10 digit dial plan Suggestions

Unanswered Question
Aug 5th, 2009


I have a design where I want to propose 10 digit dial plan. The size of the client is so huge anything less than 7 is not possible.

My question is: How do I eliminate inter digit timeout for the following scenario

Extension: 9182345555

LD: 91[2-9]xx[2-9]xxxxxx

Do I HAVE TO use an On-net code? or are there any other options?

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Erik Peterson Fri, 09/11/2009 - 07:33

I'm doing one now, NANP, but all internal DNs will start with an 8, effectively making that the On-net access code. 9 will be the PSTN access code.

mrugeshpatel_2 Fri, 09/11/2009 - 07:35

So how does your internal dialing work? how many digit and what does it start with?

Erik Peterson Fri, 09/11/2009 - 07:39

Pretty much straight out of the SRND. Local, site specific XLATE partition to allow abbreviated intra-site dialing. Users will dial 8 plus the ten digit number to dial inter-site. Really the 8 is part of all internal DNs, so it is actually an 11 digit dial plan. This is a very big deployment, with a mix of existing TDM and Cisco installations migrating to a single cluster.

mrugeshpatel_2 Fri, 09/11/2009 - 07:43

You will run into inter digit time out when a user is dialing bettwen sites vs dialing internally.

So for an extension 8475558471, a user internally dials 88471 vs a user from outside will call 88475558471. Correct?

Erik Peterson Fri, 09/11/2009 - 08:47

In that situation, the intra-site translation would have to either be more or fewer digits in order to avoid the overlap. The intra-site translation can vary in length from site to site.

shane.orr Sun, 09/13/2009 - 17:15

Just a side note, I implemented a couple of 10 digit internal dial plans and one requirement I presented was that the outside PTSN access code needed to be a 0 instead of a 9. The logic is that there are is no area code that starts with a 0 therefore avoiding a dial plan overlap. At first they did not care for the idea because of the usual argument that some locations like to dial 0 internal for operator. But after explaining the translation nightmare, inter-digit timeout, etc.. they were OK with it. Otherwise I told them if they wanted to stick with a 9 for access code that they should choose some other dial plan that did not base extensions on the full 10 digit DID.

Hope that helps


This Discussion