[cisco-voip] CUCM 8.5 integration with Exchange 2010 for Voice mail

[bill at hitechconnection.net]

So I still don’t see a compelling reason to tell a customer not to go with
Exchange 2010 and dump Unity / Unity Connection if they already own the
E-CAL for exchange 2010 as part of their EA agreement with Microsoft? To
tell them they have more nobs to turn is not going to go very far. I am
looking for real technical limitations of Exchange 2010 Vs. Unity
Connection.




On February 23, 2012 at 5:03 PM Nate VanMaren <VanMarenNP at ldschurch.org>
wrote:

> It’s not very bad at all.  But Unity Connection 8.5+ is a much more full
featured voicemail system, and you get nice single inbox.  There are a lot
more knobs in Connection to control how stuff works.
>
> Just depends on the needs.
>
> From: bill at hitechconnection.net [mailto:bill at hitechconnection.net]
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 2:14 PM
> To: Jason Aarons (AM); Nate VanMaren; Gr
> Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.5 integration with Exchange 2010 for
Voice mail
>
>
>
>
> So beside these two things why is the Exchange 2010 UM so bad? I am
having a hard time from a competitive standpoint convincing someone NOT to
dump unity  / unity connection and move directly to Exchange 2010 UM when
they have the E-CAL already as part of their enterprise agreement.
>
>
>
> On February 17, 2012 at 5:02 PM Nate VanMaren
<VanMarenNP at ldschurch.org<mailto:VanMarenNP at ldschurch.org>> wrote:
>
> > Yea there isn’t really “ports” that you have to worry about on the SIP
integrations, just max number of calls.
> >
> > You will still need a VM pilot and profile, and then a route pattern
that points to the sip trunk that is pointed at exchange UM.
> >
> > http://www.agileit.com/Blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=820
> >
> > http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=13591
> >
> >
> > From: Gr [mailto:grccie at gmail.com]<mailto:[mailto:grccie at gmail.com]>
> > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 3:00 PM
> > To: Jason Aarons (AM); Nate VanMaren
> > Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.5 integration with Exchange 2010 for
Voice mail
> >
> > Thanks Nate, Jason! Valuable information, I will keep this in mind.
> >
> > Another question is we just create voice mail pilot in cucm and route
it to sip trunk and then in exchange 2010 we create  voice mail pilot and
the actual voice mail ports?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > GR
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On 18/02/2012, at 4:35 AM, "Jason Aarons (AM)"
<jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com<mailto:jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com<mailto:jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com%3cmailto:jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>>>
wrote:
> > I think I understand that Exchange 2010 has a crappy sip stack.  Good
info. <lol>
> >
> > From:
cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net%3cmailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>>
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]<mailto:[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]><mailto:[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]>
On Behalf Of Nate VanMaren
> > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 11:03 AM
> > To: gr11;
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net%3cmailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.5 integration with Exchange 2010 for
Voice mail
> >
> >
> > Two things off the top of my head.
> >
> >
> > 1.       Exchange has a crappy sip stack.  So you have to use a MTP on
the SIP trunk because it won’t deal with RTP source/destination changes in
a session.  Like when someone does a supervised transfer to voicemail.
> >
> > 2.      Exchange has a crappy sip stack.  So if you want correct caller
name on the voicemail on call transferred to voicemail, you have to run the
transfer through an app that waits for the transferee to complete the
transfer to send the call to exchange.
> >
> > Voicemail preview takes a lot of hardware.  I think our boxes are quad
core with 8/16gb of ram and 4-5 calls will max out the CPU.
> >
> > -Nate
> >
> > From:
cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net%3cmailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>>
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]<mailto:[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]><mailto:[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net]>
On Behalf Of gr11
> > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 5:17 PM
> > To:
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net%3cmailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
> > Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.5 integration with Exchange 2010 for Voice
mail
> >
> > Hi List,
> >
> > I am providing the CUCM8.5 integration with exchange 2010 for a
customer for their voice mail needs. The customer has an old unity server
that will be decommissioned and voice mail functionality will be provided
by exchange 2010 UM.
> >
> > Anyone who has done this before, any pitfalls or things to be aware of?
We are going to use a third party gateway for SIP Trunk termination to/from
CUCM and exchange
> >
> > Thanks,
> > GR
> >
> >
> > NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any
unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you
are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email
and destroy all copies of the original message.
> >
> >
> >
> > itevomcid
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120224/67f3286a/attachment.html>