Genesys Cloud - Main

Hello -

Had opened support ticket originally because using 1300 numbers in Australia seemed to result in destination devices receiving CID information looking like "01300" which is completely invalid. Now, that could be a carrier issue, but I'm reticent to push that with the carrier since I can enter invalid data in the field.

(1) Discovered that you could enter alphabetic characters (A-Z) into a field that was asserted by Genesys support as being an E.164 compliant field. This was addressed.

(2) Discovered that you could enter invalid phone numbers into the Caller ID: Phone Number field. Was essentially told by support that this is acceptable and to submit an enhancement request. For instance I can center "+61 02 5550 1234" into the field and have it accepted when the value is clearly in error (including both the country code - 61 - and the NDD digit - 0 - is an error). The correct E.164 value, with spaces inserted, would be "+61 2 5550 1234" ... more properly "+61255501234" 

Elsewhere in PureCloud the phone number fields were changed to be firmly validated several months ago, but this field was, apparently, allowed to remain a text field. Should the lack of validation here be considered a fault, or should making carrying phone number validation to this field be considered an enhancement request?

 I see it as a fault. Any other opinions?

------------------------------
Patrick Rada
Keypath Education LLC
------------------------------

Patrick, here is some rationale from the development side regarding that field:

Basically, what it boils down to is what someone's concept is of a phone number.  When it comes to the Architect phone number data type, it's definitely not E.164 only.  We have this help page that gives more details:

https://help.mypurecloud.com/articles/about-the-phone-number-data-type/

Architect phone numbers support either tel: or sip: since that's what edge supports.  On the tel: side of things, it's based off of https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3966 so you can ask for the e164 property value from the string that was submitted to create a phone number instance.  Architect has a way to get e164 information if available, but there's more to a "phone number" here.

------------------------------
George Ganahl
Principal Program Manager
Genesys
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 07-13-2018 10:23
From: Patrick Rada
Subject: Campaign "Caller ID: Phone Number" Accepts Invalid Numbers

Hello -

Had opened support ticket originally because using 1300 numbers in Australia seemed to result in destination devices receiving CID information looking like "01300" which is completely invalid. Now, that could be a carrier issue, but I'm reticent to push that with the carrier since I can enter invalid data in the field.

(1) Discovered that you could enter alphabetic characters (A-Z) into a field that was asserted by Genesys support as being an E.164 compliant field. This was addressed.

(2) Discovered that you could enter invalid phone numbers into the Caller ID: Phone Number field. Was essentially told by support that this is acceptable and to submit an enhancement request. For instance I can center "+61 02 5550 1234" into the field and have it accepted when the value is clearly in error (including both the country code - 61 - and the NDD digit - 0 - is an error). The correct E.164 value, with spaces inserted, would be "+61 2 5550 1234" ... more properly "+61255501234"

Elsewhere in PureCloud the phone number fields were changed to be firmly validated several months ago, but this field was, apparently, allowed to remain a text field. Should the lack of validation here be considered a fault, or should making carrying phone number validation to this field be considered an enhancement request?

 I see it as a fault. Any other opinions?

------------------------------
Patrick Rada
Keypath Education LLC
------------------------------

I'd be down with that, except I'm not talking about Architect. In the campaign management page the field is labeled: "Caller ID: Phone Number" and anywhere else in PureCloud Admin configuration pages phone numbers are explicitly checked to be E.164 compliant. Try entering a SIP URI into a queue voice number field.

------------------------------
Patrick Rada
Keypath Education LLC
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 07-13-2018 17:28
From: George Ganahl
Subject: Campaign "Caller ID: Phone Number" Accepts Invalid Numbers

Patrick, here is some rationale from the development side regarding that field:

Basically, what it boils down to is what someone's concept is of a phone number.  When it comes to the Architect phone number data type, it's definitely not E.164 only.  We have this help page that gives more details:

https://help.mypurecloud.com/articles/about-the-phone-number-data-type/

Architect phone numbers support either tel: or sip: since that's what edge supports.  On the tel: side of things, it's based off of https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3966 so you can ask for the e164 property value from the string that was submitted to create a phone number instance.  Architect has a way to get e164 information if available, but there's more to a "phone number" here.

------------------------------
George Ganahl
Principal Program Manager
Genesys

Original Message:
Sent: 07-13-2018 10:23
From: Patrick Rada
Subject: Campaign "Caller ID: Phone Number" Accepts Invalid Numbers

Hello -

Had opened support ticket originally because using 1300 numbers in Australia seemed to result in destination devices receiving CID information looking like "01300" which is completely invalid. Now, that could be a carrier issue, but I'm reticent to push that with the carrier since I can enter invalid data in the field.

(1) Discovered that you could enter alphabetic characters (A-Z) into a field that was asserted by Genesys support as being an E.164 compliant field. This was addressed.

(2) Discovered that you could enter invalid phone numbers into the Caller ID: Phone Number field. Was essentially told by support that this is acceptable and to submit an enhancement request. For instance I can center "+61 02 5550 1234" into the field and have it accepted when the value is clearly in error (including both the country code - 61 - and the NDD digit - 0 - is an error). The correct E.164 value, with spaces inserted, would be "+61 2 5550 1234" ... more properly "+61255501234"

Elsewhere in PureCloud the phone number fields were changed to be firmly validated several months ago, but this field was, apparently, allowed to remain a text field. Should the lack of validation here be considered a fault, or should making carrying phone number validation to this field be considered an enhancement request?

 I see it as a fault. Any other opinions?

------------------------------
Patrick Rada
Keypath Education LLC
------------------------------

My apologies, Patrick. I read your initial question wrong.

I haven't found the correct person in Development to ask about this yet.

A kludge that might work in the meantime would be to enter a dummy number in the Campaign Management field and change it at the External Trunk level under the External Trunk Configuration>Identity>Outbound>Calling section. That only allows you three options, so probably wouldn't meet all your needs, but I figured I'd suggest it. It uses Regular Expressions, so with some ingenuity (taking part of the dummy number from the match and using it in the formatted number) you could have each expression manipulate multiple Caller ID values.

BTW, I tried putting a SIP: address in the Caller ID:Phone Number field, and it was rejected as invalid, so it is not a straight text field. Basically, it accepts numbers without spaces and with or without a leading "+" as input.

------------------------------
George Ganahl
Principal Program Manager
Genesys
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 07-23-2018 18:10
From: Patrick Rada
Subject: Campaign "Caller ID: Phone Number" Accepts Invalid Numbers

I'd be down with that, except I'm not talking about Architect. In the campaign management page the field is labeled: "Caller ID: Phone Number" and anywhere else in PureCloud Admin configuration pages phone numbers are explicitly checked to be E.164 compliant. Try entering a SIP URI into a queue voice number field.

------------------------------
Patrick Rada
Keypath Education LLC

Original Message:
Sent: 07-13-2018 17:28
From: George Ganahl
Subject: Campaign "Caller ID: Phone Number" Accepts Invalid Numbers

Patrick, here is some rationale from the development side regarding that field:

Basically, what it boils down to is what someone's concept is of a phone number.  When it comes to the Architect phone number data type, it's definitely not E.164 only.  We have this help page that gives more details:

https://help.mypurecloud.com/articles/about-the-phone-number-data-type/

Architect phone numbers support either tel: or sip: since that's what edge supports.  On the tel: side of things, it's based off of https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3966 so you can ask for the e164 property value from the string that was submitted to create a phone number instance.  Architect has a way to get e164 information if available, but there's more to a "phone number" here.

------------------------------
George Ganahl
Principal Program Manager
Genesys

Original Message:
Sent: 07-13-2018 10:23
From: Patrick Rada
Subject: Campaign "Caller ID: Phone Number" Accepts Invalid Numbers

Hello -

Had opened support ticket originally because using 1300 numbers in Australia seemed to result in destination devices receiving CID information looking like "01300" which is completely invalid. Now, that could be a carrier issue, but I'm reticent to push that with the carrier since I can enter invalid data in the field.

(1) Discovered that you could enter alphabetic characters (A-Z) into a field that was asserted by Genesys support as being an E.164 compliant field. This was addressed.

(2) Discovered that you could enter invalid phone numbers into the Caller ID: Phone Number field. Was essentially told by support that this is acceptable and to submit an enhancement request. For instance I can center "+61 02 5550 1234" into the field and have it accepted when the value is clearly in error (including both the country code - 61 - and the NDD digit - 0 - is an error). The correct E.164 value, with spaces inserted, would be "+61 2 5550 1234" ... more properly "+61255501234"

Elsewhere in PureCloud the phone number fields were changed to be firmly validated several months ago, but this field was, apparently, allowed to remain a text field. Should the lack of validation here be considered a fault, or should making carrying phone number validation to this field be considered an enhancement request?

 I see it as a fault. Any other opinions?

------------------------------
Patrick Rada
Keypath Education LLC
------------------------------