[cisco-voip] UCM <-> Gateway: H323 vs. SIP

[Mark Holloway]

The choice of SIP or H.323 is personal preference.  In my opinion SIP is much simpler to troubleshoot.  There is less dialog and call setup times are quicker.  I think you are going to find more non-Cisco related server-based applications rely on SIP while Cisco continues to implement SIP more frequently between core UC applications. Someday you will most likely ditch your TDM services and move to SIP Trunking. In that case you will already have the skills needed to configure and support CUBE.  CUBE is very powerful with the ability to perform SIP Header Manipulation if you ever needed it.  

There is a white paper on Cisco's web site discussing differences between H.323 and SIP.  It is not very detailed but may provide some value.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk652/tk701/technologies_white_paper09186a0080092947.shtml


On Feb 14, 2010, at 3:58 PM, Carter, Bill wrote:

> 
> I am preparing for a UCM 7.1(3) install. The deployment includes Zoom
> CallREC call recording. We will use SPANless recording which utilizes a
> SIP trunk between UCM and Zoom. A majority of the calls will be
> recorded. I am wondering if there are advantages to using SIP from UCM
> to the Gateways. I haven't studied the UCM/SIP integration with gateways
> since studying for the old CCIE Voice with CM 4.1.
> 
> I am looking for CCO documents comparing H323 and SIP as it relates to
> UCM features and functionality, and any experiences from the community
> using SIP for the UCM to Voice Gateway connections.
> 
> Thanks much
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip