Overlapping e164-pattern-map

[kely]

Can I have overlapping pattern maps?

What will be the behavior? Closest match?

In my scenario I have a large group of TNs. Most of the numbers will point to CUCM. Some need to point directly to a different GW, but are in the same range. Would this setup work?

TN Range: 1800-800-0000 through 1800-800-0999.

e164-pattern-map 1

e164 18008000...

e164-pattern-map 2

e164 18008000268

e164 18008000594

e164 18008000558

e164 18008000944

dial-peer 1

destination e164-pattern-map 1

send to CUCM

dial-peer 2

destination e164-pattern-map 2

send to GW

[R0g22]

Can you make this a bit more generic if possible ?

e164-pattern-map 1
e164 18008000...

The preferred one should be longest match but it might cause overlaps.

[kely]

Sure.
Pattern map 1
..........
Pattern Map 2
.........1

All 10 digit numbers are in pattern map 1 and fall into dial peer 1.
All 10 digit numbers that end with 1 are in pattern map 2.

Will the number 1000000001 go to Dial peer 1 or dial peer 2?

[R0g22]

You are still overlapping the dial plan.

Pattern map 1
.........[2-9]
Pattern Map 2
.........1

The above won't be overlapping.

[kely]

Nipun,

I think I oversimplified the example. I can't edit the dial pattern 1 to avoid all of the special numbers and still use a wild cards. I have dozens of non-sequential numbers to avoid.

I want the patterns to overlap. This way all calls are handled and route one way by default, but any number specifically called out in dial pattern 2 would be processed by the second pattern.

I just want to ensure a number specifically called out in dial pattern 2 would always use that dial pattern and it's dial peer.

[R0g22]

Ok. So you want the dial plans to overlap but want calls to specific numbers to route through a specific dial pattern ? So exactly, how do you want the IOS to handle that ?

[kely]

Pattern map 1 uses wildcards for generic match to many number. Ex: ..........
Pattern map 2 uses more specific list to match special routing cases. Ex: 1800800....
DP 1 matches pattern map 1.
DP 2 matches pattern map 2.
All numbers in pattern map 2 are called and are a closer match than pattern map 1. Will the IOS recognize this and always use DP 2?

Would it make more sense to use a dial pattern .......... For the general route and a pattern map for the special routing?
Dial pattern .......... Normal routing.
Pattern map 1 1800800.... Specific numbers for special routing.

The dial pattern 1 is more specific than the dial pattern ..........

[kely]

The question boils down to;

If I have two pattern maps that overlap. Will the cisco IOS use the closes match?

[R0g22]

There would still be a overlap. Irrespective of the fact what number you dial, you will always match peer with pattern 1. I ran this in my lab to prove the point.

voice class e164-pattern-map 1
e164 ..........

voice class e164-pattern-map 2
e164 1800800....



dial-peer voice 1023819 voip
session target ipv4:1.1.1.1
destination e164-pattern-map 1

dial-peer voice 1023818 voip
session target ipv4:2.2.2.2
destination e164-pattern-map 2



HOST2911#show dialplan number 1234567890
Macro Exp.: 1234567890

VoiceOverIpPeer1023819
peer type = voice, system default peer = FALSE, information type = voice,
description = `',
tag = 1023819, destination-pattern = `',
destination e164-pattern-map tag = 1 status = valid,


HOST2911#show dialplan number 12345678901
Macro Exp.: 12345678901

VoiceOverIpPeer1023819
peer type = voice, system default peer = FALSE, information type = voice,
description = `',
tag = 1023819, destination-pattern = `',

[kely]

Nipun,

That is unfortunate. Thanks for checking.

[R0g22]

I know. IOS is not intelligent unfortunately. Best thing is to not overlap. Send me a PM with the details and we can work out a plan to accommodate what you are trying to achieve.

[kely]

Nipun,

I have been doing some testing on overlapping pattern maps.

I have two pattern maps, using preference in the dial-peers it appears this may still work. Does this sound correct?

I have specific pattern map for special case and general pattern map for general case.

voice class e164-pattern-map 1
  e164 2601111111
  e164 2602222222
 !
!
voice class e164-pattern-map 2
  e164 260.......
 !
!

dial-peer voice 1 voip
 session protocol sipv2
 session server-group 1
 destination e164-pattern-map 1

 preference 0
!

dial-peer voice 2 voip
 preference 1
 session protocol sipv2
 session server-group 2
 destination e164-pattern-map 2
!

If I run show dialplan number 2601111111 it still matches on both dial patterns. However, it should always use dial-peer 1 because it is a higher preference correct?

Numbers that are in pattern map 2 but not pattern map 1 wouldn't overlap and always use dial peer 2 correct?

[R0g22]

Nope. It's still a overlap. Preference is used as a tie breaker by IOS when the destination-pattern across multiple dp's are similar. Your patterns are overlapping but not identical, so preferences won't be used as a tie breaker.

[rholifield · Accepted solution]

Sorry, I know this is a little dated but I just ran across this. I would not completely rely on the "show dialplan number" for e164-pattern-map routing. Even though it shows both dial-peers (based on pattern-maps) as potential matches, it will route based on the more explicit match between the two maps. I run this in a production environment every day and this works flawlessly. My dialplan does overlap, but it is by design. I want all toll-free numbers routed to CVP unless I want a specific number routed to CUCM. So...

voice class e164-pattern-map 1

  e164 800.......

voice class e164-pattern-map 2

  e164 8001234567

!

dial-peer voice 1 voip
  description CVP dial-peer - Outbound
  destination e164-pattern-map 1
  session server-group 1234

dial-peer voice 2 voip
  description CUCM dial-peer - Outbound
  destination e164-pattern-map 2
  session server-group 4567

8001234567 will route to dial-peer 2 every time, while 800XXXXXXX will route to dial-peer 1 every time. Test it in a lab and you will find that it definitely does route on the more explicit match if multiple matches are found. I hope this helps.

[kely]

This is exactly what I was trying to implement. A general pattern map to handle the bulk of my numbers and a specific pattern map that handled specific numbers even though they fell within the general map.

Thanks for your reply.