how to prefix a phone number link

[Mike Buyarski]

we have phone number links in websites and email, but we call it fails since the prefix to dial outbound is not on the call. so when we call outbound we need to add the number "8" to the number first to dial out of course a number link in email or a websie just has the 10 digit number so the call fails when we click it. is there a way for the phone system to add the "8" when calling those numbers? 

UCM Version11.5

[Elliot Dierksen]

I would suggest using +E.164 numbers. The would be +1.407.555.1212. You can have translation patterns that wouldn't overlap with anything to unwrap those numbers, and would also work for people outside.

[Flo.Matalis]

Hi! if I were you, I will create a translation pattern to that specific number.

Example: 555551212

Translation Pattern: 555551212

Calling Search Space: <Outgoing CSS>

Prefix Digits (Outgoing Calls): 8

[Mike Buyarski]

that would not work since the links we encounter is not going to be same all the time. 

[Flo.Matalis]

Yes, above was just an example. The idea should be creating a translation pattern then adding the Prefix 8, so you do not have to enter 8 when dialing the number. You just need to press the number link.

As Elliot suggested, you could put it into E164 or depending on what's the current format you are seeing on your email/website number links.

If you are seeing E164 format, then you create an E164 translation pattern.

If you are seeing just the national code and subscriber numbers, then create something like a catch all or wildcard translation pattern.

[Mike Buyarski]

the links we are looking at either give is the 10 digit number or the 1+10 digit number. the problem is if i put in a translation pattern with a "XXXXXXXXXX" pattern and then add the rule to add the 81 to it, and a second pattern of  "1XXXXXXXXXX" where i just add a 8 to it, it will shut down our regular outbound dialing. so either i am misunderstanding what to do or something else. 

[Nithin Eluvathingal]

Can you share the current 10 digit and 11 Digit RP configured for a normal call. 

[Mike Buyarski]

we only have 10 digit RP's for long distance and local. (we do have a 7-digit since it was the standard for local, but not for much longer) 

Here they are. the place i put the 10 and 11 digit was under translations pattern. 

[Nithin Eluvathingal]

I can see for 10 digit the first digit is in a range of [2-9]. do you use complete range of 2-9 ? can we have more specific for the first digit. I am trying to see an option  if I can remove the 8 from [2-9].

For 11 digit, I hope the translation 1[2-9]XXXXXXXXX with prefix 8 wont create any problem. and as an  alternative you can have a pattern 1[2-9]XXXXXXXXX.

[Elliot Dierksen]

I have a couple stray thoughts here. First, what are the range you you extensions, specifically the leading two digits? I ask because extension ranges that start with "10" or "11" do not conflict with any NANP PSTN numbers. That means you could do without a outside dial prefix if your extensions match that.

There was an earlier question about how to write the expression for PSTN numbers. In NANP, area codes and exchanges have the same rules which is they can not have the last two digits be "11". That means 4 patterns are required if you want to write them more specifically for 10 digits. It would be an additional 4 patterns for 11 digits calls.

[2-9][02-9]XX[2-9][02-9]XXXXXX

[2-9]X[02-9]X[2-9][02-9]XXXXXX

[2-9][02-9]XX[2-9]X[02-9]XXXXX

[2-9]X[02-9]X[2-9][X02-9]XXXXX

[Mike Buyarski]

basically you are saying i need to redo the 10 digit local and long distance i currently have with what you have listed. 

[Elliot Dierksen]

It depends on your dial plan (as in your internal extension range). I don't see where you mentioned that. I ALWAYS try to drive things towards +E.164 now. If you are the one controlling what it contained in the phone number links, +E.164 is 100% the way you should go. I was describing the NANP portion of E.164 in more detail because I thought there was a question about being more specific on the wild cards. I may have added confusion in an attempt a **bleep** retentive completeness.