Digit manipulation in Route Patterns or Route List

[yuexp0929]

Hello  All, 

    I still have a question.  Which is the best choice when I can modify a calling number and called number in Route Pattern or in Route List? Why?

[b.winter]

Hi,

Personally, the better way is to do it on the route pattern.

Simply, because you need it anyway and it is more transparent to have the digit modification in one place and not split up into 2 places (route pattern and route list).

[Roger Kallberg]

It depends on if you want the modification of the number to be visible to the calling device or not. Doing it on the RP level will be seen on the calling device, whereas doing it on the RL/RG details level will, with the correct config on your voice gateway, not be seen on the calling device.

[b.winter]

But then you could also work with the service parameters Always Display Original Dialed Number --> True and Name Display for Original Dialed Number When Translated --> Show the display Name for Final Dialed Number after Translation

[Roger Kallberg]

For sure yes, but that has far greater impact than for just external facing calls as that would also affect anything that runs past a translation pattern for internal calls.

[b.winter]

That's why I also recommended the command Name Display for Original Dialed Number When Translated --> Show the display Name for Final Dialed Number after Translation.

The default value is to use the original dialed number. And then I agree with you, this would cause problems.

[Roger Kallberg]

Not actually saying that it would cause a problem as such, just stating the options and differences.

[Meddane]

There is no recommendation. It depends. This is why CUCM gives you the flexibility to configure digit manipulation at different levels. With translation pattern , Under route pattern, route group, using the called and the calling transformation pattern in this order. So the idea is to have a granularity to select the best place according to your requirements and your dial plan. This is why Cisco does not mention a special recommendation for a given entity.