cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Announcements
723
Views
0
Helpful
4
Replies
j.a.m.e.s
Participant

Installed Dial Plans and +E164 Dialing

Does anyone know if the installed dial plans represented by the @ (e.g. NANP, UKNP etc) can match +E164 patterns?

 

My use case is as follows:

 

 

1. User dials a number which might be on the PSTN or another global office (via SME/ILS learned patterns)

2. We globalize everything to E164 and try to match our ILS learned patterns as the first choice

3. If step 2 fails, we attempt to use the local PSTN (matching @ with some filtering at the next partition in the CSS)

4. We want to block things like local Premium Rate calls on the local PSTN

 

If @ doesn't support E164 matching, I think having globalized the dial string, I would have to localize it again then attempt a match. To make matters worse, the local carriers then require E164. In other words, I would have to Globalize, then localize then globalize again! With all that effort, it might be easier to forget @ and just implement lots of country dial-plans, but this seems a lot of effort.

Any thoughts?

 

 

 

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
Maren Mahoney
Advocate

I hunted around for a while to see if I could find a full list of the NANP numbers supported by the @ wildcard, but came up empty. However, the Route Filters used with the @ symbol don't have a Route Filter Tag to capture the + character, which leads me to believe it is not supported by CUCM's @.

And I agree that stripping the +, going through the filter, and then re-adding the + seems a bit much. But the alternatives aren't much better::

  • Add translation patterns to the incoming call CSS to block the "bad" numbers as soon as they are dialed.
  • Use a voice translation profile on the router to block a list of dialed numbers as they egress the enterprise.
  • Add \+<pattern> route patterns with the "Block this pattern" .

If you don't want to globalize/localize/re-globalize, the only other one that makes sense to me is adding translation patterns to the incoming call CSS with the "Block this Pattern" checked.

HTH

Maren

View solution in original post

4 REPLIES 4
gearbox
Beginner

James,

 

Are you leveraging an SME in your environment? 

Gear Misner
HyeTech Network & Security, LLC
@collabcowboy

Are you leveraging an SME in your environment? 

Sorry I missed your reply. Yes, we are using SME to learn global patterns company-wide in E164 format, but we want to leverage local PSTN breakout on some local clusters which are installed in various countries.

Maren Mahoney
Advocate

I hunted around for a while to see if I could find a full list of the NANP numbers supported by the @ wildcard, but came up empty. However, the Route Filters used with the @ symbol don't have a Route Filter Tag to capture the + character, which leads me to believe it is not supported by CUCM's @.

And I agree that stripping the +, going through the filter, and then re-adding the + seems a bit much. But the alternatives aren't much better::

  • Add translation patterns to the incoming call CSS to block the "bad" numbers as soon as they are dialed.
  • Use a voice translation profile on the router to block a list of dialed numbers as they egress the enterprise.
  • Add \+<pattern> route patterns with the "Block this pattern" .

If you don't want to globalize/localize/re-globalize, the only other one that makes sense to me is adding translation patterns to the incoming call CSS with the "Block this Pattern" checked.

HTH

Maren

View solution in original post

Hi Maren



Thank you for taking the time to reply. I managed to locate a plain text version of the @ dialplans via CCO software download, which has a readme. As we both suspected, there doesn't appear to be any + support.

I like your blocking approach and will probably go with this. It's a nuisance though as I believe Cisco are meant to be encouraging adoption of E164.

Regards
James
Create
Recognize Your Peers
Content for Community-Ad