Remote Destination Profile - External Phone Number Mask

[Carlos Espinosa]

Hi

I just need to confirm the following behavior is normal or not:

RDP (Remote Destination Profile) configured with External Phone Number Mask associated to IP Phone A.

If I call from the mobile phone (the one in the RDP) to IP Phone B, I see in IP Phone B the alerting name of IP Phone A  BUT instead of the DN it displays the External Mask.

If I remove the External Mask from the RDP then I see in Phone B, the name and DN of Phone A. I would like to display the internal DN but if I remove the External Mask then it could affect the MVA part.

FYI, I tried also with Mobile Identity and it does the same behavior.

CUCM is 9.0.1

Regards

[ashok_boin]

It's an expected behavior when you set ext number mask on RDP. Please note that the call is coming from VG and you have set ext mask explicitly.

Ashok.

Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPhone App

[Carlos Espinosa]

Hi Ashok,

Thanks for the answer, actually I did further test.

Scenario A

Calling from the cell phone which is the RDP number from IP Phone A to the DID of Phone B, it display the internal name and number from Phone A. Phone B doesn't even know that I'm calling from the outside, he sees my internal extension and name. I believe this is the correct behavior.

Scenario B

I have a different results, when I call the main number (CUC CallHandler) and then transfer to Phone B extension, is this scenario I see in Phone B the name and the external mask of Phone A instead of the internal extension. This is what I want to confirm if it is a expected behavior or not.

Forgot to mention this is an H.323 GW.

With a SIP Trunk I always see the external phone number mask on both scenarios, the only way I can see the internal Number (as in sceneario A) is by removing the External Phone Number Mask

Regards

[ashok_boin]

Hi Chris,

Interesting and learning to me as well :)

Have you tried in Scenario 1 to do call transfer to let's say Phone C from Phone B and observed the name and number at Phone C? This is mainly to compare same call flows as CUC done a call transfer so not sure whether RDP principles would apply during transfer.

Ashok.

Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPhone App

[Carlos Espinosa]

Hi Ashok,

You're right, it shows the internal name and the external mask.

There is one step I missed and it was to answer the call, so basically during the Alerting state I see the internal name and the DN, but once I hit the Answer soft key in Phone B (connected state) it display the internal name and instead of the internal DN it switch to the External Mask.

I guess this is the expected behavior and match the Scenario B

What I would like to verify is if with a SIP Trunk I should expect the same behavior.

[ashok_boin]

Hi Carlos,

Glad to hear this.

When you are talking about SIP trunk, I would presume connectivity to CUC. The call flow is slightly different here as it involves call transfer and of course depends upon CUC and SIP behavior to react to call transfer scenarios.

Ashok.



Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPhone App

[Carlos Espinosa]

Hi Ashok,

　

I have two setups (two different environments):

　

For the SIP Trunk is via CUBE

　

SIP Provider --SIP--> CUBE --SIP--> CUCM 9.0.x --SCCP--> IP Phone

I have a Translation Pattern that converts the DID to the DN (Scenario A), here I see the internal name and the External Mask during the Ringing and connected state.

　

　

For the H.323

ISDN --H323--> CUCM 8.6.x --SCCP--> IP Phone

I have a Translation Pattern that converts the DID to the DN (Scenario A), here I see the internal name and the DN during the Ringing and the External Mask in the connected state.

　

Lastly for the first setup (the one with the SIP Trunk) I created an h.323 Dial Peer towards CUCM, to see if the issue was with the SIP Protocol or the CUCM version. There was no change during the Ringing and connected state, so it seems that the CUCM 9.0.x version is the problem.

Probably next week I will upgrade from 9.0.x to 9.1.x (due to another DDTS), I will post my findings.

Regards

[ashok_boin]

Hi Carlos,

We can't still rule out that it could be CUCM issue as there is still SIP component in it. It depends upon hand off information between SIP and H323 as well. I feel the traces during this conversion will give us more insight into this issue if it's possible for you.

Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPhone App

[Carlos Espinosa]

Thanks Ashok,

I have a case open for this matter, it's actually something between the SIP and H.323 stack. Now I have the two clusters in the same CUCM version (one SIP and one H323) and the call display behaves differently.

[ashok_boin]

Oh ok, Carlos.

Pls update here if you get a solution for this or find the root cause.

With best regards...
Ashok
-----------
Pls kindly rate if helpful or answered your question.