[cisco-voip] Exchange 2007 SIP and CCM6.0

Matthew Saskin matt at saskin.net
Sat Feb 9 07:13:54 EST 2008


I can't speak to the base exchange side as my exchange admins do that, 
but as for configuring the EXUM side and integrating with CallManager - 
it's a trivial operation.  It took  literally 30 minutes the first time 
for me to get two EXUM servers configured and tied into callmanager in a 
redundant fashion.

-matt

Joel P wrote:
> I have also been approached by several customers who have shown interest in
> E2k7UM instead of upgrading to Unity 5. We have turned them away due to lack
> of experience installing it ourselves.
> But they have taken it upon themselves to price it out and according to them
> it is more cost effective to use E2k7UM. 
> I think M$ will begin to eat away at UnityUM and NortelUM share of the
> market in the next two years.
> Time to renew my E2k7 Certs and take some follow up classes.
>
> Joel P
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Matthew Saskin
> Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 8:10 PM
> To: Scott Voll
> Cc: Corbett Enders; cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Exchange 2007 SIP and CCM6.0
>
> I'd like to hear everyone's views on Unity having more functions than 
> Exchange UM.  Personally, we migrated internally from Unity 4 to 
> Exchange 2007 UM and I think it blows Unity out of the water, 
> hands-down...just my opinion ;)
>
>  From a cost perspective, regardless of any volume licensing discount if 
> you already run Exchange for voicemail, the per user cost is less for 
> EXUM than Unity UM.  Last I checked, Unity UM licenses list at $140 per 
> user.  List pricing for an Exchange enterprise CAL (for UM) is $36 more 
> than a standard CAL, which is required for email anyhow.  Hardware 
> requirements for all intents and purposes are the same, and actual cost 
> for the server software is the same as well.
>
> For MWI, the primary 3rd party product (geomant) costs something like 
> $1000 for the application + $4.50/user without volume discounts, and 
> goes down to < $3/user if you're in the thousands of users range.  The 
> only downside that we have hit is that the Geomant application runs on a 
> single server, so if that box goes down, MWI's stop functioning.
>
> -matt
>
> Scott Voll wrote:
>   
>> Looking from VM only this is true.  But when you look at UM
>>  
>> Exchange = 1 or 2 servers
>> Unity + voice portal + Exchange = 3 servers.
>>  
>> They currently have 1 Exchange server doing Email, voice portal, and 
>> UM.  if they have problems they can add a second server, but thus far 
>> have not had issues.  Where as with Unity and the voice portal you 
>> can't even do it with a single server.and UM for that matter.
>>  
>> Don't get me wrong... I think Unity is more functional but because 
>> they didn't put VM into the budget thinking there old VM was going to 
>> work, and they already had the Exchange server / Cals it was really a 
>> no brainer.
>>  
>> Scott
>>  
>>
>>
>>  
>> On Feb 8, 2008 3:21 PM, Corbett Enders <cenders at homesbyavi.com 
>> <mailto:cenders at homesbyavi.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Well, I'd guess that you need a box for Unity or a box for
>>     Exchange UM,
>>     so that would be a wash.
>>     You'll need an Exchange license or a license for Unity... wash?
>>     You'll need Exchange Enterprise CALs on top of the standard CAL (it is
>>     an additive CAL now, you need both) or you get the CALs for Unity.
>>     Wash?
>>
>>     So in the end, it boils down to functionality.   And I have to think
>>     Unity has more functionality from a pure VOICEMAIL system right
>>     now, but
>>     it won't be long for Microsoft to catch up.
>>
>>     ---------------
>>     Message: 3
>>     Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 16:56:50 -0600
>>     From: "Voice Noob" <voicenoob at gmail.com <mailto:voicenoob at gmail.com>>
>>     Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Exchange 2007 SIP and CCM6.0
>>     To: "Scott Voll" <svoll.voip at gmail.com <mailto:svoll.voip at gmail.com>>
>>     Cc: "Madziarczyk, Jonathan" <JMad at cityofevanston.org
>>     <mailto:JMad at cityofevanston.org>>,
>>            cisco-voip at puck.nether.net <mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
>>     Message-ID:
>>          
>>      <535625f70802081456n3e55c812j7ce3cb63fb0dca5d at mail.gmail.com
>>     <mailto:535625f70802081456n3e55c812j7ce3cb63fb0dca5d at mail.gmail.com>>
>>     Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>>     If you have 800 - 1000 phone you shoul dhave multiple exchange servers
>>     and
>>     one dedicated to the UM role according to microsoft design guides.  So
>>     once
>>     again if you add the price of the additional exchange server
>>     license and
>>     now
>>     the additional x64 server hardware I bet you are not saving much
>>     money.
>>
>>     This does not take into account your specail state pricing.
>>
>>     On Feb 8, 2008 4:49 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     > well the School district loves Exchange for the voice portal vs the
>>     press
>>     > 1 for this that and the other thing.  unless you have a second
>>     server
>>     and
>>     > unity 5.x  which adds $$$ also.  especially on a small SD size of
>>     800-1000
>>     > phones.  and the pricing between UM and VM licenses on Unity is
>>     huge.
>>     >
>>     > Scott
>>     >
>>     > PS>  I use Unity 5.x UM personally ;-)
>>     >
>>     >   On Feb 8, 2008 1:33 PM, Voice Noob <voicenoob at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:voicenoob at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>     >
>>     > > I completely agree with you. I also think that OCS will be a
>>     product
>>     > > that is going to very good after a few years.  The thing is I am
>>     installing
>>     > > these products today and must deploy the best solution for my
>>     customers and
>>     > > a hacked together system that saves them 10% is not in my best
>>     interest.
>>     > >
>>     > >
>>     > > On Feb 8, 2008 3:30 PM, Craig Staffin <craig at staffin.org
>>     <mailto:craig at staffin.org>> wrote:
>>     > >
>>     > > > Voice Noob
>>     > > >
>>     > > > Keep in mind that exchange 07 unified messaging is version 1.
>>     > > >
>>     > > > Give it two years and see how much competition it can give to
>>     Unity.
>>     > > > My guess the way its already going is Unity will be in trouble;
>>     > > >
>>     > > > Just my .02
>>     > > > Craig
>>     > > >
>>     > > >
>>     > > > On Feb 8, 2008 3:15 PM, Voice Noob <voicenoob at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:voicenoob at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>     > > >
>>     > > > > Not everyone has that. So once you purchase the correct
>>     exchange
>>     > > > > CAL, and the MWI software it may not be that much more to just
>>     purchase
>>     > > > > Unity. I don't think Exchange 2007 can compare to Unity in the
>>     number or
>>     > > > > features it has.
>>     > > > >
>>     > > > >
>>     > > > > On Feb 8, 2008 3:11 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:svoll.voip at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>     > > > >
>>     > > > > > School district..... SLA ..... State contract pricing......
>>     Better
>>     > > > > > pricing then Unity ;-)
>>     > > > > >
>>     > > > > >
>>     > > > > > On Feb 8, 2008 1:10 PM, Voice Noob <voicenoob at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:voicenoob at gmail.com>>
>>     wrote:
>>     > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > You have to purchase diffrent Exchange CAL's if you
>>     use the
>>     UM
>>     > > > > > > role so it is going to cost you more $$$ for the correct
>>     Exchange CAL.
>>     > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > On Feb 8, 2008 2:52 PM, Voice Noob
>>     <voicenoob at gmail.com <mailto:voicenoob at gmail.com>>
>>     wrote:
>>     > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > > What third party software are you using?
>>     > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > > On Feb 8, 2008 2:47 PM, Scott Voll
>>     <svoll.voip at gmail.com <mailto:svoll.voip at gmail.com>>
>>     > > > > > > > wrote:
>>     > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > > > I have it in production at one of our School Districts
>>     but
>>     > > > > > > > > with CM 5.1 not 6.x.
>>     > > > > > > > > The MWI doesn't work by default but with a 3rd party
>>     vendor
>>     > > > > > > > > their is software you load on exchange to get that
>>     working.... But the
>>     > > > > > > > > negitive is that you have to enable it on a per box
>>     basis.
>>     > > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > > > Scott
>>     > > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > > > On Feb 8, 2008 8:29 AM, Madziarczyk, Jonathan <
>>     > > > > > > > > JMad at cityofevanston.org
>>     <mailto:JMad at cityofevanston.org>> wrote:
>>     > > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > > > > I'm about to start testing Exchange 2007's new SIP
>>     > > > > > > > > > voicemail option in
>>     > > > > > > > > > conjunction with CCM6.0 in the hopes of that
>>     becoming
>>     my
>>     > > > > > > > > > new VM system
>>     > > > > > > > > > (currently on CallXpress).  Has anyone done this
>>     yet,
>>     or
>>     > > > > > > > > > have any
>>     > > > > > > > > > experience with this?  I've heard there are some MWI
>>     > > > > > > > > > issues, but that
>>     > > > > > > > > > there are 3rd party products to help with that end.
>>     > > > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > > > > Thanks
>>     > > > > > > > > > JM
>>     > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
>>     > > > > > > > > > cisco-voip mailing list
>>     > > > > > > > > > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>>     <mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
>>     > > > > > > > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>     > > > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
>>     > > > > > > > > cisco-voip mailing list
>>     > > > > > > > > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>>     <mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
>>     > > > > > > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>     > > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > > >
>>     > > > > > >
>>     > > > > >
>>     > > > >
>>     > > > > _______________________________________________
>>     > > > > cisco-voip mailing list
>>     > > > > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net <mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
>>     > > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>     > > > >
>>     > > > >
>>     > > >
>>     > > >
>>     > > > --
>>     > > > Craig Staffin
>>     > > > Craig at staffin.org <mailto:Craig at staffin.org>
>>     > > > (H) 262-437-7313
>>     > > > (C) 262-613-6003
>>     > >
>>     > >
>>     > >
>>     >
>>     -------------- next part --------------
>>     An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>     URL:
>>
>>     
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20080208/1f3bb3
>   
>>     a8/attachment.html
>>
>>     
> <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20080208/1f3bb3a8/
> attachment.html>
>   
>>     ------------------------------
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     cisco-voip mailing list
>>     cisco-voip at puck.nether.net <mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
>>     https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>
>>
>>     End of cisco-voip Digest, Vol 52, Issue 61
>>     ******************************************
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     cisco-voip mailing list
>>     cisco-voip at puck.nether.net <mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
>>     https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>   
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>   



More information about the cisco-voip mailing list