We have a new law starting tomorrow in Texas that requires 911 work without dialing the FAC (9 in our system). I thought I would have to program the ARS tables with a match on 11 and insert a 9 using a route. But someone tested and it works without it. I cannot find any other way in the docs or forum to make 911 work without the ARS changes. I sent a long change request in to make up new routes and change the ARS tables and now I don't know how to explain why it isn't necessary.
The first trace shows dialing 911. The setup digits line still shows the 9 in front. The next trace shows dialing another number and the 9 has been removed at the setup digits stage. The only thing that looks different is the inter-digit delay message. Can anyone explain why this works? Routes 261 and 263 are the same except for the FRL. 261 is the route used by the 911 entry in the ARS table. There are no entries in the table for less than 3 digits. Is it just that the digit expiration somehow makes it leave the 9 in front?
22:05:09 active station 262420 cid 0x1833
22:05:09 G711MU ss
ff ps:20
rgn:10 [10.1.230.30]:2722
rgn:10 [10.0.31.71]:2068
22:05:13 short inter-digit delay due to overlapping entries cid 0x1833
22:05:13 dial 911# route:ARS
22:05:13 term trunk-group 26 cid 0x1833
22:05:13 dial 911# route:ARS
22:05:13 route-pattern 261 preference 1 location 26 cid 0x1833
22:05:13 seize trunk-group 26 member 14 cid 0x1833
22:05:13 Setup digits 911
22:05:13 Calling Number & Name 4125354400 NO-CPName
22:05:13 G729A ss
ff ps:20
rgn:10 [10.1.230.30]:2722
rgn:26 [10.2.104.14]:2064
22:05:13 Proceed trunk-group 26 member 14 cid 0x1833
22:05:14 idle station 262420 cid 0x1833
22:09:28 active station 262420 cid 0x1836
22:09:28 G711MU ss
ff ps:20
rgn:10 [10.1.230.30]:2722
rgn:10 [10.0.31.71]:2066
22:09:31 dial 91469525 route:ARS
22:09:31 term trunk-group 10 cid 0x1836
22:09:31 dial 914695257901 route:ARS
22:09:31 route-pattern 263 preference 1 location 26 cid 0x1836
22:09:31 seize trunk-group 10 member 2 cid 0x1836
22:09:31 Setup digits 14695257901
22:09:31 Calling Number & Name 4125354400 NO-CPName
22:09:31 G711MU ss
ff ps:20
The first trace shows dialing 911. The setup digits line still shows the 9 in front. The next trace shows dialing another number and the 9 has been removed at the setup digits stage. The only thing that looks different is the inter-digit delay message. Can anyone explain why this works? Routes 261 and 263 are the same except for the FRL. 261 is the route used by the 911 entry in the ARS table. There are no entries in the table for less than 3 digits. Is it just that the digit expiration somehow makes it leave the 9 in front?
22:05:09 active station 262420 cid 0x1833
22:05:09 G711MU ss
rgn:10 [10.1.230.30]:2722
rgn:10 [10.0.31.71]:2068
22:05:13 short inter-digit delay due to overlapping entries cid 0x1833
22:05:13 dial 911# route:ARS
22:05:13 term trunk-group 26 cid 0x1833
22:05:13 dial 911# route:ARS
22:05:13 route-pattern 261 preference 1 location 26 cid 0x1833
22:05:13 seize trunk-group 26 member 14 cid 0x1833
22:05:13 Setup digits 911
22:05:13 Calling Number & Name 4125354400 NO-CPName
22:05:13 G729A ss
rgn:10 [10.1.230.30]:2722
rgn:26 [10.2.104.14]:2064
22:05:13 Proceed trunk-group 26 member 14 cid 0x1833
22:05:14 idle station 262420 cid 0x1833
22:09:28 active station 262420 cid 0x1836
22:09:28 G711MU ss
rgn:10 [10.1.230.30]:2722
rgn:10 [10.0.31.71]:2066
22:09:31 dial 91469525 route:ARS
22:09:31 term trunk-group 10 cid 0x1836
22:09:31 dial 914695257901 route:ARS
22:09:31 route-pattern 263 preference 1 location 26 cid 0x1836
22:09:31 seize trunk-group 10 member 2 cid 0x1836
22:09:31 Setup digits 14695257901
22:09:31 Calling Number & Name 4125354400 NO-CPName
22:09:31 G711MU ss