MENU
An engineer configures several calling party transformation patterns in Cisco UCM so that calling numbers are shown in the +E.164 format. The route patterns match seven-digit internal numbers and prefix the numbers with 1408. The SIP trunk matches 1408XXXXXXX and prefixes the number with +. When users make outbound calls, the calling number still shows as seven digits. What is the cause of this problem?
Suggested Answer: D
Get Premium 300-815 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
34 comments · newest first
LY
Lynda
11 months ago
Yeah, I agree with C, the SIP trunk is probably overriding it.
TI
Timothy
11 months ago
Definitely not B, you can configure both types.
LA
Laurene
11 months ago
Wait, can you really have transformations on both? That seems odd.
AL
Alfreda
11 months ago
I think it's option C, the route pattern transformation gets ignored.
MA
Marsha
12 months ago
Sounds like the SIP trunk transformation is taking precedence.
CH
Chauncey
12 months ago
I don't think calling transformations can be set on both levels, so maybe option B is the right choice, but I need to double-check that.
BE
Bethanie
1 year ago
I feel like option C makes sense since having two transformations could cause one to be ignored, but I’m not entirely confident.
SY
Sylvia
1 year ago
I think I saw a similar question where the calling transformations conflicted, but I can't recall if it was about SIP trunks or something else.
HY
Hyman
1 year ago
I remember something about how transformations are applied in order, but I'm not sure if the SIP trunk takes precedence over route patterns.
FL
Florinda
1 year ago
The key here is to understand the precedence of the different transformation settings. I'll need to carefully consider how the route pattern and SIP trunk configurations work together.
DA
Daryl
1 year ago
This is a good test of my knowledge of Cisco UCM calling transformations. I'm confident I can work through this step-by-step and arrive at the right answer.
JO
Joesph
1 year ago
Okay, I think I've got a strategy. I'll focus on understanding the order in which the different calling transformations are applied and how they interact with each other.
EA
Earleen
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused about the order of operations here. I'll need to think through the sequence of transformations to figure out the root cause.
RU
Ruby
1 year ago
This seems like a tricky one. I'll need to carefully review the details about how calling transformations are applied on Cisco UCM.
DE
Denny
2 years ago
Well, this is a tricky one. I bet the engineer is scratching their head trying to figure out why the seven-digit numbers are still showing up. Maybe they should try turning it off and on again?
CA
Candida
2 years ago
The engineer might need to apply a calling transformation at the route group details level.
KA
Kattie
2 years ago
I think the calling transformation on the route patterns is being ignored.
RE
Regenia
2 years ago
Maybe the calling transformation on the SIP trunk is causing the issue.
BE
Benton
2 years ago
Haha, looks like the engineer just forgot to use their crystal ball to foresee this problem. Can't blame them though, those things are pretty unreliable.
KI
Kina
2 years ago
Definitely! It's all about understanding how the configurations interact with each other.
CU
Curt
2 years ago
Oh, that makes sense. The order of operations is important in this case.
DO
Dorsey
2 years ago
C) The calling transformation on the route patterns is ignored because there is already a calling transformation on the SIP trunk.
AS
Ashleigh
2 years ago
A) The calling transformation on the SIP trunk is applied first, and then the calling transformation on the route patterns is applied.
RE
Reid
2 years ago
Hmm, I'm not sure the issue is with the calling transformations themselves. It might be that the engineer needs to apply a transformation at the route group level as well.
TE
Tegan
2 years ago
D) The engineer must also apply a calling transformation at the route group details level.
KA
Kattie
2 years ago
C) The calling transformation on the route patterns is ignored because there is already a calling transformation on the SIP trunk.
KA
Kayleigh
2 years ago
A) The calling transformation on the SIP trunk is applied first, and then the calling transformation on the route patterns is applied.
FE
Felix
2 years ago
I think the problem is that the calling transformation on the SIP trunk is being applied first, overriding the transformation on the route patterns. The order of operations is key here.
CA
Carin
2 years ago
Maybe the engineer needs to adjust the order of the transformations to fix the issue.
DO
Dominga
2 years ago
Option C) The calling transformation on the route patterns is ignored because there is already a calling transformation on the SIP trunk.
RE
Rebecka
2 years ago
That makes sense. The order of operations is important in this case.
AD
Adria
2 years ago
Option A) The calling transformation on the SIP trunk is applied first, and then the calling transformation on the route patterns is applied.
LO
Louisa
2 years ago
I disagree, I believe the issue lies with option C.
YU
Yun
2 years ago
I think the cause of the problem is option A.