis:
> potentialMatches=NoPotentialMatchesExist
>
> 28020548.006 |11:13:51.422 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis:
> match(pi="1",fqcn="+16515551901", cn="+16515551901", plv="5", pss="port",
> TodFilteredPss="port", dd="+16515551902",dac="1")
> 28020548.007 |11:13:51.422 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis:
> potentialMatches=NoPotentialMatchesExist
>
> Note that, I did not test the Redirect CSS setting of DN Calling Search
> Space, because the documentation says it's deprecated.
>
> Also note the order of DA: first its for the mailbox (Call Redirect Called
> Address), then the DA for the VM pilot happens second.
>
> Also note that, I don't have to place an inbound call from outside, since
> the calling CSS would just be used on my VGW, as opposed to my phone in
> these tests.  It doesn't matter what the calling device is, just what its
> CSS is.
>
> Further, the only time an OffNet or OnNet determination is needed, is when
> forwarding on the CTI Route Point, I.e., Call Forward Busy Internal vs
> External.  I'm 

Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display for route patterns

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

Interesting. I’m sending it to Expressway. Out to a SIP trunk to my two C’s. 
I’m using the same SIP trunk for my SIP route patterns, so I’m not sure how 
much flexibility I have in changing trunk settings without affecting the SIP 
routing as well.


---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, 
Twitter and Facebook

[University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]

From: NateCCIE 
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 3:45 PM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi 
Cc: cisco-voip voyp list 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display for 
route patterns

Where is the call going?  Cucm shouldn’t be updating what the user sees with 
that config, but the thing your sending the call to is probably updating it and 
then cucm shows the update.
Sent from my iPhone

On Sep 24, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi 
mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>> wrote:

Hmmm, went through the effort of building a route group and route list and 
adding the prefix digits I need on the route group member configuration of the 
route list.

But still, the prefix digits appear on the display of the dialing device. ☹

How do I get rid of displaying those prefix digits? I was pretty sure this was 
the way.


---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, 
Twitter and Facebook



From: cisco-voip 
mailto:cisco-voip-boun...@puck.nether.net>> 
On Behalf Of Lelio Fulgenzi
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2018 11:20 AM
To: Florian Kroessbacher 
mailto:florian.kroessbac...@gmail.com>>; Brian 
Meade mailto:bmead...@vt.edu>>
Cc: cisco-voip voyp list 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display for 
route patterns


Hmmm, looks like another programming option.

I was hoping for a built-in option. ☹

---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, 
Twitter and Facebook



From: Florian Kroessbacher 
mailto:florian.kroessbac...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2018 10:52 AM
To: Brian Meade mailto:bmead...@vt.edu>>; Lelio Fulgenzi 
mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>>
Cc: cisco-voip voyp list 
mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display for 
route patterns

Hy out there

what about CURRI if u were on >10
Am 20. Sep. 2018, 23:43 +0200 schrieb Lelio Fulgenzi 
mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>>:

I half want to try the old trick of a CTI route point and use forwarding, but 
not sure I want to intercept that complexity.
-sent from mobile device-

Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | 
le...@uoguelph.ca

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, 
Twitter and Facebook

[University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]

On Sep 20, 2018, at 5:32 PM, Brian Meade 
mailto:bmead...@vt.edu>> wrote:
For name modification, CUCM doesn't have much.  Probably would need a LUA 
script to update the name in the SIP messaging.

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 9:33 PM Lelio Fulgenzi 
mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>> wrote:

It’s been a while, and I know I can use route lists and route groups to 
customize called party number display but I can’t recall what my options are, 
if any, to customize the called party name display.

For example, if I dial 4 and want only 4 to continue to 
display, I can do the modifications on the route list/group, ie prefix 999, and 
build appropriate rules on expressway.

But what if I’d like to display “WebEx Pilot” on the phone when they call a 
particular route pattern?

I can’t seem to find any option for that.
-sent from mobile device-

Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | 
le...@uoguelph.ca

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, 
Twitter and Facebook

[University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX Call Redirect and Called Address Reset

[Bill Talley]



Maybe I’m oversimplifying the work around (having not seen your environment), 
but could you not just set your redirect CSS to one that doesn’t have 
visibility of the 1XXX route pattern?

FWIW, I have agreed with your assessment 100%.  It makes no sense at all why 
CCM is performing DA/DM on dialed numbers while also ignoring routing info.  It 
would make a little more sense if the call was matching the route pattern due 
to use of the redirect css and routing the call out the route list/gateway, but 
with it ONLY modifying called party info, that’s crazy as hell. 

Sent from an iOS device with very tiny touchscreen input keys.  Please excude 
my typtos.

> On Sep 24, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Anthony Holloway 
>  wrote:
> 
> Damn! You played a Reverse card on me!  Well played.
> 
> Well, here's how it made me feel.  You were just testing the use of different 
> CSSs, which caused a difference in Digit Analysis.  You didn't provide any 
> logs to review, but I assume you have a different CSS on each of the: CTI 
> Port, VGW, and IP Phone; as most designs would call for.
> 
> I did some testing with the Redirect CSS setting on the CTI Ports as well, 
> and here are some findings.
> 
> I have three phone numbers in this test:
> +16515551901 is my IP Phone
> +16515551902 is my VM Pilot (Call Redirect Destination)
> +16515551903 is my Voice Mailbox (Call Redirect Reset Called Address to)
> I have two Partitions in this test:
> calling has my IP Phone and my VM Pilot
> port has my CTI Port
> 
> Note that I do not have a pattern even built to match the voice mailbox, so 
> it should go to CUC unmolested (which it does).
> I have two CSSs in this test:
> calling CSS which can only reach calling PT (on my calling device (my phone))
> port CSS which can only reach port PT (on my CTI Port)
> Example call with CTI Port Redirect CSS set to Calling Party (uses my phone 
> CSS to reach VM pilot and called address)
> 27900093.006 |11:10:33.852 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: 
> match(pi="1",fqcn="+16515551901", cn="+16515551901", plv="5", pss="calling", 
> TodFilteredPss="calling", dd="+16515551903",dac="1")
> 27900093.007 |11:10:33.852 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: analysis results  
> 
> 27900103.012 |11:10:33.853 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: match(pi="1", 
> fqcn="+16515551901", cn="+16515551901",plv="5", pss="calling", 
> TodFilteredPss="calling", dd="+16515551902",dac="1")
> 27900103.013 |11:10:33.853 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: analysis results
> 
> Example call with CTI Port Redirect CSS set to Redirect Party (uses CTI Port 
> CSS to try and reach, but fails, the VM pilot and called address)
> 28020535.006 |11:13:51.421 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: 
> match(pi="1",fqcn="+16515551901", cn="+16515551901", plv="5", pss="port", 
> TodFilteredPss="port", dd="+16515551903",dac="1")
> 28020535.007 |11:13:51.421 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: 
> potentialMatches=NoPotentialMatchesExist  
> 
> 28020548.006 |11:13:51.422 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: 
> match(pi="1",fqcn="+16515551901", cn="+16515551901", plv="5", pss="port", 
> TodFilteredPss="port", dd="+16515551902",dac="1")
> 28020548.007 |11:13:51.422 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: 
> potentialMatches=NoPotentialMatchesExist
> 
> Note that, I did not test the Redirect CSS setting of DN Calling Search 
> Space, because the documentation says it's deprecated.
> 
> Also note the order of DA: first its for the mailbox (Call Redirect Called 
> Address), then the DA for the VM pilot happens second.  
> 
> Also note that, I don't have to place an inbound call from outside, since the 
> calling CSS would just be used on my VGW, as opposed to my phone in these 
> tests.  It doesn't matter what the calling device is, just what its CSS is.
> 
> Further, the only time an OffNet or OnNet determination is needed, is when 
> forwarding on the CTI Route Point, I.e., Call Forward Busy Internal vs 
> External.  I'm not testing that, so, we can skip it for now.
> 
> Ok, so what did this simple test show me?  Well, it shows the actual impact 
> of changing the setting on the CTI Ports' Redirect CSS: Calling Party and 
> Redirect Party, and how that changes the Partition Search Space (PSS) used in 
> DA, which affects the Call Redirect Called Address, as that DA is performed 
> before the DA for the Call Redirect Destination.  I already know that it's 
> Partitions and Calling Search Spaces which dictate which and how patterns are 
> matched, that was never the issue.  The issue is with CUCM performing DA on, 
> *and* manipulating the Called Address, when I was trying to call the VM 
> pilot, not the Called Address.  And changing the CSS/PT is not an option for 
> me right now, since the pattern we're hitting for DA on the Called Address is 
> a pattern that I actually need UCCX to see.
> 
> From a CTI Manager perspective (different test call, so timestamps are 
> later), you can see how CTI manager receives the Call Redirect request from 
> UCCX
> 79624786.000 |13:30:03.172 |SdlSig   |CtiLineCallRedirectReq   

Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display for route patterns

[NateCCIE]

Where is the call going?  Cucm shouldn’t be updating what the user sees with 
that config, but the thing your sending the call to is probably updating it and 
then cucm shows the update. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 24, 2018, at 12:49 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
> 
>  
> Hmmm, went through the effort of building a route group and route list and 
> adding the prefix digits I need on the route group member configuration of 
> the route list.
>  
> But still, the prefix digits appear on the display of the dialing device. ☹
>  
> How do I get rid of displaying those prefix digits? I was pretty sure this 
> was the way.
>  
>  
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
> 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>  
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>  
> 
>  
> From: cisco-voip  On Behalf Of Lelio 
> Fulgenzi
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2018 11:20 AM
> To: Florian Kroessbacher ; Brian Meade 
> 
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list 
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display for 
> route patterns
>  
>  
> Hmmm, looks like another programming option.
>  
> I was hoping for a built-in option. ☹
>  
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
> 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>  
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>  
> 
>  
> From: Florian Kroessbacher  
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2018 10:52 AM
> To: Brian Meade ; Lelio Fulgenzi 
> Cc: cisco-voip voyp list 
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display for 
> route patterns
>  
> Hy out there
> 
> what about CURRI if u were on >10
> Am 20. Sep. 2018, 23:43 +0200 schrieb Lelio Fulgenzi :
> 
>  
> I half want to try the old trick of a CTI route point and use forwarding, but 
> not sure I want to intercept that complexity. 
> 
> -sent from mobile device-
>  
> 
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
> 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>  
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>  
> 
> 
> On Sep 20, 2018, at 5:32 PM, Brian Meade  wrote:
> 
> For name modification, CUCM doesn't have much.  Probably would need a LUA 
> script to update the name in the SIP messaging.
>  
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 9:33 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>  
> It’s been a while, and I know I can use route lists and route groups to 
> customize called party number display but I can’t recall what my options are, 
> if any, to customize the called party name display. 
>  
> For example, if I dial 4 and want only 4 to continue to display, I 
> can do the modifications on the route list/group, ie prefix 999, and build 
> appropriate rules on expressway. 
>  
> But what if I’d like to display “WebEx Pilot” on the phone when they call a 
> particular route pattern?
>  
> I can’t seem to find any option for that. 
> 
> -sent from mobile device-
>  
> 
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 
> 2W1
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>  
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>  
> 
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display for route patterns

[daniele visaggio]

Hi,

did you try setting the *Always Display Original Dialed Number *service
parameter to True?



Il giorno lun 24 set 2018 alle ore 20:49 Lelio Fulgenzi 
ha scritto:

>
>
> Hmmm, went through the effort of building a route group and route list and
> adding the prefix digits I need on the route group member configuration of
> the route list.
>
>
>
> But still, the prefix digits appear on the display of the dialing device.
> ☹
>
>
>
> How do I get rid of displaying those prefix digits? I was pretty sure this
> was the way.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip  *On Behalf Of *Lelio
> Fulgenzi
> *Sent:* Friday, September 21, 2018 11:20 AM
> *To:* Florian Kroessbacher ; Brian Meade <
> bmead...@vt.edu>
> *Cc:* cisco-voip voyp list 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display
> for route patterns
>
>
>
>
>
> Hmmm, looks like another programming option.
>
>
>
> I was hoping for a built-in option. ☹
>
>
>
> ---
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
>
> *From:* Florian Kroessbacher 
> *Sent:* Friday, September 21, 2018 10:52 AM
> *To:* Brian Meade ; Lelio Fulgenzi 
> *Cc:* cisco-voip voyp list 
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Customizing called party name/number display
> for route patterns
>
>
>
> Hy out there
>
> what about CURRI if u were on >10
>
> Am 20. Sep. 2018, 23:43 +0200 schrieb Lelio Fulgenzi :
>
>
>
> I half want to try the old trick of a CTI route point and use forwarding,
> but not sure I want to intercept that complexity.
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2018, at 5:32 PM, Brian Meade  wrote:
>
> For name modification, CUCM doesn't have much.  Probably would need a LUA
> script to update the name in the SIP messaging.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 9:33 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:
>
>
>
> It’s been a while, and I know I can use route lists and route groups to
> customize called party number display but I can’t recall what my options
> are, if any, to customize the called party name display.
>
>
>
> For example, if I dial 4 and want only 4 to continue to display,
> I can do the modifications on the route list/group, ie prefix 999, and
> build appropriate rules on expressway.
>
>
>
> But what if I’d like to display “WebEx Pilot” on the phone when they call
> a particular route pattern?
>
>
>
> I can’t seem to find any option for that.
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX Call Redirect and Called Address Reset

[Anthony Holloway]

Damn! You played a Reverse card on me!  Well played.

Well, here's how it made me feel.  You were just testing the use of
different CSSs, which caused a difference in Digit Analysis.  You didn't
provide any logs to review, but I assume you have a different CSS on each
of the: CTI Port, VGW, and IP Phone; as most designs would call for.

I did some testing with the Redirect CSS setting on the CTI Ports as well,
and here are some findings.

I have three phone numbers in this test:

   - +16515551901 is my IP Phone
   - +16515551902 is my VM Pilot (Call Redirect Destination)
   - +16515551903 is my Voice Mailbox (Call Redirect Reset Called Address
   to)

I have two Partitions in this test:

   - *calling* has my IP Phone and my VM Pilot
   - *port* has my CTI Port

   Note that I do not have a pattern even built to match the voice mailbox,
   so it should go to CUC unmolested (which it does).

I have two CSSs in this test:

   - *calling* CSS which can only reach *calling* PT (on my calling device
   (my phone))
   - *port* CSS which can only reach *port* PT (on my CTI Port)

*Example call with CTI Port Redirect CSS set to Calling Party (uses my
phone CSS to reach VM pilot and called address)*
27900093.006 |11:10:33.852 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis:
match(pi="1",fqcn="+16515551901", cn="+16515551901", plv="5",
pss="calling", TodFilteredPss="calling", dd="+16515551903",dac="1")
27900093.007 |11:10:33.852 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: analysis results

27900103.012 |11:10:33.853 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: match(pi="1",
fqcn="+16515551901", cn="+16515551901",plv="5", pss="calling",
TodFilteredPss="calling", dd="+16515551902",dac="1")
27900103.013 |11:10:33.853 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis: analysis results

*Example call with CTI Port Redirect CSS set to Redirect Party (uses CTI
Port CSS to try and reach, but fails, the VM pilot and called address)*
28020535.006 |11:13:51.421 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis:
match(pi="1",fqcn="+16515551901", cn="+16515551901", plv="5", pss="port",
TodFilteredPss="port", dd="+16515551903",dac="1")
28020535.007 |11:13:51.421 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis:
potentialMatches=NoPotentialMatchesExist

28020548.006 |11:13:51.422 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis:
match(pi="1",fqcn="+16515551901", cn="+16515551901", plv="5", pss="port",
TodFilteredPss="port", dd="+16515551902",dac="1")
28020548.007 |11:13:51.422 |AppInfo  |Digit analysis:
potentialMatches=NoPotentialMatchesExist

Note that, I did not test the Redirect CSS setting of DN Calling Search
Space, because the documentation says it's deprecated.

Also note the order of DA: first its for the mailbox (Call Redirect Called
Address), then the DA for the VM pilot happens second.

Also note that, I don't have to place an inbound call from outside, since
the calling CSS would just be used on my VGW, as opposed to my phone in
these tests.  It doesn't matter what the calling device is, just what its
CSS is.

Further, the only time an OffNet or OnNet determination is needed, is when
forwarding on the CTI Route Point, I.e., Call Forward Busy Internal vs
External.  I'm not testing that, so, we can skip it for now.

Ok, so what did this simple test show me?  Well, it shows the actual impact
of changing the setting on the CTI Ports' Redirect CSS: Calling Party and
Redirect Party, and how that changes the Partition Search Space (PSS) used
in DA, which affects the Call Redirect Called Address, as that DA is
performed before the DA for the Call Redirect Destination.  I already know
that it's Partitions and Calling Search Spaces which dictate which and how
patterns are matched, that was never the issue.  The issue is with CUCM
performing DA on, *and* manipulating the Called Address, when I was trying
to call the VM pilot, not the Called Address.  And changing the CSS/PT is
not an option for me right now, since the pattern we're hitting for DA on
the Called Address is a pattern that I actually need UCCX to see.

*From a CTI Manager perspective (different test call, so timestamps are
later), you can see how CTI manager receives the Call Redirect request from
UCCX*
79624786.000 |13:30:03.172 |SdlSig   |CtiLineCallRedirectReq   |ready
 |CTIDeviceLineMgr(3,200,25,1) |CTIHandler(3,200,22,1461)
|3,200,13,1468.359280^172.16.B.C^*   |[R:N-H:0,N:0,L:0,V:0,Z:0,D:0]
AsyncResponse=279506 CH=3|53896065 LH=3|54438 OriginalCalled=2
mUnconditionalRedirect=0 DestAddr=+16515551902
PreferredOriginalCalled=+16515551903 RedirectReason=0 ModifiedCalling Num=
ModifiedCallingType=0 FAC= CMC=

In that one line we see that the DestAddr is the VM Pilot and the
PreferredOriginalCalled is the mailbox.  So perhaps CUCM could be coded to
not perform DA on CTI PreferredOriginalCalled fields, or perhaps UCCX can
be coded to send the call to CUCM differently.  I'd be ok with either, as
long as the Called Address wasn't being sent through DA, as there's no
point, and works counter intuitive to how the rest of CUCM works.

FWIW, I opened a TAC case, and was told it's working as designed.  So, I
lost 

Re: [cisco-voip] All calls sip calls?

[Lelio Fulgenzi]

I believe so. Sorry, that’s what I was trying to convey when I said, “…filling 
out this info on the config page..” – but that was way too cryptic.

I’m hoping there’s an option.

There’s this neat blog I started reading but did not go deep into that talks 
about “local” vs SIP, etc.

https://ccieme.wordpress.com/2016/10/26/4-8-uri-call-routing/



---
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | le...@uoguelph.ca

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, 
Twitter and Facebook

[University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]

From: Brian Meade 
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 10:14 AM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi 
Cc: cisco-voip voyp list 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] All calls sip calls?

Was it when you added the SIP TLD in CUCM?

On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 1:46 PM Lelio Fulgenzi 
mailto:le...@uoguelph.ca>> wrote:

At some point in my configuration tasks for the roomkit, it seems all calls 
from both the roomkit (CE) and the SX20 (TC) are now sip uri calls. I used to 
dial a DN and not see the @otld info. Now I do.

I suspect it was me actually filling This info in on the config page.

Is there another config that will eliminate this?

It’s just gonna cause questions.
-sent from mobile device-

Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. | Senior Analyst
Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON | N1G 2W1
519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 | 
le...@uoguelph.ca

www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, 
Twitter and Facebook

___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

Re: [cisco-voip] All calls sip calls?

[Brian Meade]

Was it when you added the SIP TLD in CUCM?

On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 1:46 PM Lelio Fulgenzi  wrote:

>
> At some point in my configuration tasks for the roomkit, it seems all
> calls from both the roomkit (CE) and the SX20 (TC) are now sip uri calls. I
> used to dial a DN and not see the @otld info. Now I do.
>
> I suspect it was me actually filling This info in on the config page.
>
> Is there another config that will eliminate this?
>
> It’s just gonna cause questions.
>
> *-sent from mobile device-*
>
>
> *Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.* | Senior Analyst
>
> Computing and Communications Services | University of Guelph
>
> Room 037 Animal Science & Nutrition Bldg | 50 Stone Rd E | Guelph, ON |
> N1G 2W1
>
> 519-824-4120 Ext. 56354 <519-824-4120;56354> | le...@uoguelph.ca
>
>
>
> www.uoguelph.ca/ccs | @UofGCCS on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook
>
>
>
> [image: University of Guelph Cornerstone with Improve Life tagline]
> ___
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
___
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip