Thanks Brian an Anthony for all the great information and examples. My config does not look anything like this so it looks like I’ve got some work ahead of me. I’m glad to see no digit manipulation is needed in the example. I’ve been told that we have to do digit manipulation on the CUBE which I questioned and part of what led me to ask here.
Jason
From: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2020 8:53 PM
To: Brian Meade <bmeade90@vt.edu>
Cc: JASON BURWELL <JASON.BURWELL@foundersfcu.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE Config Dial Peers
CAUTION: This email originated outside of Founders Federal Credit Union. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
________________________________
All great points, thanks for taking the time to respond.
The only one I think that I need to reply to is the DPG and destination-pattern one. I was actually troubleshooting a customer CUBE wherein this exact scenario was in place and the only negative was getting options to work. Otherwise, it was routing the call just fine. Granted, I couldn't tell you what version that was, as it was like a year or so ago, but either way, I always put a destination-pattern on because you need one for options to function.
I guess I could reply to one more, and that has to do with tweaking retries from 6 to 2 AND using options. Why stick to one, when you can do both?
Here's the one I use which I said was very similar to yours.
The first thing to note is the numeric structure of my tags.
1000 series numbers are the ITSP side
2000 series numbers are the CUCM side
I would expand this to 3000, 4000, etc., for additional integrations like PRIs, FXO, second ITSP, second PBX, etc. Most I ever had was 6 integrations into a single CUBE i think.
The second digit is 1 for incoming and 2 for outgoing.
The 4rd and fourth digit are generally not used, unless I need additional dial-peers for the same peer and direction, but doing something slightly different. Most I ever used was like 15 i think. E.g., 2215 But that was not using IP addresses in the matching and DPGs, that was using phone number matching, and I was using steering codes.
Jason
From: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2020 8:53 PM
To: Brian Meade <bmeade90@vt.edu>
Cc: JASON BURWELL <JASON.BURWELL@foundersfcu.com>; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [cisco-voip] CUBE Config Dial Peers
CAUTION: This email originated outside of Founders Federal Credit Union. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
________________________________
All great points, thanks for taking the time to respond.
The only one I think that I need to reply to is the DPG and destination-pattern one. I was actually troubleshooting a customer CUBE wherein this exact scenario was in place and the only negative was getting options to work. Otherwise, it was routing the call just fine. Granted, I couldn't tell you what version that was, as it was like a year or so ago, but either way, I always put a destination-pattern on because you need one for options to function.
I guess I could reply to one more, and that has to do with tweaking retries from 6 to 2 AND using options. Why stick to one, when you can do both?
Here's the one I use which I said was very similar to yours.
The first thing to note is the numeric structure of my tags.
1000 series numbers are the ITSP side
2000 series numbers are the CUCM side
I would expand this to 3000, 4000, etc., for additional integrations like PRIs, FXO, second ITSP, second PBX, etc. Most I ever had was 6 integrations into a single CUBE i think.
The second digit is 1 for incoming and 2 for outgoing.
The 4rd and fourth digit are generally not used, unless I need additional dial-peers for the same peer and direction, but doing something slightly different. Most I ever used was like 15 i think. E.g., 2215 But that was not using IP addresses in the matching and DPGs, that was using phone number matching, and I was using steering codes.