[cisco-voip] Is anyone using using a non-Cisco approved server forCUCM?

[Omori, Hiroshi]

Wow, I wasn't expecting any replies until the morning.  Thanks for the info.  Good to know I wasn't the only one who received a quote for double the price of the Cisco spec'd server.

Hiroshi

-----Original Message-----
From: Lelio Fulgenzi [mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca]
Sent: Wed 2/18/2009 6:15 PM
To: Ed Leatherman
Cc: Omori, Hiroshi; cisco voip; James Liakos
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Is anyone using using a non-Cisco approved server forCUCM?
 
I think we can all agree that that HP badged servers are cheaper. But I think the original request was for non-CCS approved HP boxes. The current discontinued MCS-7845v2 specs are about double the cost of a current spec'ed model. My HP rep couldn't believe I was buying this over the current specs at double the cost. So basically, double the cost and at half the performance. :( 

--- 
Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A. 
Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1 
(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN) 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
"Bad grammar makes me [sic]" - Tshirt 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Leatherman" <ealeatherman at gmail.com> 
To: "James Liakos" <jliakos at csr.com.au> 
Cc: "Hiroshi Omori" <HOmori at cts.ucla.edu>, "cisco voip" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net> 
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 9:03:01 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Is anyone using using a non-Cisco approved server forCUCM? 

I'm getting ready to replace 3 of my 7845's that are going 
end-of-support with HP's. MUCH cheaper. 

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 8:45 PM, Liakos, James <jliakos at csr.com.au> wrote: 
> Where I use to work we never bought Cisco MS Server's but instead only the 
> HP equivalent. 
> 
> Never had a problem. 
> 
> Yes like you said, much cheaper ! 
> 
> 
> 
> JL. 
> 
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net 
> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Omori, Hiroshi 
> Sent: Thursday, 19 February 2009 12:37 
> To: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net 
> Subject: [cisco-voip] Is anyone using using a non-Cisco approved server 
> forCUCM? 
> 
> 
> 
> In these times of shrinking budgets, I was wondering if anyone is using a 
> non-Cisco approved server for the CUCM? 
> 
> 
> 
> Cisco and HP created a part number, 470064-887, which is equivalent to the 
> MCS 7845H2. It's still available from HP but it looks like it has a 
> discontinued CPU(5140) and the RAID controller is a P400/256 instead of a 
> P400/512. 
> 
> 
> 
> I received a quote for a HP DL-380 G5 server that has a newer CPU and RAID 
> controller that is almost half the price of the Cisco "approved" 
> configuration. 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure the CUCM would run fine, in fact we're running a 5 server 
> cluster on HP DL-380 G5 servers using the E5345 CPU's in our test lab but I 
> wanted to see if anyone has encountered any problems. 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! 
> 
> 
> 
> Hiroshi Omori 
> 
> Network Engineer 
> 
> UCLA - University of California, Los Angeles 
> 
> Communications Technology Services 
> 
> 741 Charles Young Drive South 
> 
> Building CSB1, 2nd floor 
> 
> Los Angeles, Ca. 90095 
> 
> 
> 
> (310) 206-3700 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> cisco-voip mailing list 
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net 
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip 
> 
> 



-- 
Ed Leatherman 
Assistant Director, Voice Services 
West Virginia University 
Telecommunications and Network Operations 
_______________________________________________ 
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/20090218/78d3ba70/attachment.html>