! with urgent priority

[helloguys]

CUCM 11.5.  If a translation pattern was configured with ! and urgent priority, what's the expected behavior?

It seems silly to have ! and urgent priority together.  But I've seen it in the past and the behavior seems to be unpredictable.

Say, we have 9.XXXXXXXXXX in partition A.  Then we have 9.! in partition B with urgent priority.

In CSS, partition A is listed higher than partition B.

When user gets the phone off-hook and press 91234567890123 digit-by-digit, what would happen?

Will CUCM send the call once it match 91234567890?

Or CUCM will wait for inter-digit timeout?

[balaji.bandi]

Route Pattern—In Voice Over IP (VoIP), route patterns are the equivalent of static routes. The only difference is the route patterns point to E.164 numbers instead of the IP address. The Route Pattern is a specific number or, more commonly, a range of dialed numbers that are used to route calls to a device directly, such as a DT-24+ or a voice-capable router, or indirectly through a Route List. For example, 1XXX signifies 1000 through 1999. The X in 1XXX signifies a single digit, a placeholder or wildcard. There are other such placeholders that are to be introduced later, such as @, ., and !). A Route Pattern does not have to be unique within a Partition, as long as the Route Filter is different. In general, a Route Pattern matches the dialed number for external calls, performs digit manipulation(optional), and points to a Route List for routing.

more information can be find here :

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/voice-unified-communications/unified-communications-manager-callmanager/13920-call-routing.html

[Jaime Valencia]

!

The exclamation point (!) wildcard matches one or more digits in the range 0 through 9.

The route pattern 91! routes or blocks all numbers in the range 910 through 91999999999999999999999

9.XXXXXXXXXX would still be a better choice, so the order of the partitions in the CSS would not matter as best match routing would apply.

As there's still a chance you dial even more digits for the 9! pattern, it would not send the call immediately and wait for IDT.

At least that's how it should behave based on my understanding of the digit analysis engine.

That being said, that sounds like someone is just looking for problems by configuring things that way, when you don't even know how many digits someone would dial.