[cisco-voip] Upgrade Hardware Question

[Ted Nugent]

Yes it will work but don't do it...! I've got a project starting next week
to fix exactly this problem. This particular customer took it upon
themselves last year to upgrade their entire IPT environment and in the
process they juggled all their servers around. They've since been having
chronic Unity issues that have been going on for months now (very likely
unrelated to the server swap). They've been working with TAC over the last
couple months and since TAC can't seem to figure out the issue they've asked
that all servers go back to the appropriate platform before they will
proceed with additional troubleshooting. This was obviously not TAC first
response, they will work with you the best that they can HOWEVER they can,
and in this case have, asked to retask the servers back to their appropriate
roles. IPC for CM, ECS for UNITY and CCX for IPCC.

My $0.02
Ted


On 10/25/07, Adam <cisco at adman.net> wrote:
>
> I have a customer that has the following environment:
>
> * CallMananger 4.1(3) running on two identical MCS-7835-H1-IPC1. IPCC 4.0(4)
> also runs coresident on the Publisher.
> * Unity UM 4.0 (3) running in a failover configuration on a as the primary
> MCS-7835H-3.0-ECS1 and a UNITY-SVR7837-1A as the secondary.
>
> We would like migrate to CallManager 6.0 and Unity 4.2, while replacing
> the Unity hardware and ordering a new standalone UCCX server at the same
> time. In order to have the least impact on up time we thought it would be
> ideal to install the CallManagers onto new hardware. What would be the best
> way to achieve this. I know that I should order an ECS1 server for the new
> Unity boxes, but these are probably the servers that I will actually end up
> using for the CallManagers. I would like to retask the two MCS-7835-H1-IPC1
> servers as the Unity servers after the CallManagers have been upgraded, but
> I'm not sure where I'm left from a licensing standpoint. Will I be able to
> obtain and use a Unity platform preparation disk on these servers? Would
> these be TAC supported? Any insight is appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Adam
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20071025/d78bad70/attachment-0001.html