<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Confused Amused &#187; normalization</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.confusedamused.com/tags/normalization/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.confusedamused.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 02:58:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Office Communicator and Published Phone Numbers</title>
		<link>http://www.confusedamused.com/notebook/office-communicator-and-published-phone-numbers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.confusedamused.com/notebook/office-communicator-and-published-phone-numbers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:57:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom Pacyk</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Collaboration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[abs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[communicator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[normalization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OCS]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.confusedamused.com/notebook/office-communicator-and-published-phone-numbers/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the trickiest parts of configuring OCS voice is getting all your address book normalization rules functioning properly and I noticed something recently that really threw me off so I set off on a little investigation. To set the stage, I removed all normalization rules from my Mediation Server and deleted the CompanyPhoneNumberNormalizationRules.txt file. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><p>One of the trickiest parts of configuring OCS voice is getting all your address book normalization rules functioning properly and I noticed something recently that really threw me off so I set off on a little investigation. To set the stage, I removed all normalization rules from my Mediation Server and deleted the Company<em>Phone</em>Number<em>Normalization</em>Rules.txt file. Theoretically that leaves me with just the built in rule processing.</p> <p>I have 2 users, Jim Morrison and Roger Daltrey, both enabled for Enterprise Voice capabilities. Jim&#8217;s Line URI is tel:+15035461201 and Roger&#8217;s is tel:+15035461101. In Active Directory I filled in the telephone numbers for Jim and Roger as the same values, sans the tel: prefix. Just so we&#8217;re clear, Jim&#8217;s number was +15035461201.</p> <p>I fired up 2 Communicator clients, one signed in as Jim and the other as Roger. From Roger&#8217;s point of view I saw this:</p> <p><a href="http://www.confusedamused.com/wp-content/pictures/2008/08/image.png"><img height="294" alt="image" src="http://www.confusedamused.com/wp-content/pictures/2008/08/image-thumb.png" width="494" border="0"></a> </p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>Not very nicely formatted, right? Jim sees the same thing for Roger&#8217;s number. The key point here is the number is displayed <strong>exactly</strong> as it is formatted in AD. The thing that threw me off was that I knew I had seen Communicator format those numbers in a much nicer way. Something more like +1 (503) 546-1201, which is much easier to read. So I started fiddling and went into Jim&#8217;s phone options within Communicator and added a mobile number. I used the same format I did in AD, +12345678900. I added Roger to my Team Access Level so he could see the mobile number and took another look:</p> <p><a href="http://www.confusedamused.com/wp-content/pictures/2008/08/image1.png"><img height="333" alt="image" src="http://www.confusedamused.com/wp-content/pictures/2008/08/image-thumb1.png" width="499" border="0"></a> </p> <p>Interesting. That mobile number sure looks better than the work one, right? Why didn&#8217;t Communicator display that number the same way for both numbers? I opened up Jim&#8217;s phone options again and took a closer look. <a href="https://blogs.pointbridge.com/Blogs/schertz_jeff/Pages/Post.aspx?_ID=26">Jeff Schertz has a nice post mentioning how access levels (don&#8217;t) get applied when you enter a number in AD</a>, but the key point applicable here is that a number entered in AD is automatically visible to anyone within the organization. So Jim&#8217;s number was entered in that box and I was unable to edit it as a user, but what I noticed was the work number was <strong>unpublished</strong>. </p> <p><a href="http://www.confusedamused.com/wp-content/pictures/2008/08/image2.png"><img height="281" alt="image" src="http://www.confusedamused.com/wp-content/pictures/2008/08/image-thumb2.png" width="477" border="0"></a> </p> <p>So I checked that box and then flipped over to Roger&#8217;s Communicator. Well, well, well. All the numbers look right and are nicely formatted now.</p> <p><a href="http://www.confusedamused.com/wp-content/pictures/2008/08/image3.png"><img height="313" alt="image" src="http://www.confusedamused.com/wp-content/pictures/2008/08/image-thumb3.png" width="498" border="0"></a> </p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>So what I discovered is that the a visible and published number are treated differently. OCS will format a published number, but not a number that is simply visible because of AD. Strange, but good to know. I think this is due to where Communicator is pulling the information from. If a number is coming from AD and is unpublished, the number is being read by MOC from the GalContacts.db file. If a number is published to OCS, MOC is reading the number from the server and OCS database. So priority-wise MOC prefers a published number over one read from the address book.</p></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.confusedamused.com/notebook/office-communicator-and-published-phone-numbers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

