Re: [cisco-voip] I need some feedback on the use of alternate enterprise number mask
could you just use a translation pattern. 9130XXX translates to 130xxx. Scott On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Barnett, Nick < nick.barn...@countryfinancial.com> wrote: > Here’s the scenario. Our HQ has been on CUCM for several years, but our > field offices have their own pots KSU solutions. We are deploying IPT to > the field offices as we speak. The field offices are consistently setting > speed dials to call back to other on net DNs, but prefixing a 9. This > causes the call to trombone and eats up call path and resources. No amount > of training or bulletins to the field seems to work. They have been dialing > 9 to reach HQ for decades. > > > > I’m aware that we should try and go full e164, but we have issues with > non-did numbers and it is a fairly complex dialplan. I’ll get there, I just > can’t do it right now. > > > > My idea is to use the alternate enterprise number mask on the DNs. We use > 11 digit DNs, so the Alt number mask would like 9XXX. This gives a > derived DN of 913095551234, which keeps the calls on net. Cool, mission > accomplished… I think. > > > > Does this method cause any call processing issues? I’m slightly worried > that it could raise processor usage… but I’m mostly just worried about it > because it is “new” to me. > > > > Has anyone used the alt Ent number mask for this work around? > > > > Thanks, > > Nick > > ___ > 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] I need some feedback on the use of alternate enterprise number mask
I sure could, but we are going to have over 1000 NPA-NXX combinations after everything is deployed. I was looking for a way to not have a ton of translations going on. From: Scott Voll [mailto:svoll.v...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 12:09 PM To: Barnett, Nick Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] I need some feedback on the use of alternate enterprise number mask could you just use a translation pattern. 9130XXX translates to 130xxx. Scott On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Barnett, Nick <nick.barn...@countryfinancial.com<mailto:nick.barn...@countryfinancial.com>> wrote: Here’s the scenario. Our HQ has been on CUCM for several years, but our field offices have their own pots KSU solutions. We are deploying IPT to the field offices as we speak. The field offices are consistently setting speed dials to call back to other on net DNs, but prefixing a 9. This causes the call to trombone and eats up call path and resources. No amount of training or bulletins to the field seems to work. They have been dialing 9 to reach HQ for decades. I’m aware that we should try and go full e164, but we have issues with non-did numbers and it is a fairly complex dialplan. I’ll get there, I just can’t do it right now. My idea is to use the alternate enterprise number mask on the DNs. We use 11 digit DNs, so the Alt number mask would like 9XXX. This gives a derived DN of 913095551234, which keeps the calls on net. Cool, mission accomplished… I think. Does this method cause any call processing issues? I’m slightly worried that it could raise processor usage… but I’m mostly just worried about it because it is “new” to me. Has anyone used the alt Ent number mask for this work around? Thanks, Nick ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_mailman_listinfo_cisco-2Dvoip=BQMFaQ=M-KQspD_LQogCbR-BWCHOaeDEPOhF8vWqHZTaiwxT3c=T9uVLZucbHG2NKKKzOrp-o5cpdReHj02PkJJsCVkgfwcv7S0R5lDeFJg2VRbiNih=paRhBsPV9F8cx4V4Suj3w3w0oN2AL6Vk-F2aL89dfXU=v-bYzIVjb_NyIJNhPSXZZCGYMsLM0Q2Bzdh64sFwJFE=> ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
Re: [cisco-voip] I need some feedback on the use of alternate enterprise number mask
I think this is a great use for the alternate enterprise number and it won’t cause any overhead with call processing. -Ryan On Oct 29, 2015, at 1:16 PM, Barnett, Nick <nick.barn...@countryfinancial.com<mailto:nick.barn...@countryfinancial.com>> wrote: I sure could, but we are going to have over 1000 NPA-NXX combinations after everything is deployed. I was looking for a way to not have a ton of translations going on. From: Scott Voll [mailto:svoll.v...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 12:09 PM To: Barnett, Nick Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] I need some feedback on the use of alternate enterprise number mask could you just use a translation pattern. 9130XXX translates to 130xxx. Scott On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Barnett, Nick <nick.barn...@countryfinancial.com<mailto:nick.barn...@countryfinancial.com>> wrote: Here’s the scenario. Our HQ has been on CUCM for several years, but our field offices have their own pots KSU solutions. We are deploying IPT to the field offices as we speak. The field offices are consistently setting speed dials to call back to other on net DNs, but prefixing a 9. This causes the call to trombone and eats up call path and resources. No amount of training or bulletins to the field seems to work. They have been dialing 9 to reach HQ for decades. I’m aware that we should try and go full e164, but we have issues with non-did numbers and it is a fairly complex dialplan. I’ll get there, I just can’t do it right now. My idea is to use the alternate enterprise number mask on the DNs. We use 11 digit DNs, so the Alt number mask would like 9XXX. This gives a derived DN of 913095551234, which keeps the calls on net. Cool, mission accomplished… I think. Does this method cause any call processing issues? I’m slightly worried that it could raise processor usage… but I’m mostly just worried about it because it is “new” to me. Has anyone used the alt Ent number mask for this work around? Thanks, Nick ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__puck.nether.net_mailman_listinfo_cisco-2Dvoip=BQMFaQ=M-KQspD_LQogCbR-BWCHOaeDEPOhF8vWqHZTaiwxT3c=T9uVLZucbHG2NKKKzOrp-o5cpdReHj02PkJJsCVkgfwcv7S0R5lDeFJg2VRbiNih=paRhBsPV9F8cx4V4Suj3w3w0oN2AL6Vk-F2aL89dfXU=v-bYzIVjb_NyIJNhPSXZZCGYMsLM0Q2Bzdh64sFwJFE=> ___ cisco-voip mailing list cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto: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
