Calling Party Transformation Mask

[msmalik]

Hi All,

Wondering if you brilliant minds can help me solve the following, where I am trying to send a specific calling number out;

- 0421362219, a Route Pattern configured for test purpose
- If I configure the "External Calling Party Phone number Mask" as 0265212625, on DN, it sends out that number without any issue - Success

- Now when I try to implement this on Route Pattern level and put 0265212625 in "Calling Party Transform Mask" in Calling Party Transformations section. It doesn't send out this number 
Instead, it sends out the following default number from Gateway ( rule 11 /.+/ /286770111/ ).

Thanks

[b.winter]

Because the rule 11 is a "match-anything" rule and therefore translate anything into 286770111.
For your first number, there is probable a different rule, but this is just guessing, without you provide any configs, debugs, logs, ...
So you better check the config on the GW or use a different rule strategy.

[Nithin Eluvathingal]

The rule says translate everything to 286770111.

Irrespective of what you configure on the route pattern, you have rules on gateway. Either do translations on RP or do it on gateway. 

2.12.0.0

2.12.0.0

[Jonathan Schulenberg]

Technically not anything since  /.+/ will only match non-blank/empty values; that requires /.?/ (press Ctrl V before the ?)

To others’ point though: that rule should have matched in the first scenario as well. If it didn’t and the translation-profile is attached to the incoming dial-peer, perhaps you’re matching a different DP in the second scenario (ie answer-address)?

If CUCM isn’t sending the transform set on the RP it’s probably because something is set to use the EPNM instead. After the RP there is the RG association to the RL and, less likely, an actual Transformation Pattern on the gateway/trunk. 

[Maren Mahoney]

Your question is about why CUCM is seemingly ignoring the Calling Party Mask on the Route Pattern, when it does seem to use the External Phone Number Mask.

Question 1: When you change the Calling Party Mask, can I assume that you uncheck the EPNM checkbox at the same time?

Question2: Do you have any additional digit manipulation on the call path out of CUCM. For instance, when you look at the Route Group as added to the Route List, are you doing digit manipulation there? And/Or, is there digit manipulation on the Trunk/GW configuration page itself?

In CUCM, once a call hits a Route Pattern digit manipulation can happen only one time for called party and calling party. Thinking about Route Pattern > RG in RL > Trunk/Gateway as the path, the last one that has digit manipulation is the ONLY one that is applied to the "original information".

I suggest that you run both calls through the Dialed Number Analyzer and see how CUCM is thinking about digit manipulation. At each step notice "Pre-Transformed" and "Transformed" numbers. If you need help parsing the output, take a screenshot and post it here and we can help.

Maren