locked
Importing a custom AD field (extension) into MOC RRS feed

  • Question

  • In our Active Directory, we have a custom field for Extension. Ideally, we'd like to use this for internal OCS calls (as opposed to the full number, which costs our company money since it is routed externally, then back in).

    Does anyone have any experience with this? I'm not really sure where to begin.
    • Moved by Gavin-ZhangModerator Tuesday, October 27, 2009 9:17 AM related with telephony (From:User Replicator & Address Book)
    Tuesday, October 20, 2009 2:05 PM

All replies

  • OCS will not send calls to internal users out the Mediation server if the dialed numbers normalize to match patterns appied to the Line URI field on user accounts.  So even if the number translates out to 10+ digits it won't actually go out to the PSTN and back in.

    If you have a multi-site topology with more than one Mediation server and multiple domains there are ways to configuede OCS to route the calls internaly as well.


    Jeff Schertz, PointBridge | MVP | MCITP: Enterprise Messaging | MCTS: OCS
    Tuesday, October 20, 2009 4:00 PM
    Moderator
  • We're using Mitel's LBG - not the Mediation server. RCC is enabled, not EV.

    We have our normalization rules working properly. Here's the problem:

    In AD, we have 3 phone fields:

    Business
    Home
    Extension (which is a custom field)

    My normalization rules will change every 10 and 11 digit number to 91[area code][number]. This works perfectly, except it throws all the calls oustide (because we force the 9). If I didn't force the 9 prefix, it would just dump out every call because it would try to dial the first 4 digits of every number like it was an internal extension (if the number was 1-800-555-5555, it would dial 1800 and gives a fast busy, because that extension doesn't exist).

    I also have a normalization rule for 4 digit numbers, but can't figure out how to get that custom entry from AD into MOC.
    Tuesday, October 20, 2009 5:02 PM
  • I may not be explaining myself well. Was my previous post clearer?

    Any ideas?

    Tuesday, October 27, 2009 1:24 PM