Forum Discussion
friday afternoon inbound number normalization question!
Instead of the global dial plan, why not a pool dial plan based upon the IP or FQDN of the Cisco PSTN Gateways. Also, when you normalize to E.164, are you adding the EXT= still?
- Would normalizing using a pool dial plans do something differently than a rule in the global plan?
I’m not really able to normalize the extension. I didn’t think I would need that in the rule. Can ext= be blank, we really don’t use extension dialing in Skype?It wouldn't do anything different, but the global dial plan would be used for outbound normalization of other things, so I typically keep them separate.
I think I misread the post the first time through, though I try to keep the normalization rule as close to the LineURI as possible. For if the 5 prepended digits were 55555, you could have the pattern to match be ^55555(\d{5})(\d{5})$ and the translation rule be +1$1$2;ext=$2;ms-skip-rnl
Anthony Caragol wrote:
It wouldn't do anything different, but the global dial plan would be used for outbound normalization of other things, so I typically keep them separate.
I think I misread the post the first time through, though I try to keep the normalization rule as close to the LineURI as possible. For if the 5 prepended digits were 55555, you could have the pattern to match be ^55555(\d{5})(\d{5})$ and the translation rule be +1$1$2;ext=$2;ms-skip-rnl
This is brilliant. I envy you guys that can write regex. So adding ms-skip-rnl to the normalized LineURI means it won't actually skip the number, like it's doing now without it?
