[cisco-voip] CUCM 8.6 hardware

[Nate VanMaren]

Plan B would be a C Series box.  That was our plan A, even thought the datacenter guys have B series infrastucture.  We needed a separate fault domain.

-Nate
________________________________________
From: Erick [ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 6:17 PM
To: Nate VanMaren
Cc: Lelio Fulgenzi; cisco-voip
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.6 hardware

I've been asked to come up with a plan    B in case the funding for our ucs chassis and B series doesn't get approved.

It is the only reason I even consider this type of deployment.

On Jan 17, 2012, at 4:49 PM, Nate VanMaren <VanMarenNP at ldschurch.org> wrote:

> www.cisco.com/go/swonly.
>
> If you look at the IBM list, it shows the equivalent Cisco Part number
>
> MCS-7845-I3-ECS1 is still on the cisco price list at $24,000.  I cannot find an EOS notice for this platform.  Cisco did EOS all HP MCSes, meaning you can't buy one with a cisco label on it.
>
> That being said, both the HP and IBM bare metal offerings are old.  We just got our first bunch of UCS servers to do UC on.  I can't believe I resisted it.  VMWare is so much better than bare metal.
>
> -Nate
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Erick Wellnitz
> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 2:08 PM
> To: Lelio Fulgenzi
> Cc: cisco-voip
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.6 hardware
>
> I'm getting conflicting information from someone at Cisco is all.
> They told me they aren't selling MCS servers any longer.
>
>
> On 1/17/12, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca> wrote:
>> did it not provide the answers you were looking for? is it not up to date?
>>
>> ---
>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
>> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
>> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (ANNU)
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
>> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Erick Wellnitz" <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
>> To: "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
>> Cc: "cisco-voip" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 3:46:32 PM
>> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.6 hardware
>>
>> I've spent more time looking at that document than I care to think about.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/17/12, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca> wrote:
>>> Pretty sure they are. Here are some ref docs
>>>
>>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/voicesw/ps6790/ps5748/ps37
>>> 8/prod_brochure0900aecd8062a4f9.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
>>> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
>>> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (ANNU)
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> ^ Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it.
>>> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Erick Wellnitz" <ewellnitzvoip at gmail.com>
>>> To: "cisco-voip" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 3:30:38 PM
>>> Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.6 hardware
>>>
>>> Quick question as I think I've gone and confused myself.
>>>
>>> Are tehre still options wit hCM 8.6 for non-virtualized environments?
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
>
> 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.
>
>