[cisco-voip] Unity Failover across WAN

[Joel Perez]

Im doing something similar for one of my customers. They currently have a
20Mb MetroE link for internet access and a 20Mb MetroE for site to site, I
warned them about the amount of bandwidth needed. They prefer to saturate
the Wan link than not have any VM at all for their remote site.
A pretty good guide which is what i used when I set it a while back is here:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/voicesw/ps556/products_tech_note09186a00807f8b70.shtml

Its for Cm 4.x but it should still apply for newer releases.


On 2/5/08, Adam Blomfield <adman at adman.net> wrote:
>
> I have a customer that is implementing a DR site across a 20mb/s MPLS
> network and we are trying to work out what voice services we can make
> redundant. I know that we can cluster CUCM server across a WAN link of that
> size, but according to the Unity Design Guides we shouldn't even consider
> trying to attempt Unity Failover without 100 or 1000mb/s. Is this accurate?
> Those requirements seem huge! Is there any way to try and provide a
> redundant Unity box across a network connection like this? We are
> considering just having a standalone Unity box over there that can split the
> mailbox load with the existing server, as well as having the Call Handlers
> set up on both of them so in the event of a failure the VM profile can be
> changed on the CTI ports to fail a main number over to the second server to
> allow calls to still roll in to the Call Handler. Does this make sense, or
> is there a better way to do this?
>
> -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/20080205/f46c4722/attachment.html