Unsupported Caller ID issues

[Heath]

I am all of a sudden having an issue with Incoming call Caller ID. Hoping can get assistance. On my inbound setting I have the following
(1)(570)(.*) -- source \2\3 -- replace
(1)(272)(.*) -- source \2\3 -- replace
+(1)(...)(.*) -- source \1\2\3 -- replace

So any numbers from 570 or 272 area code are fine... But everything else outside 570 & 272 the the caller ID is displaying for incoming calls as 1+1 the areacode and then only the next 4 digits of the phone number.. so if a person number is 15185552222 its displaying 1+151855522. I'm at a loss here... I deleted the last reformating to see if something is causing this and no change.. Then for kicks an giggles I did (1)(+)(1)(...)(.*) as the source and then \3\4\5 as replace, and stlll no change. 570 & 272 area code are fine.. But everything else is displaying very wierd and can't figure it out... Any suggestions..

 

[Evolute IT]

Is there a reason why you need to modify the format like this?

 

[leejor]

Have you confirmed that caller display numbers, for different area-codes, are being sent to you in a different format, from your provider? If that is the case, then I would question them about why they are doing that. (maybe they don't realize it.) They should be consistent.

Are you using E164 settings? Could something in there be having an affect?

 

[Heath]

Have you confirmed that caller display numbers, for different area-codes, are being sent to you in a different format, from your provider? If that is the case, then I would question them about why they are doing that. (maybe they don't realize it.) They should be consistent.

Are you using E164 settings? Could something in there be having an affect?

They are not being sent that was from the provider. I have 2 sip trunks and the source and replacement are identical and on both are being displayed the same. And it was researched both are not sending in that format

 

[Heath]

Is there a reason why you need to modify the format like this?

?????

 

[YiannisH_3CX]

+(1)(...)(.*) -- source \1\2\3 -- replace

Why is there a "+" for the last one? Are the numbers coming with a plus? Check your activity on how the caller ID is arriving at the PBX.

 

[Heath]

I had a plus on the last one that if are sent with a plus to display on the caller ID without the plus. But I deleted that when I’m getting my current issue and though that was an issue when it’s not

 

[YiannisH_3CX]

OK so please send us a screenshot of your current configuration and an example of how the caller ID is coming in the system from the provider.

 

[Heath]

Here are the screenshots... According to the provider they are sending the caller ID info for USA numbers as 1 plus areacode and number... Any numbers from 570 or 272 are coming in correctly as noted in the setting in the management portal... However anything outside 570 or 272 are being displayed as 1+1area code and first 5 digits of the phone number... so a number like 15185556947 is being displayed as 1+151855569.. I did have a setting in the management portal as
(1)(+)(1)(...)(.*) as source and replace with \3\4\5 and no changes..

 

[YiannisH_3CX]

I deleted the screenshots are they were showing your FQDN and caller ID.
I added the exact same settings to our Flowroute trunk and I cannot replicate the behavior you are describing.
It works fine for me.
With that in mind you should contact our support department regarding this so they can take a look at the PBX logs and determine why this is happening.

 

[Heath]

I didn’t realize I had the fdqn in the screenshot. I assume by support via the ticket??? My issue with that is I recently did a ticket to support on another issue and now all of a sudden after being with 3cx for 8+ years (may be longer) was told you can’t provide any support on my system even when I pay because my system is remote hosted with windows. And was told that only Linux is and not windows. Unless I’m running the PBX onsite then windows is supported. I’ve always been remote hosted and windows and now being told all of a sudden I never should have received support when I did. Unless there is another idea you have.