Notice - a Draft Service Request will be deleted Draft Service Requests are retained for 7 days. You have service request(s) that are due to expire at midnight on Expiration date. Title: Errors in UCM GBNP Text file Description: Please see CSC discussion: https://supportforums.cisco.com/message/4060807 Need to open a bug with IDP team. Please verify fix from IDP team as fixes have missed 2 releases. reference: CSCug82402. This is one of the reported issues in previous versions. New issues exist in new dialplan file. Please review CSC discussion for details. Tracking#: EXPIRY DATE: 21-OCT-13 Please click here https://tools.cisco.com/ServiceRequestTool/scm/mgmt/case to view your Draft Service Request. Support Case Manager In order to use this tool you must associate your service contracts with your Cisco.com account. You can add service contracts to your profile using the Cisco Profile Manager or have your service access management administrator do this for you. For urgent issues or products covered under warranty, please contact the Cisco Technical Assistance Center by phone. ... View more

Please use the rating system to vote for useful posts. ... View more

Thanks! I just received an email with the reference number. Just to be clear here, and as noted in the first post, there are no longer any typos in the Personal Numbers rule. The remaining issues are found elsewhere within the GBNP IDP. Those issues are discussed in detail in the last of the threads listed above and I think discussion should continue there. ... View more

Any progress on that one? ... View more

Cisco recently (2013-08-27) released GBNP version 3.1.30. The remaining issues are detailed in a new thread here: https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/2243492 ... View more

Please use the rating system to vote for useful posts. ... View more

I was only fixing a minor typo in an earlier post and clarifying the two most important issues. By chance I also happened to notice the software had been updated about a month ago. I am somewhat surprised that no-one had thought to notify me. The remaining issues are detailed in a separate thread. ... View more

There doesn't appear to be any matching 1.1.x or 2.1.x versions published here: http://www.cisco.com/cisco/software/release.html?mdfid=278719042&softwareid=282074292&release=1.1.30-GB&os=Windows http://www.cisco.com/cisco/software/release.html?mdfid=278719042&softwareid=282074292&release=1.1.30-GB&os=Linux http://www.cisco.com/cisco/software/release.html?mdfid=278719042&softwareid=282074292&release=2.1.30-GB&os=Linux Are those products no longer supported or is this an oversight? Anyone else found anything that I have missed? ... View more

The page at http://software.cisco.com/download/release.html?mdfid=278719042&softwareid=282074292&release=3.1.30-GB&os=Linux should link to the README file at http://www.cisco.com/web/software/282074292/105507/dp-ffr-3-1-30_GBNP_Readme.txt but the link is missing. The same error was made when 3.1.29 was released. Section 1 of the README mentions CSCuc48084 and links to a post within https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/2171992. It should now also mention CSCug82402 and CSCuh62857 and link to https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/2214042 as that thread contains the details of what version 3.1.30 fixes. The README links to http://software.cisco.com/download/release.html?mdfid=278719042&catid=278875240&softwareid=282074292&os=Linux&release=3.1.4-IT&relind=AVAILABLE&rellifecycle=&reltype=latest for software download. That's version 3.1.4 for ITALY not version 3.1.30 for the UK. The same error was made when 3.1.28 and 3.1.29 were released. The README file links to http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/idp/504_423/deploy/dpdg.html but that documentation (especially the GBNP dialplan details at http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/idp/504_423/deploy/dpDlPlns.html#wp1042320 ) is full of errors. The newer version, with less errors, is here http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/idp/911/deploy/dpDlPlns.html#wp1042716 It was corrected more than a year ago. The same error was made when 3.1.28 and 3.1.29 were released. In section 4 of the README, defect CSCuc48084 should also be mentioned in the list. Cisco's legendary lack of attention to detail continues. ... View more

Item 9 The section headings are disorganised and do not match the content that follows them: # Long Distance Calls # International Calls # Services, Mobile & Non Geographic Calls Suggest a new approach: # Local Calls (4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 digit local numbers) # Long Distance Calls - 10 digits (011x, 01x1, 01xxx, 01xxxx, 02x) # Long Distance Calls - 9 digits (01xxx various prefixes, 016977) # Non-geographic Numbers Charged at Geographic Rates (030, 033, 034, 037) # VoIP, Corporate, Personal and Pager Numbers (055, 056, 070, 076) # Mobile Numbers (071-075, 07624, 077-079) # Non-geographic Numbers - 10 digits (080, 084, 087, 082) # Non-geographic Numbers - 9 digits (0500, 0800) # Non-geographic Numbers - 7 digits (0800 1111, 0845 4647) # Premium Rate Numbers (090, 091, 098) # International Calls (00 prefix) # Services (1xx, 116xxx, 118xxx, 1xxx, 18xxx) # Emergency (112, 999) Number plan maintenance will become much easier if there is some sort of logic and organisation to the data. ... View more

Item 8 The arrangement of the various items is completely disorganised. This makes it much more difficult to check for errors and makes it easy for new errors to be introduced. Rules that cover similar number types should be adjacent. Move # 0+13873+[2-9]XXXX to be before # 0+15242+[2-9]XXXX. Move # 0+1768[347]+[2-9]XXXX to be before # 0+19467+[2-9]XXXX. Move # 0+1827+[56]XXXX into numerical order further down the page, just before # 0+1837+5[2-5]XXX. Move # 0+1524+3[2-79]XXX and # 0+1524+6XXXX into numerical order much further down the page. Move # 0+16977+[23]XXX to be just after # 0+19467+[2-9]XXXX. Move # 0+1768+88[234678]XX to be before # 0+1827+[56]XXXX and # 0+1837+5[2-5]XXX. Swap the order of # 0+1750+[3-68]2XXX and # 0+1750+2[0-3]XXX. Move # 0+56XXXXXXXX to be near # 0+55XXXXXXXX. Put in numerical order: # 0+55XXXXXXXX, # 0+56XXXXXXXX, # 0+70+XXXXXXXX and # 0+76+XXXXXXXX. Move # 112 and # 999 to be at the end, last in the file. ... View more

Item 7 The heading is incorrect. # Services , Mobile & Non Geographic Calls Below that heading only one type of number is found. # Services ... View more

Item 6 There are some extraneous TABs and trailing spaces in the file. Run both 'convert tabs to spaces' and 'trim trailing spaces' in a text editor. This is cosmetic only and has absolutely no bearing on functionality. ... View more

Item 5 The following number ranges were removed from the GB Number Plan many years ago. # 0+9[2-79]XXXXXXXX P: 0                             NATIONAL-ACCESS P: 9[2-79]XXXXXXXX               BROADBAND-SERVICE T: N C: LONGDISTANCE E: +,[COUNTRY-CODE],BROADBAND-SERVICE F: NATIONAL-ACCESS,BROADBAND-SERVICE S: Y It may be that you're leaving them in because removing could create instability in existing installations. Previously, this pattern also matched 098 numbers and people could potentially use it to allow access to adult chat lines. That loophole has been closed by matching only 9[2-79]XXXXXXXX numbers now. All numbers matched by this new version of the rule are currently unallocated in the UK. ... View more

Item 4 Some of the names for the types of numbers are misleading. LOCALRATE-ACCESS L OCALRATE-SUBSCRIBER NATIONALRATE-ACCESS NATIONALRATE-SUBSCRIBER 0845 numbers were aligned to local-rate pricing, but only from certain landlines, and only until 2004. 0870 numbers were aligned to national-rate pricing, but only from certain landlines, and only until 2004. Other 084 and 087 numbers have never been aligned with geographic-rate pricing in any way whatsoever. Ofcom's "simplifying non-geographic numbers" project will end up with 084 and 087 numbers being classed as revenue share numbers with an Access Charge and a Service Charge to be declared by the respective parties, and a requirement that all refererences to "local" or "national" rates be removed. 090x and 091x numbers are Premium Rate Services (PRS), and 098x numbers are S**ual/Adult Entertainment Services (SES), both using NTS (Number Translation Services). 08xx numbers are also NTS, and I would suggest the following names: NTS084-ACCESS NTS084-SUBSCRIBER NTS087-ACCESS NTS087-SUBSCRIBER Ofcom currently refer to them as "08 numbers", but that causes confusion because "08 numbers" isn't supposed to include 080 numbers, which clearly also begin with 08! Whatever you decide, the terms "local" and "national" should go as they haven't applied for nearly a decade. ... View more