Route Pattern Discard Digit

Hello,
I have a all route pattern with a discard digit "9" and the national calling starting from "2" and GSM from "9",
i hear a outside dialtone whenever i press a second digit "9" or digit "2", is it possible to get the outside dial on pressing first digit whcih is discard digit "9"
I think it is not possible but i want to confirm from youll experts,

There are no hints, you really need to check EVERYTHING. DNs, meetme, call park, anything that has a pattern/DN configured. Use the route plan report.
And Suresh is falling in one of the most common mistakes when this happens, "it must be something with 9..."/"it must be a RP/TP", sometimes it might be, many other it won't.
You need to check for ANYTHING that has wildcards that might match 9, as well as anything that start with 9. And not limit yourself to just RPs and TPs.
I can tell you back when I was in TAC, as soon as I asked them if they had configured anything else other than a RP/TP with 9, they often said "Oh yeah, I added a DN/CTI/meet-me, etc with 9, could that be the issue??"
HTH
java
if this helps, please rate
www.cisco.com/go/pdihelpdesk

Similar Messages

  • Route Pattern/Filter Issues

    Hello - I had a question that I was hoping someone could help me with. I recently had an issue on CallManager 4.1.3sr6a. I have 10 sites, each using their own set of 6 9.@ route patterns for outgoing calls. Although the patterns are distinct, they all use the same route filters. Today, all of the sites began matching on the route pattern with the seven digit filter rather than matching on the long distance filter when a 91XXXXXXXXXX number was dialed (we tested with a number of numbers in different area codes). I wasn't able to input more digits after the 7th and DNA confirmed that it matched on the seven digit filter. The filters are as follows:
    Long Distance =(AREA-CODE EXISTS AND LONG-DISTANCE-DIRECT-DIAL EXISTS)
    SevenDigit = (LOCAL-AREA-CODE DOES-NOT-EXIST AND INTERNATIONAL-DIRECT-DIAL DOES-NOT-EXIST AND AREA-CODE DOES-NOT-EXIST AND SERVICE DOES-NOT-EXIST).
    I was able to resolve the issue by going to each site, removing the long distance 9.@ pattern and simply readding it (no changes were made to configuration).
    It was like it just stopped seeing all patterns using the long distance filter.
    I'm wondering if anyone is aware of a bug that may have caused this.
    Thanks very much!

    For detailed descriptions and examples, refer to the Understanding Route Pattern Wildcards and Special Characters section of Understanding Route Plans.
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/admin/3_0_9/p1rtundr.html

  • CUCM to CVP calls. CTI-RP vs Route Pattern

    CVP 9 or above
    CUCM 9 or above
    Requirement:
    1. Consultive Warm Transfer - The agents to be able to transfer calls to a a different department by dialing an internal number and wait in the queue until answered.
    2. Internal - Back-office people to dial internal IT-Helpdesk or HR
    I see the above call flows as same, i.e. a Call Originating from CUCM to CVP .... correct me please?
    I have tested both and they both work exactly the same way, i.e. using a CTI-RP associated to PGUSER, ICM answers it sends correlation id to CUCM and CUCM sends this to CVP ...AND... using a simple route patters instead point to CUCM-CVP SIP trunk. Functionally they behave same way - ICM/CVP answers and queues call until answered.
    But the documentation confuses me, below snippet from CVP Config Guide
    "... Calls Originated by Unified CM
    Internal Help Desk calls: For these calls, the Unified Communication Manager (CM) phone user calls a CTI Route Point
    Consultative Warm Transfer: For these calls, a Unified CM agent places the caller on hold and dials in to Unified ICME to reach a second agent .... "
    And then on the same doc, there a Note
    (*1) Note For warm transfers, the call from Agent 1 to Agent 2 does not typically use a SIP Trunk, but you must configure the CTI Route Point for that dialed number on the Unified CM server and associate that number with your peripheral gateway user (PGUSER)
    (*2) And then again on the same doc under 'Unified ICME Warm Consult Transfer/Conference to Unified CVP' chapter/section it mentiones doing this using a Route Patter 'Create a route pattern and assign the route list to the route pattern'
    So the confusion is
    1. Why treat these call flows as Internal and Warm Transfer - they are calls from CUCM to CVP for the same end result - queue the call and transfer to an agent?
    2. Route pattern or CTI-RP, what diff it makes? They both behave the same way, so is there a diff from reporting point of view that a call to CTI-RP are treated as Transferred rather than new calls or what?
    3. Also if you compare (*1) & (*2) above, they both talk about Warm Transfer and *1 says 'must use CTI-RP' and *2 says use a Route Pattern?
    Please assist.
    Thanks & Regards,
    Kartik

    Kartik,
    The Route Pattern that is mentioned is used for connecting a call leg through CVP to a local VXML Gateway for media playback. The CTI Route Point is entirely different from the Route Pattern/Route List setup. Here's the basic call flow:
    Internal caller dials DN
    DN hits CTI RP in CUCM. CTI RP sends call to ICM.
    ICM matches DN to Call Type to Script, executes Script.
    At some point, Script has either Send To VRU or a Run Ext. Script node.
    ICM sends CUCM Network VRU label back to CUCM.
    CUCM routes label using Route Pattern and Route List. The CSS of the internal caller determines how this is modified, i.e. which prefix digits to add for determining VXML gateway to route to.
    Call is sent to CVP through SIP trunk
    CVP receives call, tells ICM it has the call.
    CVP starts new call leg to VXML gateway with digit string to match bootstrap dial-peer.
    VXML Gateway receives call, initiates bootstrap TCL and VXML magic.
    Yes, this is basically the same call flow for a fresh internal call to a queue, or an internal warm transfer to a queue. The CTI Route Point is needed in both cases. The Route Pattern/Route List combo is needed in both cases.
    When you start looking at reporting, yes of course the two call scenarios are different. One is a transfer, the other isn't. The transferred call will have a more complex call history if you look at it in the TCDR.
    From the standpoint of call legs, you will use less legs if you do a direct (one-step) transfer instead of a warm transfer. It is also simpler to maintain the call context in that case. In a warm transfer scenario, the agent is putting a caller on hold, then starting a new call, and joining the two calls together. The new call is coming from the agent, not the original caller. In a direct transfer, CVP just takes back the original call, potentially does more queuing, then sends the original caller to a new agent target.
    -Jameson

  • 9@ Route Pattern Matched Issues

    Unfortunately I have to deal with a lot of 9@ route patterns in our deployment.  I understand weird things happen when 9@ is used, but even this one is boggling my mind.  So I was hoping someone could help me understand why it's doing what it's doing.
    I have a CSS with a collection of partitions.   I'll call the 3 I'm interested in the following: One-PT, Two-PT, Three-PT.
    One-PT has a route pattern of 9@ with the Local filter applied going to Gateway 1.
    Two-PT has a route pattern of 9@ with the Local filter applied going to Gateway 2.
    Three-PT has a route pattern of 9.XXXXXXXXXX with no filter applied (those are 10 Xs) going to Gateway 3.
    My phone is assigned to the CSS with these 3 partitions.  When I dial 9 981 xxx xxxx DNA says that 9@ from One-PT is always matched.  If I remove One-PT from the CSS, then 9@ in Two-PT is matched.  Only if I remove those 2 partitions does Three-PT get matched.
    Now, as I said above I understand 9@ can introduce weird routing issues, but I thought that the route pattern with 9 and 10 Xs would be more specific and it would be matched.  Obviously I was wrong, but I'm trying to understand why I was wrong. Is this because the 10 digit number dialed matches the NANP and the Local filter matches a NANP area code?  Thus it's the more exact match?
    Thanks!

    Hi,
    As per the following link
    http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/admin/5_0_4/ccmsys/ccmsys/a03rp.html#wp1050657
    "Using the @ Wildcard Character in Route Patterns
    Using the @ wildcard character in a route pattern provides a single route pattern to match all NANP numbers, and requires additional consideration.
    The number 92578912 matches both of the following route patterns: 9.@ and 9.XXXXXXX. Even though both these route patterns seem to equally match the address, the 9.@ route pattern actually provides the closest match. The @ wildcard character encompasses many different route patterns, and one of those route patterns is [2-9][02-9]XXXXX. Because the number 2578912 more closely matches [2-9][02-9]XXXXX than it does XXXXXXX, the 9.@ route pattern provides the closest match for routing."
    Also, check the following post
    https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/10698966/9-route-pattern
    HTH
    Manish

  • Matching Route Patterns with standard Local Route group and Specific Route Group

    Hi
    I have a customer with CUCM 8.6 with few branches
    couple of branches in UK and few in Europe and middle east.
    I configured route patterns with Standard local route group, but using their own Voice gateway, everything was working fine until adding the recent branch with matching pattern 
    UK has a mobile pattern with 9.07XXXXXXXXX (11 digits)
    One Branch has a mobile with 9.07XXXXXXXX (10 digits)
    When branch call 907X..(10digit) number there was a delay and I ticked the Urgent priority to process it quicker, but later realized the UK branch cannot dial 907x.. (11Digit) mobile.
    I created Route List for branch and added the 10 digit pattern to that but still the UK cannot call 11 digit. so i believe when you call out it will check the pattern first and the Route-List and Route-Group and gateway play a part.
    Is there a way to get 07 -10digit call out quickly also allowing the 07 -11digit pattern as well ( without changing the T302 timer)
    Really appreciate your support
    thanks
    shameer

    Yes, they key to managing overlapping centralized dial plans is to be really good with patterns, partitions, and CSSs. You can have 3 different 9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXXX patterns and assign them a different partition, and then assign that to the branch CSS. This will only work if each Branch has a different CSS.
    For example:
    9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXXX @ Egypt-PT ->Routes to Local route group of Egypt.
    9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXX @ UK-PT -> Routes to Local route group of UK
    9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXX @ Germany-PT -> Routes to Local Route group of Germany.
    //PT = partition//
    Then have Egypt-CSS that contains 9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXXX @ Egypt-PT. 
    UK-CSS contains 9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXX @ UK-PT
    Germany- CSS contains 9.0[2-9]XX-[2-9]XX-XXX @ UK-PT
    The other patterns will be invisible to your sites because they are in a different partition that is not in their CSS. 2 overlapping patterns in the same PT will cause you to wait for the inter-digit timeout unless you press #.
    Thanks,
    Frank

  • Device Weight: Route Pattern Vs IP Phone

    Hi, we are starting the planning for removing two CO class GTD5 switches that route 28,000 DID numbers for the County. The switches are +16 years old and maintenance is expensive. Our Callmanager cluster is designed to replace the existing phone infrastructure (2 CO switches, +60 PBXs, and +20 key systems). Here's a quick overview of our Cluster:
    - Publisher only running database services (MCS7845H2)
    - Two TFTP servers only running TFTP service and MOH streaming (multicast) (MCS7835H)
    - Two subscribers configured as 1-to-1 backup (MCS7845H2)
    - CCM version 4.1(3)sr3b
    We are planning to add the additional six MCS7845H2 subscribers as we need the capacity.
    The first step in our migration is to move all the DID's to new T1/PRI's on a set of six Communication Media Modules (CMM) spread out over four Cat6513 switches.
    Essentially our CCM cluster will be acting as a Tandem switch until we get all the trunks moved off the GTD5 CO switches to the CMMs.
    Unfornutately all of the 28,000 DIDs are pretty much shot gunned all over the County. So, we will have +20,000 route patterns in the beginning. Over time we will also be converting sites to IP Tel and removing the route patterns as we migrate.
    My question: Does a route pattern for one directory number carry the same device weight as an IP phone with the directory number assigned to a line?
    We are thinking it does and if it does, then we need to scale up our CCM cluster for 30,000 devices before we start the migration.
    Thanks in advance for any advice.
    Tom.

    Thanks Greg for taking the time to reply. Our cluster design is following the "Cisco Callmanager Best Practices" book. The Publisher and TFTP servers are not running the Callmanager service. This allows 8 subscribers running the Callmanager service in the Cluster.
    Our research is trying to understand the cost of a route pattern in terms of the dialing forest and the impact on the subscriber's memory and CPU.
    We own two complete prefixes plus another 8,000 DNs from a third prefix. We fortunately do not have an overlapping dialing plan. Each directory number will either be assigned to an IP phone or it will belong to phone on a PBX.
    All directory numbers for IP phones belong to the same partition and we also followed the Best Practices book for our dialing plan and use the line/device CSS design.
    All +80 remote sites connect back to our GTD5 and the GTD5 routes all the numbers to the remote sites.
    We are first migrating all the DID services to our new PRI's handled by the Callmanager cluster. We when start the migration it will be a simple process of a route pattern such as [4-5]XXXX to route the 874-xxxx and 875-xxxx numbers to the GTD5. Then as we disconnect the tie-lines from each remote PBX and re-connect it to the CMM for Callmanager to route, we will need to add all the specific route patterns to route the numbers for the site.
    It would be ideal if we did not have to retire the GTD5 switch. We would follow our 5 to 7 year plan to migrate the entire County to IP Tel and leave the GTD5 in place routing the numbers to the remote PBXs. However, we have been directed by management to decommission the GTD5 switch within 12 months.
    So we are trying to understand the impact to the subscribers when we begin adding 1,000's of route patterns. We are planning to consolidate as many of the route patterns as possible to reduce the number of route patterns. However, we inherited a design that we refer to as "Number-lose-ability", where individual numbers are routed and not blocks of numbers. Over the years of adds, moves, and changes the numbers have been scattered to all the sites. We have very few sites with consecutive numbers.
    Another question that we are trying to answer: what is the cost of a route pattern such as 5555x compared to 10 individual route patterns for the same number range. Again, in terms of memory and CPU on the subscriber doing the digit analysis. We are asking this question because we may have 6 of the 10 numbers going to the same PBX, but the other 4 numbers each going to a different site. To consolidate route patterns we would add the 5555X pattern and the four individual route patterns. What we do not know is how the 5555x is added to the dialing forest. Is it expanded to 10 patterns or just one expression.
    Thanks again for any help,

  • Block route pattern

    Hello,
    I ran the dial number analyzer and it says a router pattern is blocking the extension im trying to dial on my VOIP network.  I tried tracing what partition and calling search space might cause the blocking but cant tell.  Where in cucm on version 8 can I know the name of the router pattern that is blocking me from dial that extension?
    Thanks,

    You need to collect the detailed callmanager traces and look at the Digit Analysis ( DA ) portion. The list of partitions in the 'pss' field should contain the partition of the Route pattern and further the 'RouteBlockFlag' in the DA DA will say 'Route this pattern' or ' Block this pattern ' , here is an example
    |StationD - stationOutputActivateCallPlane tcpHandle=0x53563d0
    |Digit analysis: match(fqcn="", cn="1000", pss="", dd="")
    |Digit analysis: analysis results
    |PretransformCallingPartyNumber=1000
    |CallingPartyNumber=1000
    |DialingPartition=
    |DialingPattern=
    |DialingRoutePatternRegularExpression=
    |DialingWhere=
    |PatternType=Unknown
    |PotentialMatches=PotentialMatchesExist
    |DialingSdlProcessId=(0,0,0)
    |PretransformDigitString=
    |PretransformTagsList=
    |PretransformPositionalMatchList=
    |CollectedDigits=
    |TagsList=
    |PositionalMatchList=
    |RouteBlockFlag=BlockThisPattern
    HTH
    manish

  • Route Pattern complete

    Hi experts,
    I have question regarding Route Plan - Route Pattern. We have variable numbering plan and problem is interdigit timeout T302. If its short - lets say less then 5 seconds, customer has to hurry up to dial - otherwise he will wait to long after dialing the last digit. What we have done is to make route pattern with # at the end (for example we use pattern 0664! and 0664!#), so user is able to dial # after the last digit. This is working fine but it makes everything complex (and it´s much more work - and also a new source of error!
    Is there any other solution to handle this?
    Thanks a lot
    Klaus

    That depends on your numbering plan, maybe you can use @ special character http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/voice/c_callmg/4_1/sys_ad/4_1_3/ccmsys/a03rp.htm#wp1050300
    Look if you can use international dial plan http://www.cisco.com/kobayashi/sw-center/telephony/callmgr/locale-installer.shtml

  • Route Patterne

    Hello experts,
    I have the following Route Pattern for 18XX numbers: 91.8XX[2-9]XXXXXX
    When I dial a 1800 number it works but not any other such as 1866, 1877 etc. I just don't get it. Why it works for 1800 numbers and not for the other ones. Could you please let me know if I am missing anything here?
    Thanks,

    Bahman,
    What type of gateway is this ? MGCP or H323 gateway ? Are you having a PRI (T1/E1) ? If yes can you get a debug isdn q931 output of a failed 1866/1877 call ?
    I would also check if the 1877/1866 numbers you are dialing are valid numbers. Try calling them from a cell phone and see if it works.
    Like Chris suggested, your pattern should be 9.18XX format so that either you do predot digit strip for Mgcp gateway or no digit strip for h323 gateway.
    HTH
    Sankar.
    PS: please rate all posts!

  • Route Pattern / Extension Issue

    Hello! I'm currently having an issue with a new block of extensions in Call Manager 7.1.5.
    We recently ordered a new block of DIDs. The telco sends us the last 4 digits. The last 4 are 9XXX. When dialing these extensions internally, there is an 8-10 second pause of dead air and then it eventually rings through to the phone.
    All of my Route Patterns for each site start with a " 9. "
    My guess is that when dialing the extension, Call Manager tries to match it to a Route Pattern since it starts with a "9" followed by 3 digits. After it cycles through the Route Patterns and doesn't match it, it eventually routes it to the phone. Is this what's happening? And if so, any thoughts to how I alleviate this issue?
    Any recommendations are appreciated.
    Thanks!

    Hi James,
    It appears to be correct. Due to overlapping pattern, the call manager would wait for an inter-digit timeout to expire and route the calls to the correct pattern.
    As a workaround, you can try to lower the T302 Timer(inter-digit timeout) in call manager to 4-5 seconds (Service Parameters -> Cisco Call Manager -> T302 Timer).
    As this issue is experienced with overlapping pattern, the best way to resolve it to design your dial plan efficient so that there is no overlapping.
    HTH,
    Jagpreet Singh Barmi

  • Route pattern with called party transformations

    HI All,
    i wanto to add route pattern with transformation
    i want to add RP with 9.001! predot
    and want to convert to 9.01017! with called party transformations.
    How we replace ! ? i've tried and it's error with message
    Called Party Transform Mask - allowed characters are numeric (0-9),plus (+),asterisk (*),pound (#),X.
    I've give screen shot for the configuration
    Please anybody help.
    Thanks in advance
    Regards,
    ATommy

    You can create the RP with 9001.! and in the called party, discard predot and prefix 901017.
    see below screenshot:

  • Can Anyone help to explain why character \ is used in Route pattern.

    Can Anyone help to explain why character \ is used in Route pattern. also if you could explain *11\+1.289201XXXX ?

    Well, I think the proper characterization would be that the design is based on a loose interpretation of RegEx. For instance, the asterisk "*" is typically used as the directive for zero or more occurrences of the preceding character. In the UCM dial plan, the * is a valid digit and someone decided to avoid the nastiness of escaping asterisk every time it is needed. On a related point, in standard regex build the "?" is used for a 0 or 1 match. In UCM, the "?" is 0 or more (so, it is like the asterisk in that way).
    That said, I get your point. Someone says "hey, we need wild cards" and the likely place to start pulling examples is RegEx.
    HTH
    -Bill
    (b) http://ucguerrilla.com
    (t) @ucguerrilla
    Please remember to rate helpful responses and identify helpful or correct answers.

  • Getting original digits dialed by user, or their Route patterns

    Greets ,
    I am using TAPI to monitor IP phones on my AVVID network so that i can use the data to log the destinations and numbers that system users call.
    i also use the numbers i obtain to get the route pattern that the number matched (so that i can do some kind of billing) , but my problem is when the number matches a route pattern the number that reaches TAPI is affected with the Discard Digits option in the route pattern , for example
    User dials 67272
    matches RP 6.xxxx with Discard Digits set to "PreDot"
    TAPI receives 7272
    is there some kind of way to get the whole number, or at least to get the route pattern that the number matched in TAPI?
    Thank you.

    I know little about TAPI but in JTAPI we have the originaldiallednumber (or thereof) which might be of use. I have never looked at it in terms of translation patterns, however I know that in case of a redirect, that number is the number that was originally called, not the number the call finally goes to.

  • Does the route list gets reset when adding route pattern in version 9 of CUCM?

    Hi All,
    I created a new route pattern in call manager version 9 and then associated it to an existing route list. But when I was trying to save the route pattern. I was prompted with the message saying " Any updates to this Route Pattern automatically resets the associated gateway or Route List"
    I was not able to see this message on CUCM version 8.6 however on CUCM version 9 it is there.
    Does that mean that the route list/gateway will be reset and the existing calls will be dropped?
    Or is it a bug?
    A response will be greatly appreciated.
    Thanks

    Hi Farhad,
    It does pop up when we modify the Route Pattern in CUCM 8.6 too.
    If you asociate the GW/Trunk directly to Route Pattern, yes, it will reset them and calls will be interrupted. To avoid that, we need to associate the Route List to Route Patterns.
    //Suresh
    Please rate all the useful posts.

  • How do I add a route pattern to CUCM 7.1

    I am currently using CUCM7.1 and need to  add the route pattern 9911 to dial out to emergency dispatch.  I do not want the capability of dialing 9 for an outside line for all users, just when I a calling 911 emergency.  We recently changed to dialing a # for an outside line due to excessive 911 hangup calls.  I tried adding 9911 to the route pattern list but I am missing something.  I received the message stating could not complete call as dialed. Thank you, Cindy

    Are you sure the phone has a CSS that allows you to dial 9911??
    HTH
    java
    If this helps, please rate
    www.cisco.com/go/pdihelpdesk

Maybe you are looking for