Should CDRs that contain details of connection to a conference bridge (eg. have the bxxxxxx string in them) be considered as valid records?

As background our software is call logging\billing and currently we disregard these records - eg. they would not appear in our reports. Im sure that when we did the Cisco testing that we were in fact advised to ignore these records.

Can anyone confirm?

Thanks for your response, i understand what you are saying.

We did the IVT testing some years ago now and i thought in order to pass we had to actually ignore the conference call CDRs that referenced the conference bridge (those with a b00393... string). I thought a conference call was represented by ordinary CDRs (ordinary as in containing the actual involved parties), plus there were then additional CDRs for each party involved which shows the conference bridge number (eg. b0239390.. etc).

It was my understanding that these additional CDRs did not need to be included as they could in fact contain duplicate information to the information already recorded in the other CDRs.

thanks for your assistance

A UCM ad-hoc conference is a hub-and-spoke topology, with each endpoint having a separate active call into a central conferencing resource. Therefore CDRs from each endpoint to the bridge device reflect what happened and are valid from that perspective.

These phone->bridge CDRs contain unique information that is needed to model/interpret the actual call legs that were created during the scenario.

Additional discussion, including a scenario walkthrough with detailed CDR data is available in the CDR Admin Guide: http://developer.cisco.com/web/sxml/docs