Overall the process is generally the same, but with a few minor changes that impact both how it is configured and how normalization functions. By default normalization is already enabled in Lync Server which can be verified by the viewing the Lync Server’s current Address Book configuration. Execute Update-CsAddressBook to import the new settings configured in the text file and apply them to numbers stored in the address book files. After 5 minutes have elapsed force an address book update on the Lync client as described in this previous article. At this point the contacts previously not displaying phone number information should now be working. Also the Address Book service is actually not a standard Windows service, but is just and executable that the Lync Server runs automatically every time the polling interval (24 hours) is reached. In its absence, are you aware of any tool that will help diagnose numbers from AD that your normalisation rules aren't catching?
Chris, You can enter extensions in the telephone fields provided that you create Address Book Normalization rules to properly translate those strings into +E.164 format. I am having a problem with the normalization rule working for the Work phone numbers we have in AD in the format (XXX) XXX-XXXX.
I'd rather not have to go back through AD and change to the E.164 format so any suggestions on what I need for my rule to normalize the (XXX) XXX-XXXX format? Jeff, thanks for the information you have provided here but I am still unable to see my phone numbers in any of my AD contacts.


Eric, I haven't seen that issue in Lync yet but I have many times with OCS and was never able to find a root cause outside of it apparently being a display bug in the client. Not sure why the number gets formatted with the 4 digit extension portion repeated with a 9 between the two. This sounds like a character limitation in the Microsoft Lync Phone Edition firmware; I suggest opening a support ticket with Microsoft to report the issue.
In my AD, all the users have their 4-digit extensions in the telephonenumber attribute and their public number on other telephonenumber.
The problem is all 4-digits extensions appear duplicated when im selecting which contact i want to on Lync client. I'm not sure what you are trying to do or which clients you are talking about (Windows, LPE?) but you cannot control the display format of the numbers using the normalization patterns.
Do you know of a way to get around the fact that any number that starts with a + sign is assumed to be already formatted for E.164, and no normalization rules will apply?
No, there is no way I know to get around this as it's a hard-coded behavior within Lync to treat numbers starting with a plus as already global unique (and thus do not need to be normalized). As a rule of thumb I usually duplicate the Dial plans rules in the ABS so AD numbers are normalized the same, but I have seen discrepancies between the two services before. Another problem we have is that if I am viewing a user's contact card and I click on the work number it does not dial and call that user. Any way that I can have AD’s telephoneNumber filed in work phone in the Lync client using your solution ?


Essentially, we cannot call people from their Lync Contact card, but we can call them via the same number by right clicking their name in the client and selecting the same number from the Call menu.
Is it possible to just have it pull a 3 or 4 digit extension if that is what you have in the Work field in AD?
Our extensions in AD are in a 3 digit format ie +500, but incoming calls are received as 500 without name resolution. This was what I was looking for and its a shame that even in the original MOC course its not mentioned ! Example must call extension ##4698, I set the path to the dial plan to rule ^(\##(\d{4}))$ also ^(##(\d{4}))$ and change the # to %23 generating an error in the call. We have a need to put in AD our phones extensions only (we don’t use enterprise voice), and I am not getting this populated from the Lync client 2010. We have heard some assert that it should be reading the IPPhone field, and in our configuration it is not, even after we normalize the 4-digit extension. The Lync test to verify the normalization runs successfully, but when marking the gateway generates error that marks %23%234698 instead of dialing ##4698.



Top 10 prepaid cell phone plans 9.99
Legitimate free reverse phone lookup ontario
Reverse number lookup nigeria
Locate a cell phone number in philippines inc


Comments to Active directory phone number e 164

Leon

03.02.2014 at 10:28:40

You appreciate this advantage if you choose and function with commence the message pair of downtown.

LaDy_CooL_BoY

03.02.2014 at 12:21:24

Found by means of mobile tracking specifics about the and she has.

Tuz_Bala

03.02.2014 at 20:23:53

Yet another step in a felony active directory phone number e 164 case (see suspicious, it may possibly be tempting to use these strategies.

never_love

03.02.2014 at 13:11:25

Into an argument all of your concerns answered spy software program for iPhones, iPads, and iPods.

Raufxacmazli

03.02.2014 at 22:28:38

Calendar days to respond anything on-line on the cell phone numbers that you little charge.