Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] L2 overhead for QoS
But voice packets font get fragmented when you use frf.12. So why would you use 8 and not 4? On 28/06/2013, at 2:07 PM, Suresh Bhandari bring...@gmail.commailto:bring...@gmail.com wrote: As you've read in the QoS SRND, you use 8byte overhead for the FRF.12. Further, somewhere I read that +5 - 10% bandwidth over-provisioning is okay. So, you can use a bandwidth equal to 48k, for four concurrent calls, for example. HTH On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:55 AM, Kapuria, Aman aman.kapu...@team.telstra.commailto:aman.kapu...@team.telstra.com wrote: Anyone? Aman From: Kapuria, Aman Sent: Wednesday, 26 June 2013 3:31 PM To: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.commailto:ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Subject: L2 overhead for QoS Hi All, What L2 overhead do you use for frf.12 and MLP when you calculate number of calls over a link? Different providers have different approach around this. QoS SRND says “Frame Relay adds 4 bytes of Layer 2 overhead; Frame Relay with FRF.12 adds 8 bytes.” With frf.12 voice packets don’t get fragmented, so do you use 4 bytes for your calculation or 12 or some other number? For those who have done this in lab and got 100% for QoS, can they please advise what value they used? Thanks in advance Aman ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.comhttp://www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.comhttp://www.PlatinumPlacement.com -- Suresh Bhandari ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] L2 overhead for QoS
As you've read in the QoS SRND, you use 8byte overhead for the FRF.12. Further, somewhere I read that +5 - 10% bandwidth over-provisioning is okay. So, you can use a bandwidth equal to 48k, for four concurrent calls, for example. HTH On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:55 AM, Kapuria, Aman aman.kapu...@team.telstra.com wrote: Anyone? ** ** *Aman * ** ** *From:* Kapuria, Aman *Sent:* Wednesday, 26 June 2013 3:31 PM *To:* ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com *Subject:* L2 overhead for QoS ** ** Hi All, ** ** What L2 overhead do you use for frf.12 and MLP when you calculate number of calls over a link? Different providers have different approach around this. QoS SRND says “Frame Relay adds 4 bytes of Layer 2 overhead; Frame Relay with FRF.12 adds 8 bytes.” With frf.12 voice packets don’t get fragmented, so do you use 4 bytes for your calculation or 12 or some other number? For those who have done this in lab and got 100% for QoS, can they please advise what value they used? Thanks in advance Aman ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com -- Suresh Bhandari ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Overlapping dial plan
I would recommend you review the Dial Plan SRND. I just did a roll-out with 500 remote sites so you can imagine how many overlapping digits there were. I used 10 digits for Voice Mail with 5 digit internal dialing using variable digit dialing with site codes. There's several ways to do it. The SRND goes over all the dial plans for best practice and overlapping dial plans. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/srnd/8x/dialplan.html#wp1150620 Michael Sears, CCIE(V)#38404 Designing and Implementing Cisco Unified Communications on Unified Computing Systems ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Best practice for binding interfaces to sccp and CUE
Any update? Original message From:singh singh8...@in.com Date: 26 Jun Subject: Best practice for binding interfaces to sccp and CUETo: ccievoicerequ...@onlinestudylist.com; ccievoice@onlinestudylist.comHello All,Wondering what is the best practice to bind sccp interface and CUE to .For example if I have an interface on the router which is my voice interface and a loopback then which as per the best practice can be used for binding ?singhGet Yourself a cool, short @in.com Email ID now! Get Yourself a cool, short @in.com Email ID now! ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] L2 overhead for QoS
Hi Aman, In case this help, the topic seems to be discussed before. E.g. in the following thread. - http://www.mail-archive.com/ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com/msg06632.html - http://www.mail-archive.com/ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com/msg31952.html Regards, --Somphol. On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Kapuria, Aman aman.kapu...@team.telstra.com wrote: Anyone? ** ** *Aman * ** ** *From:* Kapuria, Aman *Sent:* Wednesday, 26 June 2013 3:31 PM *To:* ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com *Subject:* L2 overhead for QoS ** ** Hi All, ** ** What L2 overhead do you use for frf.12 and MLP when you calculate number of calls over a link? Different providers have different approach around this. QoS SRND says “Frame Relay adds 4 bytes of Layer 2 overhead; Frame Relay with FRF.12 adds 8 bytes.” With frf.12 voice packets don’t get fragmented, so do you use 4 bytes for your calculation or 12 or some other number? For those who have done this in lab and got 100% for QoS, can they please advise what value they used? Thanks in advance Aman ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] L2 overhead for QoS
Hi Aman, But voice packets font get fragmented when you use frf.12. So why would you use 8 and not 4? Just to try to dig up some relevant information. *[1] On whether voice packet get fragmented.* I agreed fully with you. If configured correctly, the voice packet should not be fragemented. Frame Relay Fragmentation for Voice http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk1077/technologies_tech_note09186a00801142de.shtml ...FRF.12 stipulates that, when fragmentation is on for a data-link connection identifier (DLCI), there is fragmentation of only data frames that exceed the specified fragmentation size. *This arrangement allows small VoIP packets, which are not fragmented due to the size*, to be interleaved as frames between large data packets that have been fragmented into smaller frames *[2] On frame-relay header different between fragmented frame and non-fragmented frame.* *Fragmented Frame* Address 2 bytes + UI 1 byte + NPID 1 byte + 2 bytes Fragmentation Header + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *8 bytes* OK, I would understand if some will also count a flag which is 7E to delimits the beginning of the frame. Flag 1 byte + Address 2 bytes + UI 1 byte + NPID 1 byte + Fragmentation Header 2 bytes + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *9** bytes (including 1 byte flag)* *Unfragmented Frame Source 1*: http://docwiki.cisco.com/wiki/Frame_Relay, Figure 5 Address 2 bytes + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *4 bytes* Flag 1 byte + Address 2 bytes + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *5 bytes (including 1 byte flag)* *Unfragmented Frame Source 2: IETF Frame-Relay header, Section 3, * http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1490 Address 2 bytes + UI 1 byte + NLPID 1 byte + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *6 bytes*(excluding 1 byte flag) Flag 1 byte + Address 2 bytes + UI 1 byte + NLPID 1 byte + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *7 bytes* (including 1 byte flag) What is NLPID? It contains values for many different protocols including IP, CLNP and IEEE Subnetwork Access Protocol (SNAP). So, it is likely to identify the encapsulated protocol, i.e. protocol code. UI = 0x03 always *Unfragmented Frame Source 3*: Cisco and RFC 1940 Encapsulation Figure 2-13, Cisco Frame Relay Solutions Guide by Jonathan Chin http://books.google.com.au/books?id=GPuhnmjxLuQCpg=PA34lpg=PA34dq=Cisco+Frame+Relay+frame+headersource=blots=diBrIR-p_ksig=CYVzWCoH-iTzxXvMosrJlLSAC3Ihl=ensa=Xei=K0PNUY_8OIvVkwXEoID4CQved=0CGsQ6AEwBw#v=onepageq=Cisco%20Frame%20Relay%20frame%20headerf=false Address 2 bytes + Protocol Type 2 bytes + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *6 bytes* Flag 1 byte + Protocol Type 2 bytes + Address 2 bytes + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *7 bytes* (including 1 byte flag) * * Reference Summary: - Page 9 of http://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/download/FRF.12/frf12.pdf - Figure: Five Fields Comprise the Frame Relay Frame, http://docwiki.cisco.com/wiki/Frame_Relay - Section 3: Frame Format - http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1490 - Cisco and RFC 1940 Encapsulation Figure 2-13, Cisco Frame Relay Solutions Guide by Jonathan Chin http://books.google.com.au/books?id=GPuhnmjxLuQCpg=PA34lpg=PA34dq=Cisco+Frame+Relay+frame+headersource=blots=diBrIR-p_ksig=CYVzWCoH-iTzxXvMosrJlLSAC3Ihl=ensa=Xei=K0PNUY_8OIvVkwXEoID4CQved=0CGsQ6AEwBw#v=onepageq=Cisco%20Frame%20Relay%20frame%20headerf=false *[3] My thought? (Well, I could be wrong, so use your discretion.)* For unfragmented frame if you believe in source #1 + QoS SRND + SRND 7.x, yes, I think you should go ahead and use 4 bytes (5 bytes if you think FCS deserves to be part of calculation).At least, we know why we choose these numbers. (Also uses 4 bytes Frame Relay Header is SRND 7.x Table 3-10 Bandwidth Consumption with Layer 2 Headers Included http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/srnd/7x/netstruc.html#wp1044772 ) I believe 7 bytes is more accurate based on both source #2 source #3. Yes, I disagree with both QoS SRND SRND 7.x. There is also a big confusion, when it comes to FRF.12.And, I think that is why people are unsure of how Proctor going to grade the lab. First, within the QoS SRND itself. Table 1-3 Voice Bandwidth (Including Layer 2 Overhead) Second, in some other document such as Voice Over IP - Per Call Bandwidth Consumption, http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk652/tk698/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094ae2.shtml If they do in fact agree that FRF.12's fragmentation header is not applicable for voice packet, they would not have a column for* Frame-Relay w/FRF.12*. So, it could well be the case that the proctor may use FRF.12 column if the requirement specifies FRF.12 for LFI. They may use 4 bytes and refers to SRND and make an assumption that this is a trick question for candidate. *[4] More likely way out?* Cisco exam designer has known to have already budgeted for 10% margin of error. And, they will most likely know that this particular topic is controversial. I think it is more than likely that either you use 4 bytes or 7 bytes or 8 bytes for your calculation, it will all be well within the acceptable margin of error
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] L2 overhead for QoS
Just one more thing I forget to highlight. FRF.12 specification page 9 ( http://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/download/FRF.12/frf12.pdf), stated that NLPID field must be set to 0xB1 to signify that the frame contains a fragment. Then, it make more sense to assume that the NLPID field exists for unfragmented frame as well both to signify that the frame is unfragmented (because it will contain the value that is not 0xB1) and to use it as a Protocol Type field. That's also why I believe the overhead size of *7 bytes* is likely to be more accurate for both Unfragmented IETF and Cisco Frame Relay Header than 4 bytes. Regards, --Somphol. On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Somphol Boonjing somp...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Aman, But voice packets font get fragmented when you use frf.12. So why would you use 8 and not 4? Just to try to dig up some relevant information. *[1] On whether voice packet get fragmented.* I agreed fully with you. If configured correctly, the voice packet should not be fragemented. Frame Relay Fragmentation for Voice http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk1077/technologies_tech_note09186a00801142de.shtml ...FRF.12 stipulates that, when fragmentation is on for a data-link connection identifier (DLCI), there is fragmentation of only data frames that exceed the specified fragmentation size. *This arrangement allows small VoIP packets, which are not fragmented due to the size*, to be interleaved as frames between large data packets that have been fragmented into smaller frames *[2] On frame-relay header different between fragmented frame and non-fragmented frame.* *Fragmented Frame* Address 2 bytes + UI 1 byte + NPID 1 byte + 2 bytes Fragmentation Header + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *8 bytes* OK, I would understand if some will also count a flag which is 7E to delimits the beginning of the frame. Flag 1 byte + Address 2 bytes + UI 1 byte + NPID 1 byte + Fragmentation Header 2 bytes + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *9** bytes (including 1 byte flag) * *Unfragmented Frame Source 1*: http://docwiki.cisco.com/wiki/Frame_Relay, Figure 5 Address 2 bytes + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *4 bytes* Flag 1 byte + Address 2 bytes + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *5 bytes (including 1 byte flag)* *Unfragmented Frame Source 2: IETF Frame-Relay header, Section 3, * http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1490 Address 2 bytes + UI 1 byte + NLPID 1 byte + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *6 bytes * (excluding 1 byte flag) Flag 1 byte + Address 2 bytes + UI 1 byte + NLPID 1 byte + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *7 bytes* (including 1 byte flag) What is NLPID? It contains values for many different protocols including IP, CLNP and IEEE Subnetwork Access Protocol (SNAP). So, it is likely to identify the encapsulated protocol, i.e. protocol code. UI = 0x03 always *Unfragmented Frame Source 3*: Cisco and RFC 1940 Encapsulation Figure 2-13, Cisco Frame Relay Solutions Guide by Jonathan Chin http://books.google.com.au/books?id=GPuhnmjxLuQCpg=PA34lpg=PA34dq=Cisco+Frame+Relay+frame+headersource=blots=diBrIR-p_ksig=CYVzWCoH-iTzxXvMosrJlLSAC3Ihl=ensa=Xei=K0PNUY_8OIvVkwXEoID4CQved=0CGsQ6AEwBw#v=onepageq=Cisco%20Frame%20Relay%20frame%20headerf=false Address 2 bytes + Protocol Type 2 bytes + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *6 bytes* Flag 1 byte + Protocol Type 2 bytes + Address 2 bytes + DATA + FCS 2 bytes = *7 bytes* (including 1 byte flag) * * Reference Summary: - Page 9 of http://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/download/FRF.12/frf12.pdf - Figure: Five Fields Comprise the Frame Relay Frame, http://docwiki.cisco.com/wiki/Frame_Relay - Section 3: Frame Format - http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1490 - Cisco and RFC 1940 Encapsulation Figure 2-13, Cisco Frame Relay Solutions Guide by Jonathan Chin http://books.google.com.au/books?id=GPuhnmjxLuQCpg=PA34lpg=PA34dq=Cisco+Frame+Relay+frame+headersource=blots=diBrIR-p_ksig=CYVzWCoH-iTzxXvMosrJlLSAC3Ihl=ensa=Xei=K0PNUY_8OIvVkwXEoID4CQved=0CGsQ6AEwBw#v=onepageq=Cisco%20Frame%20Relay%20frame%20headerf=false *[3] My thought? (Well, I could be wrong, so use your discretion.)* For unfragmented frame if you believe in source #1 + QoS SRND + SRND 7.x, yes, I think you should go ahead and use 4 bytes (5 bytes if you think FCS deserves to be part of calculation).At least, we know why we choose these numbers. (Also uses 4 bytes Frame Relay Header is SRND 7.x Table 3-10 Bandwidth Consumption with Layer 2 Headers Included http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cucm/srnd/7x/netstruc.html#wp1044772 ) I believe 7 bytes is more accurate based on both source #2 source #3. Yes, I disagree with both QoS SRND SRND 7.x. There is also a big confusion, when it comes to FRF.12.And, I think that is why people are unsure of how Proctor going to grade the lab. First, within the QoS SRND itself. Table 1-3 Voice Bandwidth (Including Layer 2 Overhead) Second, in some other document such as Voice Over IP - Per Call Bandwidth Consumption,
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] SRST issue
Dear guys, When i applied SRST on site-b and site-c router i cant see any ephone under router how can verify it on both routers? -- Thanks Regard's Amit Sharma ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] LLQ issue between HQ and BR1
guys see below config...that showing after apply config inter link goes down... how can fix it and what is issue? -- Thanks Regard's Amit Sharma ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] LLQ issue between HQ and BR1
uys see below config...that showing after apply config inter link goes down... how can fix it and what is issue? SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#au SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#auto qo SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#auto qos voi SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#auto qos voip tr SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#auto qos voip trust Jun 28 19:26:25.103: %OSPF-5-ADJCHG: Process 1, Nbr 10.10.101.1 on Serial0/0/1:0.1 from FULL to DOWN, Neighbor Down: Interface down or detached SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#auto qos voip trust %Creating new map-class. SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)# SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)# SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)# SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)# SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)# Jun 28 19:28:05.241: %RMON-5-FALLINGTRAP: Falling trap is generated because the value of cbQosCMDropBitRate.210.9467521 has fallen below the falling-threshold value 0 SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci == teB-RTR(config-subif)# SiteB-RTR(config-subif)# SiteB-RTR(config-subif)#fra SiteB-RTR(config-subif)#frame-relay in SiteB-RTR(config-subif)#frame-relay int SiteB-RTR(config-subif)#frame-relay interface-dlci 101 SiteB-RTR(config-fr-dlci)# Jun 28 19:26:28.739: %OSPF-5-ADJCHG: Process 1, Nbr 10.10.100.1 on Serial0/0/1:0.1 from FULL to DOWN, Neighbor Down: Dead timer expired SiteB-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#do sh run int SiteB-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#do sh run int ser SiteB-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#do sh run int ser SiteB-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#do sh run int ser0/0/0:0.1 po SiteB-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#do sh run int ser0/0/0:0.1 po sh run int ser0/0/0:0.1 po SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#au SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#auto qo SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#auto qos voi SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#auto qos voip tr SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#auto qos voip trust Jun 28 19:26:25.103: %OSPF-5-ADJCHG: Process 1, Nbr 10.10.101.1 on Serial0/0/1:0.1 from FULL to DOWN, Neighbor Down: Interface down or detached SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)#auto qos voip trust %Creating new map-class. SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)# SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)# SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)# SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)# SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci)# Jun 28 19:28:05.241: %RMON-5-FALLINGTRAP: Falling trap is generated because the value of cbQosCMDropBitRate.210.9467521 has fallen below the falling-threshold value 0 SiteA-RTR(config-fr-dlci On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Amit Sharma aryan231...@gmail.com wrote: guys see below config...that showing after apply config inter link goes down... how can fix it and what is issue? -- Thanks Regard's Amit Sharma -- Thanks Regard's Amit Sharma ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
[OSL | CCIE_Voice] Translation-rule help
Dear All, I would like to make a translation-rule to do the following remove 9 from 91[10 digits] remove 9 from 9[10 digits] remove 9 from 9[7 digits] i did it the following but was invalid voice translation-rule 1 rule 1 /^91../ /../ rule 2 /^9../ /../ rule 3 /^9.../ /.../ when i did it like that it didn't work I would like to make it strict match not like /^9/ // this will overlap Please help me whats the other way to do it. Thanks, Hesham ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Translation-rule help
Hi Hesham, You make this form: voice translation-rule 1 rule 1 /^91\(..$\)/ /\1/ rule 2 /^9\(..$\)/ /\1/ rule 3 /^9\(...$\)/ /\1/ Test it. I put the $ after last digit, because I understand that you want match with the total digits diled. Regis Reis De: Hesham Abdelkereem heshamcentr...@gmail.com Para: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Enviadas: Sexta-feira, 28 de Junho de 2013 13:29 Assunto: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Translation-rule help Dear All, I would like to make a translation-rule to do the following remove 9 from 91[10 digits] remove 9 from 9[10 digits] remove 9 from 9[7 digits] i did it the following but was invalid voice translation-rule 1 rule 1 /^91../ /../ rule 2 /^9../ /../ rule 3 /^9.../ /.../ when i did it like that it didn't work I would like to make it strict match not like /^9/ // this will overlap Please help me whats the other way to do it. Thanks, Hesham ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Translation-rule help
Hi Hesham, You're trying to do this translation on voip dial-peers? You could try this rule 1 /^9\(1...\)/ /\1/ number of dots depends on how many digits to keep. Try and let's know. Regards. Khaled Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 09:29:07 -0700 From: heshamcentr...@gmail.com To: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Translation-rule help Dear All, I would like to make a translation-rule to do the followingremove 9 from 91[10 digits]remove 9 from 9[10 digits]remove 9 from 9[7 digits] i did it the following but was invalid voice translation-rule 1 rule 1 /^91../ /../rule 2 /^9../ /../rule 3 /^9.../ /.../ when i did it like that it didn't workI would like to make it strict match not like /^9/ // this will overlap Please help me whats the other way to do it. Thanks,Hesham ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Translation-rule help
Regist what about if i need it for 9011T I would like to strip 9 from 011T how can i do it? On 28 June 2013 10:02, Regis Reis regis_r...@yahoo.com.br wrote: Hi Hesham, You make this form: voice translation-rule 1 rule 1 /^91\(..$\)/ /\1/ rule 2 /^9\(..$\)/ /\1/ rule 3 /^9\(...$\)/ /\1/ Test it. I put the $ after last digit, because I understand that you want match with the total digits diled. ** *Regis Reis* -- *De:* Hesham Abdelkereem heshamcentr...@gmail.com *Para:* ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com *Enviadas:* Sexta-feira, 28 de Junho de 2013 13:29 *Assunto:* [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Translation-rule help Dear All, I would like to make a translation-rule to do the following remove 9 from 91[10 digits] remove 9 from 9[10 digits] remove 9 from 9[7 digits] i did it the following but was invalid voice translation-rule 1 rule 1 /^91../ /../ rule 2 /^9../ /../ rule 3 /^9.../ /.../ when i did it like that it didn't work I would like to make it strict match not like /^9/ // this will overlap Please help me whats the other way to do it. Thanks, Hesham ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Translation-rule help
Um, not sure why you are making this so complicated SiteC-RTR(config)#voice translation-rule 8 SiteC-RTR(cfg-translation-rule)#rule 1 /^9/ // SiteC-RTR(cfg-translation-rule)#do test voice translation-rule 8 95551234 Matched with rule 1 Original number: 95551234 Translated number: 5551234 Original number type: none Translated number type: none Original number plan: none Translated number plan: none SiteC-RTR(cfg-translation-rule)#do test voice translation-rule 8 912225551234 Matched with rule 1 Original number: 912225551234 Translated number: 12225551234 Original number type: none Translated number type: none Original number plan: none Translated number plan: none SiteC-RTR(cfg-translation-rule)#do test voice translation-rule 8 92225551234 Matched with rule 1 Original number: 92225551234Translated number: 2225551234 Original number type: none Translated number type: none Original number plan: none Translated number plan: none SiteC-RTR(cfg-translation-rule)# On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:08 PM, khaled Saholy khaled_sah...@hotmail.comwrote: Hi Hesham, You're trying to do this translation on voip dial-peers? You could try this rule 1 /^9\(1...\)/ /\1/ number of dots depends on how many digits to keep. Try and let's know. Regards. Khaled -- Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 09:29:07 -0700 From: heshamcentr...@gmail.com To: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Translation-rule help Dear All, I would like to make a translation-rule to do the following remove 9 from 91[10 digits] remove 9 from 9[10 digits] remove 9 from 9[7 digits] i did it the following but was invalid voice translation-rule 1 rule 1 /^91../ /../ rule 2 /^9../ /../ rule 3 /^9.../ /.../ when i did it like that it didn't work I would like to make it strict match not like /^9/ // this will overlap Please help me whats the other way to do it. Thanks, Hesham ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Translation-rule help
Why not just make the pattern 9T? From: Regis Reis regis_r...@yahoo.com.brmailto:regis_r...@yahoo.com.br Reply-To: Regis Reis regis_r...@yahoo.com.brmailto:regis_r...@yahoo.com.br Date: Friday, June 28, 2013 12:02 PM To: Hesham Abdelkereem heshamcentr...@gmail.commailto:heshamcentr...@gmail.com, ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.commailto:ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.commailto:ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Translation-rule help Hi Hesham, You make this form: voice translation-rule 1 rule 1 /^91\(..$\)/ /\1/ rule 2 /^9\(..$\)/ /\1/ rule 3 /^9\(...$\)/ /\1/ Test it. I put the $ after last digit, because I understand that you want match with the total digits diled. Regis Reis De: Hesham Abdelkereem heshamcentr...@gmail.commailto:heshamcentr...@gmail.com Para: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.commailto:ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.commailto:ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Enviadas: Sexta-feira, 28 de Junho de 2013 13:29 Assunto: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Translation-rule help Dear All, I would like to make a translation-rule to do the following remove 9 from 91[10 digits] remove 9 from 9[10 digits] remove 9 from 9[7 digits] i did it the following but was invalid voice translation-rule 1 rule 1 /^91../ /../ rule 2 /^9../ /../ rule 3 /^9.../ /.../ when i did it like that it didn't work I would like to make it strict match not like /^9/ // this will overlap Please help me whats the other way to do it. Thanks, Hesham ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com ___ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
