Installed Dial Plans and +E164 Dialing

[j.a.m.e.s]

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?

[gearbox]

James,

Are you leveraging an SME in your environment? 

[j.a.m.e.s]

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 · Accepted solution]

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

[j.a.m.e.s]

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