Using # in DigitMap for routing to SIPToSis gateway is not working. - SOLVED
shap:
Hello,
I have a strange problem - I changed my Linksys PAP2T to Obi110.
I am also using a Skype gateway (SIPToSis) and my dial plan on Linksys was:
(<#1:>xx.<:@192.168.1.101:5070>|*xxxxS0|<:02>xxxxxxx|0[5-7]xxxxxxxxS0|0[2-48-9]xxxxxxxS0|<00:014>x.|<012:014>x.|<013:014>x.|xx.|*xx.)
So to get the same result on Obi110 I did the following:
1. Phone -> DigitMap: ([1-9]x?*(Mpli)|**0|***|#|**1(Msp)|**2(Msp2)|**8(Mli)|**9(Mpp)|#1(Mvg1)|(Mpli)|**3(Mvg1))
2. Phone-> OutboundCallRoute: {([1-9]x?*(Mpli)):pp},{**0:aa},{***:aa2},{(<**1:>(Msp1)):sp1},{(<**2:>(Msp2)):sp2},{(<**8:>(Mli)):li},{(<**9:>(Mpp)):pp},{(<#1:>(Mgv1)):vg1},{(<**3:>(Mvg1)):vg1},{(Mpli):pli}
3. VoiceGateway1 -> AccessNumber: sp1(192.168.1.101:5070)
VoiceGateway1 -> DigitMap:(xx?)
VoiceGateway1 -> AuthUserID: 767657657
With Linksys I was dialing : #133 for example to get some user in Skype. This is not working with Obi110. However, if I use **333 - call passed to SiptoSis w/o a problem.
It seems that #1 pattern is recognized by the Obi but as far as I see it tries to dial @192.168.1.101:5070. and fail. With using **3 it is dialing 33@192.168.1.101:5070.
I do not know if it is a bug or feature, but I did no find any reference that I can not map #....
RonR:
Using a '#' in a DigitMap/OutboundCallroute is supposed to be allowed. I can reproduce the problem you're experiencing.
There appears to be two problems occurring here:
1. Things are getting tangled up with this rule: {(<#:>|911):li}
2. Removing the rule cited above, the OBi tries to send the call out SP1 (Google Voice) instead of the intended SP2 (VoIP) in my case.
When I first got my OBi, I discovered a number of problems with DigitMap/OutboundCallRoute parsing that were ultimately corrected. It would appear you've found yet another.
obi-support2:
You have a typo in your OutboundCallRoute: {(<#1:>(Mgv1)):vg1}
I think you meant {(<#1:>(Mvg1)):vg1}
With this change, it works as expected.
Ans the answer is yes, you can use #1, #2, etc. for call routing, just like **1, **2, ...
RonR:
**2 Works:
PHONE Port DigitMap:
([1-9]x?*(Mpli)|[1-9]x?|911|**0|***|#|**1{t=di2}(Msp1)|**2{t=di2}(Msp2)|**3{t=di2}(Mvg3)|
**4{t=di2}(Mvg4)|**6{t=di2}(Mvg6)|**7{t=di2}(Mvg7)|**8{t=di2}(Mli)|**9{t=di2}(Mpp)|(Mpli))
PHONE Port OutboundCallRoute:
{([1-9]x?*(Mpli)):pp},{(<#:>|911):li},{**0:aa},{***:aa2},{(<**1:>(Msp1)):sp1},
{(<**2:>(Msp2)):sp2},{(<**3:>(Mvg3)):vg3},{(<**4:>(Mvg4)):vg4},{(<**6:>(Mvg6)):vg6},
{(<**7:>(Mvg7)):vg7},{(<**8:>(Mli)):li},{(<**9:>(Mpp)):pp},{(Mpli):pli}
#2 Fails:
PHONE Port DigitMap:
([1-9]x?*(Mpli)|[1-9]x?|911|**0|***|#|**1{t=di2}(Msp1)|#2{t=di2}(Msp2)|**3{t=di2}(Mvg3)|
**4{t=di2}(Mvg4)|**6{t=di2}(Mvg6)|**7{t=di2}(Mvg7)|**8{t=di2}(Mli)|**9{t=di2}(Mpp)|(Mpli))
PHONE Port OutboundCallRoute:
{([1-9]x?*(Mpli)):pp},{(<#:>|911):li},{**0:aa},{***:aa2},{(<**1:>(Msp1)):sp1},
{(<#2:>(Msp2)):sp2},{(<**3:>(Mvg3)):vg3},{(<**4:>(Mvg4)):vg4},{(<**6:>(Mvg6)):vg6},
{(<**7:>(Mvg7)):vg7},{(<**8:>(Mli)):li},{(<**9:>(Mpp)):pp},{(Mpli):pli}
The only change is: **2 -> #2
In the #2 failure case (#218005551212), a second dialtone is presented after '#2' is dialed, but the LINE Port is selected as if nothing but '#' was dialed (regardless of whether a terminating '#' is used or not).
The call history shows PHONE1 Peer Number: #218005551212 on the left and LINE1 with no Peer Number on right.
I don't think I have a typo.
obi-support2:
Ron,
I was replying to shap. I thought you were testing his callroute also?
His case is all working by fixing the typo: (Mgv1) is undefined; it should be (Mvg1).
It looks to me a typo anyway.
-----
Your new cases I can reproduce also; removing "<#:>|" from {(<#:>|911):li} should make it work too.
We are looking at why #1 etc will cause conflict in this case; it shouldn't.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page