SOLVED

Issues with calling number translation rules under Trunk Configuration

Brass Contributor

I was playing around with SfB number translation rules in order to find a way to inverse match a number. In my scenario I wanted to make sure that if the calling party number (CLI) of the SfB user doesn’t match particular prefix, for example +441234561234x where x=0-9 the CLI will always be replaced with +449865498760. In order to do that I had created pattern match expression ^(?!\+441234561234) which matches everything else than CLIs starting with +441234561234. Then as a Translation rule I simply specified my replacement number +449865498760.


MS_fig1.jpg
I forgot to mention that all this happens on Trunk Configuration level. So once configured like that matching was working just fine but translation was weird. For example when there is a match i.e. CLI was for example +4422334455667, translation was +449865498760+4422334455667 !!!


MS_fig2.jpg


Any idea why it is like that? Is this a know issue or I'm just doing something wrong?

2 Replies

You need to change the translation rule - I'm not a RegEx expert, but there's guidance on the topic in the library here: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg398520.aspx

 

best response confirmed by VI_Migration (Silver Contributor)
Solution

Yes, Jamie was right I had to change my translation rule to ... two translation rules :), first of which matches the prefix/string and pass it unchanged and second that simply changes the CLI without any checks, relying on the fact that if the prefix was equal to the one I wanted to stay unchanged it would have matched to the first rule.

Thansk Jamie.

1 best response

Accepted Solutions
best response confirmed by VI_Migration (Silver Contributor)
Solution

Yes, Jamie was right I had to change my translation rule to ... two translation rules :), first of which matches the prefix/string and pass it unchanged and second that simply changes the CLI without any checks, relying on the fact that if the prefix was equal to the one I wanted to stay unchanged it would have matched to the first rule.

Thansk Jamie.

View solution in original post