Location based ARS tables

[XEON2006]

I'd like to route some calls out via VDNS using the route-to command in a vector but I want to use a specific ARS table in location 4 as the calls will be made out through local trunks for that site. The ARS table is set up specifically for that site so I dont want to use the default ARS table.
I set up a COR with a dedicated time-of-day/PGN and was hoping that calls would use the ARS table in location 4 but the calls are processed using the default ARS table. I'm stuck! any help would be great.

 

[YeOldPhoneGuy]

Make sure the cabinet or media gateway has the correct location specified.

Make sure the ip phones use a network region that specifies the correct location.

Make sure you are changing the ars route using the location parameter on the ars analysis forms.

If there is a better match in the all partition it will use it instead of the one you specified in the route.

IE To add the number 2138321234 to use the location routing use the following command:
ch ars ana 12139020 ( I am assuming the whole prefix will be called here and there is not a better match in the all partition)
Specify your local trunk group that is in your media gateway and you should be routing correctly.

Hope this helps

Me

 

[XEON2006]

I have programmed the media gateway and IP phones for the right location and I have programmed an ARS table specifically for this location. Calls made directly from the phones work fine. Calls to the VDN go through the default gateway even though the entry in the preferred ARS location 4 table is set up correctly for the digits. VDNS dont seem to be location based. I'm wondering how the system routes calls from VDNS to different ARS tables if there is no location specified for it. I know if you ring direct from an IP phone it will decide the location based on the IP-network-map & region but if you call from one of these phones to a VDN and route out how can you control which ARS tabel is used?

 

[skara]

Try changing the TN entry to 4 on the VDN form

 

[XEON2006]

we dont have tenant partitioning as a feature