Mitel Forums - The Unofficial Source
Mitel Forums => Mitel SX200, SX2000, and older SX platforms => Topic started by: nMitel on November 07, 2018, 12:14:03 PM
-
Hi,
I'm trying to block extension 1234 from dialing a specific number.
I assigned a route for the destination number to be blocked in Form 26, assigned a COR for it in form 23, allowed all COR Groups to access it to access it, assigned unused COR to ext 1234, and added it to all COR groups except the one I used for extension 1234.
when I applied this It ended up blocking all outgoing calls. what am I doing wrong here. this SX200 MX
Thank you,
-
Cor group members are ones that can't do it
-
Johnp what would be a better way to do this.
-
Your there, you just need to put the COR of the phone in the COR group assigned to that route, not the other way around. If you are familiar with the 3300, COR works almost the opposite of that.
-
I guess I'm confused about the COR number that I assign in form 9 ... is it a COR member number or a COR group number ?
-
I guess I'm confused about the COR number that I assign in form 9 ... is it a COR member number or a COR group number ?
COR is assigned to devices, COR groups to routes... if the COR is in the COR group for that route the call is blocked.
COR groups are just ways to associate several CORs to one route.
In the route you build for the special number, give it a new COR Group, then put the COR of the phone that CANNOT make the call.
Exactly the opposite of the MCD.
-
As Ace says, cor number is the user i.e form 9. Cor group is in routes, be a while 23?
-
Still not working for me for some reason :(, Please see attachments. I added the same COR the extension was using (COR 3) to the new COR group #11 which is still part of the original COR group #3, not sure if this is a mistake and if I should be using a unique COR for the extension (EXT 1564).
-
From what I see, that extension should not be able to dial that number
-
Programming looks correct... Are you using only one outside access code? Are you using Outgoing Call Restriction (Form 4 - Option 32)?
-
Im not using Outgoing Call Restriction Form 4 - Option 32. but I THINk I have two outside access codes,.
-
Im not using Outgoing Call Restriction Form 4 - Option 32. but I THINk I have two outside access codes,.
Hmm... I don't see an issue with the programming, it looks correct. I only asked about Outcalling Call Restriction because it can cause weird things with toll restriction, but it is typically only used in hospitality environments.
You do have two outgoing access codes, 9 and #6... I have to assume #6 is something special, a specific trunk group for international calls, paging equipment, tie line to another system, or something unusual. Again this is only a guess, but there seems to be a lot going on here as you have tenanting setup as well, but that could be for any number of reasons.
As I see it, if anyone with COR 3 dials "9+7097531611" the call should be blocked by ARS, anyone with any other COR should be able to dial it fine as it would match "9+709XXXXXXX" and go out route 9 which has no COR group assigned to it.
-
not sure what mod digit 2 does. As said this looks like it should block the 10 digit. 1+ might still be able to get to that number
-
weirred! calls are still going out. how could I block the number if +1 is dialed before, do I create another route for it?
-
weirred! calls are still going out. how could I block the number if +1 is dialed before, do I create another route for it?
No need, just use the same route and add the 17097531611 entry
-
Solved!
I had to block the number on access code #6, not 9 because that extension did not use to dial 9 to get an outside line, seems like it resides within #6 access code.
Thank you very much for the help.
-
Solved!
I had to block the number on access code #6, not 9 because that extension did not use to dial 9 to get an outside line, seems like it resides within #6 access code.
Thank you very much for the help.
Ahh... the plot thickens and is solved.
Actually, this isn't that usual... The SX200 has a feature called "Direct to ARS" where you set the code that is essentially "dialed for the user" when they go off-hook. I would guess if you dig into it, you would find this code is set to #6 and this users COS has Direct to ARS enabled. In that case, it makes perfect sense.