Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
New Member

Call back

Hi,

I have this little problem. When I try to redial a missed call, the call fails. This, I think, is as a result of not dialing 9 to seize a trunk line first before dialing the actual number. I need to be able to use this feature. How will this be possible?

I am using Call Manager 3.1.3a with 7960 IP phones. MGCP is the protocol in use.

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Ade

12 REPLIES
New Member

Re: Call back

Hi Ade,

It's very easy:

When you're in the Missed calls menu, select the number you want to call back. Then you have the menu 'EditDial' on the second SoftKey. With this, you can add the 9 at the beginning of the number to call.

Bye

Jean-Philippe

New Member

Re: Call back

Jean, I know that's the prescribed soln from cisco but how about dialling the number direct from the missed call arena without editing and especially in a environment where 9 is the access out?

Well, I propose ( this is with a uk dial plan mind set) that you create an open translation pattern of say xxxxxxxxxx or 11 x's and use "Called Party Transformations" to insert a prefix with of 9 for an outbound line.

Then from your CSS make that partition the lowest on the ladder - ( quite a number of scenarios can be developed based on you IPT design)

Guys - Your views please. I sure this will work but if any one out there has a better soln please let's hear it.

Question: Is this soln the same as the Least Cost Routing performed from the client end. Could somebody confirm / refute.

New Member

Re: Call back

Hi guys,

I have tried both the route pattern and translation pattern. None of the two works. I use NANP and for the transform masks, I can not add any special characters (., @ etc.). I am still searching for a solution. The users get a lot of missed calls and I do not think they would like to enter 9 for each of them.

Thanks for the help.

Regards,

Ade

New Member

Re: Call back

Could you post a trace from one of the handsets suffering from this problem.

New Member

Re: Call back

Hi guys,

I think I've gotten the solution.

Create a partition for allowing missed calls and put it at the bottom of the list for the CSS. Create a route filter that allows calls for which "local direct dial" does not exist. This route filter should be used in the partitions created above ONLY. Specify the desired number pattern (I used quite a few including @ for all NANP calls) in the route pattern to allow the calls through. Remeber to specify the route partition and filter. Under Called Party Transformations, set Discard digits to none.

This seems to work so far. I will update as developments occur. Please test this if you can.

Regards,

Ade

New Member

Re: Call back

Hi,

I just remembered. To redirect a non-local call through a different gateway with this feature, configure another route filter that has "long-distance direct dialing does not exist". Put this in the right parttion when configuring the route patter. Also, in the called party transformations, use 11D-->10D. These seems necessary to strip the long distance code so that the number becomes local again. That way the right trunks will carry the call. Of course, the appropriate route groups and lists have to be configured first.

I tried this with the NANP. I do not know if it will work with any other dialing plans.

Regards,

Ade

New Member

Re: Call back

Hi ade,

I've solved this problem by making a trabslation rule on my gateway. So when the call cames from the outside, i've add it the number that i use for making outside calls from the inside.

Ex: from ip phone i have to dial 0 for an outside call.

If some one calls me from the ouside the arriving number will be 0xxxxxxxxx.

If a have a missed call, i just see it and press dial.

I hope this helps.

Regards,

Sergio

New Member

Re: Call back

I like your approach too. Well done!

Guys, are there any catches anybody has noticed with this solution?

New Member

Re: Call back

I tried to enforce the translation rule on a test gateway but ran into problems. While the translation rules seem to work when I run a test they don't actually work when I get a call.

I believe the problem is that I have an MGCP gateway although I am not sure. I am going to try them on H.323 gateway and see if it works.

New Member

Re: Call back

Sergio,

I did the same thing but I made 2 seperate translations depending on the numbering plan. If I see an international numbering plan I prefix the incoming number with two zeroes (international calls here in Belgium).

Kind regards,

Bram

New Member

Re: Call back

Adding a translation-rule on the gateway to change the calling number of incoming calls, is possible only with H.323 gateways (on the VoIP dial-peer).

Am I wrong ?

What about MGCP ? I think there's no possible digit manipulation on the calling number for incoming calls with MGCP.

In fact you try to solve the 'redial-on-missed-calls' problem; but in my opinion, having the external calling phone number displayed on my phone, without the access code, is not very good either.

I'd like to add a prefix to the incoming calling number (as soon as possible on the call path) so that my display will be correct, and I won't have to deal with translation-pattern, partition and CCS on the CCM.

Any Idea ?

Cheers,

Manuel.

New Member

Re: Call back

Hi Manuel,

I am currently still using the new route patterns I configured for this problem and they are working perfectly. When I extended the concept to the entire NANP, I ran into problems with two of my phones. They could no longer dial internal numbers. All other phones were fine. I currently have a case opened with TAC on the issue.

About prefixing digits on incoming calls, I am not sure that will work. For one, the codes are just to convey information to the switches (long distance, international etc.). Telco switches will typically strip this information when routing the call from switch to switch. Also, I do not think it is possible to manipulate incoming calls this way on the CCM. Please advise me if I misunderstood.

Regards,

Ade

236
Views
0
Helpful
12
Replies
CreatePlease to create content