[cisco-voip] C-series servers

[Matthew Saskin]

Awesome...learn something new every day.  I presume one still needs to have
UCS manager running within a B-series chassis in order to manage said
C-series servers?

Matthew Saskin
msaskin at gmail.com
203-253-9571



On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 6:29 PM, Mike Wilusz (miwilusz)
<miwilusz at cisco.com>wrote:

> Note:  UCS C-series management support was added to UCS Manager v1.4(1).
>
>
>
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/unified_computing/ucs/release/notes/OL_24086.html#wp56822
>
>
>
> -mike
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] *On Behalf Of *Matthew Saskin
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 26, 2011 6:11 PM
> *To:* Ed Leatherman
> *Cc:* Cisco VOIP
>
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-voip] C-series servers
>
>
>
> Ed - C series servers can only be managed separately, no UCS manager.
>
> For what it's worth, I've got clients ranging from 2 x UCS C210's in a
> small environment (CUCM + UCXN) to ones with multiple B-series chassis
> running large CUCM + UCCE deployments.  All are happy, and none have
> experienced any support issues.  In fact, one has turned UCS into their de
> facto blade hardware, displacing HP.  It's a stable platform, and for most
> new deployments, hard to cost justify still using MCS servers.  As a point
> of reference (based on list price), a C210 is only a touch more expensive
> when you include VMware licensing than an MCS-7845, however you can run 2-4
> apps instead of 1.  If you look at the maintenance costs, UC
> Support/smartnet on a UCS C210 costs about 30-50% of what it costs on an
> MCS-7845, which is another compelling reason.  Reduce server count by 50%+
> and reduce ongoing maintenance by 50%+ per chassis = big-time savings.
>
> To my understanding there is a single TAC support team, at least for RTP,
> that is responsible for most/all UC on UCS tickets, regardless of what
> component they are related to; UCS, Nexus, or UC Apps - this helps to keep
> the ball in one court if/when it comes down to support issues.  As long as
> everything is deployed per the UC on UCS guidelines, all should be well.
>
> Matthew Saskin
> msaskin at gmail.com
> 203-253-9571
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 8:04 AM, Ed Leatherman <ealeatherman at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Thats basically what we're planning, except CER instead of CM. Nice.
>
> Are you using UCS Manager for these servers or are they manageable
> individually?
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Carter, Bill <bcarter at sentinel.com>
> wrote:
> > We are implementing this now. Two C-Series servers. Server 1 has
> > UCM-Publisher, UCxN, UCCX, Server 2 has UCM-Subscriber, UCxN, UCCX.
> >
> > Works really well. Also found significant performance improvement when
> > doing upgrades...Fast!
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Matthew
> > Loraditch
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 3:24 PM
> > To: Ed Leatherman; Cisco VOIP
> > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] C-series servers
> >
> > Well I've got a C200M2 on order for someone. Not sure that I'll be able
> > to give you much helpful reaction given my install timeline length but
> > if you still need info once I've got her up and running I'll be glad to
> > give some.
> >
> >
> > Matthew Loraditch, CCVP, CCNA, CCDA
> > 1965 Greenspring Drive
> > Timonium, MD 21093
> > support at heliontechnologies.com
> > (p) (410) 252-8830
> > (F) (443) 541-1593
> >
> > Visit us at www.heliontechnologies.com
> > Support Issue? Email support at heliontechnologies.com for fast assistance!
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ed Leatherman
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 4:19 PM
> > To: Cisco VOIP
> > Subject: [cisco-voip] C-series servers
> >
> > Anyone deployed or running any UC apps on the UCS C210 servers? Any
> > thoughts or opinions? Do you like the hardware better than a HP or IBM?
> > Has running on VMWare caused any support headaches?
> >
> > I'm planning to migrate Unity Connection to it and also looking at this
> > as an option for UCCX as our current hardware is EOL soon. Since it
> > would be virtualized i can use the server that will have the connection
> > VM to also host one of the UCCX nodes, which will help out price-wise.
> >
> > --
> > Ed Leatherman
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Ed Leatherman
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110227/ed425285/attachment.html>