line/device approach comparison

[fran19422]

Hello, I am a bit confused about how the line/device approach directly compares with newer techniques involving local route groups.

Could someone please give me a simple example of how a local route group method would be better than the older line/device approach.

Thanks kindly for any help.

[Dennis Mink]

Line/device approach has to do with calling search spaces  i.e. call privilieges. Local Route Groups have to do how and where the call is routed to after the CSS has established that the call is actually allowed.  Those are two different concepts and logics. and should not be confused.   The CUCM SRND has some real good theory on both these concept. I am convinced that once you have gone through that, you will "see the light"

=============================
Please remember to rate useful posts, by clicking on the stars below. 

=============================

[fran19422]

thanks, I am quite clear on what and how CSS and LRGs work.

I have read that after LRGs were introduced in CUCM 7 that the line/device approach was not necessary.

That is the aspect that is confusing me.

[Jaime Valencia]

And exactly where did you read that??
Because you need both to make a call, local route groups are by no means a replacement for the line/device approach and CCS and partitions

Id strongly suggest you to read the dial plan chapter from SRND

Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPad App

[Abdulbaseer Mohammed]

Hi Fran,

I am helping a client adopt LRG's simply put its simplification of number of Dial plan with minimum CSS and Partitions.  This is not replacement of line/device but will replace multiple Route patterns, route lists etc to utilize common ones as central to all sites.

Old way one to one relationship with multiple CSS and multiple Partitions and RP, Route lists etc LRG's will use same CSS, Partitions where ever possible and using their RP, Routelist plus using local devices.

Hope that helps.

Baseer.