[cisco-voip] rehosting SRST license

[Scott Voll]

from what I understand.... the x9xx routers enforce licensing where as the
x8xx did not.  So it does not surprise me that you would need to buy
licensing since the G1's where a piece of paper where as the G2's are a
license key.

Just my 2 cents.

Scott

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Leslie Meade <lmeade at salientnetworks.com>wrote:

> This is what my co worker was told
>
>
>
>
> Thank you so much for your patience. After researching your question
> concerning SRST license transfer from Cisco 2800 to Cisco 2900, I have
> determined that no, you cannot transfer the SRST license from Cisco2800 to
> Cisco2900. You can transfer from G2 router to G2 router but not with G1 to
> G2 router. You would then need to get 75 new SRST licenses for the
> Cisco2900 according to Licensing. This is also available on SRST Q&A,
> please see link below:
>
>
>
> Q. If I am upgrading my Cisco Integrated Services Router (ISR) from
> Generation 1 (G1) to Generation 2 (G2), can I reuse my existing SRST
> licenses?
>
> A. No. New licenses are needed.
>
>
>
> Cisco Unified Survivable Remote Site Telephony (SRST) and Cisco Unified
> Enhanced SRST (E SRST)
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/voicesw/ps6788/vcallcon/ps2169/prod_qas0900aecd8028d113.html
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Ted Nugent <tednugent73 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Pretty sure you need partners access, if you have it here's the link.
>>
>>
>> http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/sell/technology/ipc/uc_tech_readiness.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>wrote:
>>
>>>  Is the ordering guide public? Can you provide a link?
>>>
>>> And why haven't they updated the references to 2800 to 2900. ;)
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone...
>>>
>>> "There's no place like 127.0.0.1"
>>>
>>> On Apr 17, 2012, at 3:32 PM, Ted Nugent <tednugent73 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>   You got 2 different answers from the licensing team at Cisco??? Say
>>> it isn't so!!!!
>>>
>>> </sarcasm>
>>>
>>> This is from the 8.5 ordering guide.
>>>
>>>  Customers can migrate Cisco Unified Communications Manager Express or
>>> SRST Feature License
>>> from one router to another for the same number of phones licensed. For
>>> example a customer currently
>>> using a Cisco 2621XM with FL-SRST-SMALL license for 24 phones can apply
>>> this same license on a
>>> new Cisco 2851 for up to 25 phones. As the Cisco 2851 supports 100
>>> phones, if the customer wants to
>>> support more than 25 phones, they need to purchase an additional FL-SRST
>>> license to make up the
>>> different between the 24 phones license and the 100 supported.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Leslie Meade <
>>> lmeade at salientnetworks.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Can any one tell me if I can rehome my 250 seat SRST license on my isr
>>>> g1 to a g2?
>>>>
>>>> I have logged a ticket with licenseing who pushed it off to tac and
>>>> they say yes, but my co-worker also did it and was told no.
>>>>
>>>> Leslie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Salient Service
>>>> 760.930.2636, support at salientnetworks.com
>>>> Request Line (moves adds and changes only)
>>>> 760.930.2699, macs at salientnetworks.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Salient Service
> 760.930.2636, support at salientnetworks.com
> Request Line (moves adds and changes only)
> 760.930.2699, macs at salientnetworks.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120417/139fb5ac/attachment.html>