[cisco-voip] C200 co-residency

Wed Jul 6 00:18:01 EDT 2011

It does look like the math works out, I just know from asking product
management about it that they still classify CUEAC as 3rd party since
it's an ARC product.  I'll update with what I find.

-nick

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 11:28 PM, Paul <asobihoudai at yahoo.com> wrote:
> according to cueac release notes....
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/voicesw/ps6789/ps7046/ps7282/data_sheet_c78-520987.html
>
>
> You can reduce total cost of ownership by deploying the Cisco Unified Enterprise Attendant Console server in a VMware ESXi 4.0 or 4.1 environment on a Cisco UCS B200 M1, UCS C200 M2 or UCS C210 M1, components of the Cisco Unified Computing System™.
> Note: This feature is supported only with Cisco Unified Communications Manager 8.0(1) and later.
>
> BTW, there are OVAs for the latest CUEAC even though the wiki hasn't been updated to point this fact out...
>
> sooo.... CUCM 1k users needs two vCPUs, CUEAC requires one vCPU, 500 user CUC needs two vCPUs (one for hypervisor),  CUPS needs one vCPU, and UCCX 100 agents needs two vCPUs which is exactly eight cores which is exactly what UCS-C200M2-VCD2 has in it.
>
> For memory...
> CUCM 4GB
> CUEAC 2GB
> CUC 2GB...4 if 8.6.1a
> CUPS 2GB
> CCX 4GB
>
> which is only 14GB which is much less than the 24GB installed in the box.
>
> So from where I stand, it *still* looks feasible to put all *five* applications on one of the two C200M2s in my lap.
>
> Also it still looks possible to install CUCM 1k + CUC 5k on one C200M2 because it doesn't explicitly state against the mix and match of the listed supported OVAs so long as resources aren't oversubscribed.
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Nick Matthews <matthnick at gmail.com>
> To: Paul <asobihoudai at yahoo.com>
> Cc: Ed Leatherman <ealeatherman at gmail.com>; cisco <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 5, 2011 7:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] C200 co-residency
>
> A few things:
> -I don't believe we support co-residency with CUEAC yet.
> -Almost positive the information or communication was incorrect about
> 5 apps on 1 C200
> -I don't think the higher user count OVAs are supported on the C200
> based on this web page:
> http://docwiki.cisco.com/wiki/Supported_VM_configurations_%28including_OVA/OVF_Templates%29
>
> If you mix and match the OVAs on that web page you should be fine, but
> there doesn't appear to be other ones you can use.
>
> This seems to be pretty pertinent to your question as well:
> http://docwiki.cisco.com/wiki/Sizing_Guidelines#Application_Co-residency_Support_and_Server
>
> For your scenario it looks like you would need 3 C200's because of EAC.
>
> -nick
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Paul <asobihoudai at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Hmmm....so one of those vCPUs must be allocated to the hypervisor. I did a double take when you mentioned that bit about the requirement of having one vCPU free for connection. So it appears in *that* case we would unable to do a WAN-split cluster with CUCM, CCX, CUPS, CUC, CUEAC on one C200 box, and the same configuration on the other box without EAC *despite* the fact that PDI Helpdesk stating that it *would* be kosher.
>>
>> Now I -really- want an answer from one of the Cisco folks to be clear once and for all.
>>
>> This is for UCS-C200M2-VCD2 x 2...which I guess doesn't matter since I just want the answer about shoving five applications onto one C200M2 box.
>>
>> 1. is it okay to mix and match the OVAs on a C200M2 or is it *only* supported in those listed configurations?
>> 2. is it okay to put CUCM, CCX, CUPS, CUC, and CUEAC all on the same C200M2 or am I not? This is for 250 phones so all the smallest OVAs.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Nick Matthews <matthnick at gmail.com>
>> To: Ed Leatherman <ealeatherman at gmail.com>
>> Cc: Paul <asobihoudai at yahoo.com>; cisco <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 5, 2011 5:02 PM
>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] C200 co-residency
>>
>> I would say as long as nothing is oversubscribed you should be fine.
>> In your example if the CUCM 1k is 2 vCPUs and the Ucxn is 4 vCPUs you
>> would be fine.  But if you tried adding another CUCM 1k that would put
>> you at 8 and Ucxn is only supported when there's a free vCPU.  This is
>> just for an example, I think the 1k CUCM's might be 1 vCPU.
>>
>> I believe the reason we can get 4 on there today is because one of
>> those templates only really needs 1 vCPU.
>>
>> -nick
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 7:34 PM, Ed Leatherman <ealeatherman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> FWIW, I read it as only those specific scenarios are supported.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Paul <asobihoudai at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> per
>>>>
>>>> http://docwiki.cisco.com/wiki/Unified_Communications_Virtualization_Sizing_Guidelines
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I see...
>>>>
>>>> Note that the tested reference configuration for UCS C200 M2 is sized for co-residency at a lower capacity per VM than UCS B200 or C210 so only supports a subset of Virtual Machine templates.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For UCS C200, you must align with these rules:
>>>>     * The only supported virtual machine OVA templates are:
>>>>     * CUCM - Unified Communications Manager 1000 users
>>>>     * CER - Emergency Responder 12,000 users
>>>>     * CUC or UCxn - Unity Connection 500 users, 1000 users and 5000 users
>>>>     * CUP - Unified Presence 1000 users
>>>>     * CUCCX - Unified Contact Center Express 100 agents
>>>>     * Other unlisted OVA templates are not supported on C200 as they are sized too big.
>>>>     * If C200 is used for Unified Communications Manager Business Edition 6000 then you must follow its co-residency rules.
>>>>     * Otherwise at this time the following co-residency scenarios are supported:
>>>>     * Four VMs: CUCM 1000 users + CUC 1000 users + CUP 1000 users + CUCCX 100 users (the scenario used by Unified Communications Manager Business Edition 6000 )
>>>>     * Up to four VMs: 1 to 4 CUC of various user sizes provided you don't over-subscribe any physical server resources as described previously.
>>>>     * Four VMs: 4 CUP 1000 users
>>>>     * Four VMs: 4 CUCM 1000 users
>>>>     * Three VMs: 3 CUCCX 100 users
>>>>     * Also, any CUCM VM may be substituted with a CER 12,000 user VM in the above scenarios.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which leaves this prescient question:
>>>>
>>>> Are we good to just mix and match any of those OVAs on one C200 so long as we're not oversubscribing resources or is it ONLY the co-residency scenarios listed that are supported? E.g., cucm 1k users + cuc 5k users on one box?
>>>>
>>>> What's the official word? The wording of this documentation is a little bit vague and could use a little clarification. . .
>>>>
>>>> Has anybody else deployed C200s with a mix/match of those OVAs?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>
>