Simply Inbound Rules Query

[ziptalk]

I've noticed when creating inbound rules, I have to choose a port. For example I have a Patton 4 port BRI ISDN Gateway, but only one physical port is plugged into an ISDN 2e. When I specify a inbound rule, I have to choose explicitly which port this call will arrive on. Does that mean, when I move over to my 4 ISDN 2e setup, I will have to create a inbound rule for each respective ISDN port ? For example I have an inbound rule of *6, that routes to an internal extension number of 3966 - but because that inbound rule operates on port 10002, does that mean if the call came in on 10003, the inbound rule will not be triggered ?

I would like for the inbound rule to apply across the ISDN Gateway ports 10002 - 10005 inclusive, or better still just be able to specify the ISDN Gateway device in the inbound rule as opposed to a particular port.

Thanks for clarifying the situation for me and letting me know if I have to create a inbound rule for each port.

Lewis

 

[discovery1]

You can have a range of values in the rule - in your case just make the port value 10002-10005 rather than make a separate rule for each port.

 

[igor.snezhko]

The more annoying that I cannot specify particular port in Outbound rule - but only gateway. This is really feature request.

 

[ziptalk]

You can have a range of values in the rule - in your case just make the port value 10002-10005 rather than make a separate rule for each port.

Hi Igor, thanks for your response.

Can you tell me where I do this, since when I create an inbound rule, the port is a drop-down menu and consequently I can only select 1single port and not specify a range as you have suggested. I have included a screenshot for clarify.

 

[igor.snezhko]

I am not answered to your question before, but I would recommend to use DID/DDI Number Mask. Also you neeed to set proper Line identification Numbers - your actual numbers, but NOT 10001, 10002 ets.

 

[ziptalk]

I am not answered to your question before, but I would recommend to use DID/DDI Number Mask. Also you neeed to set proper Line identification Numbers - your actual numbers, but NOT 10001, 10002 ets.

Sorry Igor, I think I must of been reading a response from you on another post at the time of writing.

I am using the mask *9 but it seems i can only choose one port. My question is whether I would have to create this rule for each port, or would the rule apply throughout the range of ports. Thanks for your response by the way - I'll leave this one cooking as it may be the case i'm not explaining my issue clearly. Thanks, Lewis

 

[igor.snezhko]

You use 10001, 10002, 10003... but mask *9. Set Line Identification Numbers RIGTH and it will work.

 

[radix]

You use 10001, 10002, 10003... but mask *9. Set Line Identification Numbers RIGTH and it will work.

I have the same problem/concern like ziptalk.
What exactly do you mean by that? Can you explain a litle more in detail?

At the moment, in my config wich is very simmilar with the config of ziptalk, I have the same DDI defined for each line and in the same way.
Ex:
10001
*31
*32
*33
...
10002
*31
*32
*33

I have 2 BRI gateway with both lines having the same tel.no. Everything is working OK (inbound/outbound) but Is not really nice that I must define the DDI rules 2 times.
Also in the Inbound Rules I have a list like:
*31
*31
*32
*32
...

Not knowing without opening what rule to what port applies.

 

[ziptalk]

You can have a range of values in the rule - in your case just make the port value 10002-10005 rather than make a separate rule for each port.

Hi Discovery - I mistakingly responded to your post by addressing another member of the forum. Would you mind elaborating on how I do this. Since when I create an inbound rule it gives me a drop down for a single port and I am unable to specify a range.

I am concerned I'll have to create the same rule for each port - since the DDI's can come down any of the 4 ISDN 2e boxes.

Thanks for showing me how to do this.

Cheers, Lewis

 

[igor.snezhko]

When you add DID the rules creating automatically.

 

[discovery1]

Sorry Lewis
I misunderstood the exact reason for your question. I was under the impression that if you set DID's for each of the BRI's you should be able to create a rule based on the DID and not the port - this seems not to be the case.
Maybe you could add this in the feature request section - possibly with a request to be able to copy rules as well which would make setup a bit quicker.

 

[ziptalk]

Re: Simple Inbound Rules Query

I have discovered that my inbound rules are created on a per port level on the ISDN Gateway (Patton). So for each port, i.e. 10003, 10004 and 10005 I effectively have to duplicate the DID rules I have already on port 1002.

I would of hoped that those inbound rules are set at the device level as opposed to the physical port level ?

Creating DID rules is painstaking enough, to have to create them for each port is adminsitratively expensive when it doesn't need to be.

Any input on whether there is any other ways of setting up rules over a range of ports as opposed to a per-port-basis would be gratefully received.

Thanks in advance,

Lewis

 

[igor.snezhko]

All this is possible with more complex, but more flexible system. 3CX is young and very simply to configure system. For such advanced functionality you really need Asterisk - like system with complex dial plan descriptive language. IMHO.

 

[ziptalk]

All this is possible with more complex, but more flexible system. 3CX is young and very simply to configure system. For such advanced functionality you really need Asterisk - like system with complex dial plan descriptive language. IMHO.

Hi Igor,

Thanks for taking the time and funnily enough I was pretty much arriving at that same conclusion. It's not the end of the world, and I am sure a couple of feature-requests and releases later all these things will be taking care off. At least I can put this one to bed now and get on with my life and create the duplicate rules! I can accept it when the answer is it doesn't do that, the frustration is bourne from thinking that it can and it must be something I'm overlooking!

Thanks again, Lewis

 

[igor.snezhko]

I sure, 3CX will evolute to Object and Policy model. You have object like lines, providers, Extensions, and set polices on them. Like ISA server does.

 

[ziptalk]

I sure, 3CX will evolute to Object and Policy model. You have object like lines, providers, Extensions, and set polices on them. Like ISA server does.

Yes agree.

I like the pace at which it is evolving, it's very considered and not seemingly giving in to the whims of many telephony engineers out there who are familiar with certain features from other systems. I like the fact 3CX is a new system, and has no heritage from the old-telephony world and it is doing things on it's own terms. You have got to respect that.

Lewis

 

[igor.snezhko]

Yes. By the way, one of my ideas is to add Powershell support to 3CX. And it will be the "best of the best"