Hi Mike, If using old school method, I think you wouldn't be using local route group concept as well, right?. In that case you will need two separate RP, two different RL/RG, in which case you can perform manipulations in RG within RL and send the leading 9 only to the h.323 gw,
If still want to use one RP and the standard local route group RL without using cd xform patterns, I think the best way to sort this out for the h.323 gw is to perform the manipulation in the incoming dial peer for the h.323 like you mentioned as the srst dialing won't be affectedand will be the same as when dialing from the ucm, also the dial plan will be simpler, If you don't add the leading 9 to the incoming dial peer, you will have to configure two dial peers set for the same dialing and they will overlap with each other, so this option is going to be much more complicated, hth, On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Mike Brooks <2xcci...@gmail.com> wrote: > ahh..yes very good point... I have been moving away from the "new school" > routing methods lately because of some of the flexibility issues I have ran > into while using it. > > For instance ANI manipulation based on the type of call. > > I do prefer sticking to the "old school" routing method if possible, but I > will play around with the called party transformations on the gateway. > > Thanks Randall !! > > Mike Brooks > CCIE#16027 (R&S) > > > > > > On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 5:32 PM, Randall Saborio <ill2...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Mike (sorry, missed to copy the list on first try), >> >> >> You are missing one option, which is the one I like most. >> >> For almost all situations, I would go about using Calling Party >> Transformations and Called Party Transformations. >> >> Since these are device specific, you would make a Called Party >> Transformation that would be used only by the H323 gateway, and there >> prepend a 9. >> >> Then, on the gateway, you would stick with just one set of dial-peers >> which are the same used for SRST. >> >> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Mike Brooks <2xcci...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Just want to know how most would handle this type of scenario. It >>> appears there are multiple ways to configure this. >>> >>> >>> 9.[2-9]XXXXXX -> Standard Local RL (must strip predot because HQ is mgcp >>> gw) >>> >>> *HQ Device Pool:* >>> Standard Local Route Group: HQ-MGCP-RG >>> >>> *BR1 Device Pool:* >>> Standard Local Route Group: BR1-H323-RG >>> >>> >>> If either an HQ or BR1 phone makes a local call 9.[2-9]XXXXXX we must >>> strip the 9, regardless of which gateway it goes to because HQs standard >>> local route group is an MGCP gateway. >>> >>> So on the BR1-H323 gateway you have 2 options: >>> >>> 1. make 2 sets of dial-peers with a leading "9" (for SRST) and without a >>> leading "9". >>> >>> 2. on the inbound voip dial-peer preprend a "9" to the called number >>> using a translation pattern. >>> >>> >>> Which option seems to be the best choice and why ? Are there any other >>> options ? >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> Mike Brooks >>> CCIE#16027 (R&S) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please >>> visit www.ipexpert.com >>> >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > visit www.ipexpert.com > > -- Regards, Otto Sanchez CCIE #25592 (Voice) Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc. URL: http://www.IPexpert.com
_______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
