Route Filter issue

[Tommer Catlin]

CUCM 8.5SU1

Using Device/Line Approach.  (Allow all at device, block at the line)

Patterns are all the stand ard 9.1[2-9] etc. (LD)   9.011# INT, etc.

I put in a System wide block partition that references a Route Filter for fraud with 9.@

It works perfect.

But I have a few sites that actually do need to call an area code off the Route Filter.   So I went ahead and created a specific route pattern 9.1242[2-9]XXXXX (Bahamas) and put this in the Site-Devices-PT.   

In my DNA, it will only use the 9.@ and then alternate is my second route above.  Even if it put it as "urgent" it still overides it.   Im boggled on why I cant allow this.   Does 9.@ take precedents over 9.1x patterns?  Trying to figure out a work around rather than creating an entire new PT/CSS/RPs for this one site.....   

[Joseph Martini]

It must be that the route pattern 9.@ with the route filter is more specific, closer match.

[Joseph Martini]

I'll dump the dialing forest on my lab server to let you know what it contains thats a closer match.

[Tommer Catlin]

Whats odd is that I have a route pattern for Callforword so the site can only use that area code to call forward to.

For example: RP 91408XXXXXXX

On the Callfoward CSS, I select the CSS for this pattern

Boom, it works fine and ignores any other pattern for call forwarding.

So I have to imagine that my PT and CSS ordering is correct if I can use a specific CSS/PT to match a pattern, but ignore the other NA-PSTN-PT I use for the system wide RPs.

Cisco Support Community<>

Re: Route Filter issue

created by joemar2<> in IP Telephony - View the full discussion<>

[Tommer Catlin]

I think my work around if I cant figure it out is to create a separate CSS for this site that has its own Route Filter List excluding 242. Which would suck, but I know what will work.

Device CSS stays the same

Create new LINE CSS for LD, INT, Local and another Route Filter with 9.@ for this site.