[cisco-voip] Unity UM talking to a remote Exchange server across WAN

[Matthew Saskin]

I've tried the same thing at about 250ms RTT...let's just say my remote 
exchange server was not a happy camper :)

As much as I preach following the guidelines, do you have a lab 
environment you can test something like this in (with some device to 
simulate latency)?

-matt

Karl Whitson wrote:
> Voice Voob,
>  
> Thanks for the reply.  I agree with you and I always preach to my 
> customers to follow the design guides.  This was a last minute "find" 
> that everyone forgot to mention in the presales cycle and I am just 
> looking for a quick way of getting them online until a more permanent 
> (and correct) solution can be implemented.  I hate to have this company 
> all on Cisco Unified Communications except this one remote site.
>  
> Karl Whitson
> CMB Technologies
> DID:  508.422.8413
> Cell:  603.930.4189
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Voice Noob [mailto:voicenoob at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Thu 3/20/2008 9:19 AM
> *To:* Karl Whitson
> *Cc:* cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] Unity UM talking to a remote Exchange server 
> across WAN
> 
> I would recommend following the design guides. I have worked on several 
> customers where if the initial installer would have followed the SRND 
> they wouldn't need me to hire me to solve their problems.
> 
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 8:09 AM, Karl Whitson <KWhitson at cmbtec.com 
> <mailto:KWhitson at cmbtec.com>> wrote:
> 
>     All,
>      
>     I am looking for recommendations for an issue I am having.
>      
>     Scenario:
>     Unity 5.0 UM server at HQ site talking to Exchange 2007 Partner
>     server.  Users homed on 2007 server as well as an additional
>     Exchange 2003 server at HQ.  These users function correctly and
>     everything is great.
>     I also have a remote site that has an Exchange 2003 server in the
>     same AD domain.  Unity UM at HQ can not deliver voicemails to users
>     homed on that remote server.  TAC states that the reason is that
>     MAPI is timing out to this remote Exchange server.  Extended pings
>     show an average of 40 - 50 ms response times.  According to the
>     design guide, MAPI requires less than 10 ms response times.  Bottom
>     line is TAC's recommendation is a Unity server next to any Exchange
>     server that homes user's mailboxes.  I see that in the design guide
>     and can appreciate that, but this is an expensive undertaking for a
>     site that only has 20 users on that remote Exchange server.
>      
>     So my question is does anyone have any alternate suggestions, or
>     working scenario of this setup?  What are my options?
>      
>     1.  Unity UM server at remote location with networking to HQ Unity.
>     2.  Move remote Exchange server to HQ and force users to access
>     Exchange over WAN.
>     3.  Move remote user's mailboxes to HQ Exchange server.
>     4.  Any others?
>      
>     Any advice or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
>      
>     Karl Whitson
>     CMB Technologies
>     DID:  508.422.8413
>     Cell:  603.930.4189
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     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