Need some advice with Local Route Groups in CUCM 9

[Tracy Larson]

I am trying to verify if what I read was true. I would LOVE to setup local route groups in cucm with the new cluster I am building up. It sounded great with the simplified dial plan and all, until I kept reading about forwarding. When I read about user A calling user B across the WAN and user B or C has their phone fowarded to their cell phone - lets say using 7 digits - that the local route group for user A gets used in this scenario. Since that would be a long distance call from user A's gateway and without TEHO configured for every scenario like this in the system will this fail or am I reading the doc incorrectly? Let me know ya pack of einsteins! I cant wait to fire off a load of +5's! And Pablo, I already searched the forum - you dont get a +5 for telling me to do that! You get a +6 instead

Tracy                 

[Chris Deren]

Tracy,

The forwarding issue can be addressed in version 9 with the following parameter:

Local route group for redirected calls:	This parameter specifies the local route group to be used for a  redirected call. Valid values follow: Local route group of calling  party: When this value is selected, the local route group associated  with the Device Pool of the Calling Party is used for routing the call.  Local route group of original called party: When this value is selected,  the local route group associated with the Device Pool of the Original  Called Party is used for routing the call. Local route group of last  redirecting party: When this value is selected, the local route group  associated with the Device Pool of the Last Redirecting Party is used  for routing the call.
	This is a required field.
	Default:                  Local route group of calling party

Chris

[David Hailey]

Check out my post on this the other day:

https://supportforums.cisco.com/message/3840436#3840436https://supportforums.cisco.com/message/3840436#3840436

Hailey

Please rate helpful posts!

[Tracy Larson]

Chris and David, I swear to you I searched for this!! Not hard but I did nonetheless. Thank you Thank you Thank you. I was about to conclude how stupid Cisco was for doing something like this and yet again I am an idiot, well not an idiot just really dumb. Thanks once again, this is an excellent feature. David, you got the correct answer in the other thread which Pablo didnt tell me to go find, so I have to give it to Chris. You can blame Pablo for that.

Tracy