[cisco-voip] CUCM 9.0 Demo License?

[Mark Holloway]

With the Acme Packet Session Director (SBC) now having Active Directory integration, the Active Directory, Lync and <insert IP PBX here> integration is killer for SIP Trunking.  Lync no longer needs to be treated like a Mobility device as the Acme SD acts more like a session management device at the top layer of the SIP network. The flexibility of local-policy based routing on the SBC using LDAP queries opens things up quite a bit. You can have a policy that takes an incoming call phones that may be a desk phone, query AD, and if the user also has a Lync number, route the call to Lync instead (if desired). If Lync is down hard, re-route the call to the IP PBX phone (if desired) or re-route the call back to the PSTN to the user's "mobile" number...if the mobile field is populated in Active Directory and has the next precedence in the local-policy.  The flexibility is huge...and this is just one example. I'm looking forward to Acme's Lync Contact Center integration.. 


On Sep 10, 2012, at 9:46 AM, Matthew Berry wrote:

> I'm naturally predisposed to Cisco products, but one this Microsoft has is its tight integration with Active Directory.  I'm on a Jabber for Everyone project right now and the biggest pain points I've experienced is (a) Cisco's inability to effectively manage end-user permissions via security groups in AD and (b) the requirement to have a softball call in place in order to screen-share (BFCP, provided by CUCM in on-prem).
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Matthew Berry
> CCIE Voice #26721
> Sr. Unified Communications Engineer  | CDW
> Phone: +1.763.592.5987 (single number reach)
> 
> From: <Heim>, Dennis <Dennis.Heim at wwt.com>
> Date: Monday, September 10, 2012 8:10 AM
> To: Mark Holloway <mh at markholloway.com>, Ted Nugent <tednugent73 at gmail.com>
> Cc: "cisco-voip at puck.nether.net" <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 9.0 Demo License?
> 
> I suspect that MS and Cisco will contain to be more of less feature parity between each other. The question between choosing Cisco and Microsoft, is it better to put some of the power in hardware or do you put it all in software…remember time is relative ;-).
>  
> Dennis Heim
> Sr. UC Engineer
> World Wide Technology
> Office: 314.212.1814
> Email: dennis.heim at wwt.com
> www.wwt.com
>  
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark Holloway
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 9:06 AM
> To: Ted Nugent
> Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 9.0 Demo License?
>  
> You wouldn't believe how many customers I visit that are planning to phase out their current deployment and replace it with Lync. It's not something I would personally consider today, but having a big-picture view of the customer landscape, it's pretty scary to see what's coming down the pipeline.  When Lync 2013 is GA with H.264 video support and a mobile client that can make/receive calls, that is going to shake things up quite a bit. 
>  
> On Sep 10, 2012, at 1:44 AM, Ted Nugent wrote:
> 
> 
> you still have NFR however for resellers with big labs that doesn't help much because the major offices get them and us little guys get the shaft.... I've heard they only get 3 per org (at least that's what I was told when I asked for one).... for those of us that have small office labs we're stuck. we need to reinstall every 90 days (6 months if we get the eval lic) but that's stall aggravating. Just when we get our lab where we need them to be we have to reinstall...? sure it's in line with other competitors but those other competitors don't require 6+ servers make make up their portfolio. Cisco's licensing will be (and is currently) the bane of their product lines and that's from someone that's watching it unfold in the field.... There isn't a day that goes by that I don't hear a customer bitching about licensing!! I know Cisco is TRYING to make licensing easier for the end user but screwing the partners at the same time is really the wrong way of doign it..... Just sayin...
> 
> 
>  
> On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 5:53 PM, gwenzit <gwenzit at gmail.com> wrote:
> all gone.... believe me partners like me were dumbfounded and pissed off
>  
>  
> Sent from my Galaxy S®III
> 
> Mark Holloway <mh at markholloway.com> wrote:
> Bummer, no more free 150 non-expiring DLU's when installing CUCM 9 in VMWare. 
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> On Sep 6, 2012, at 10:19 PM, Pavan Katta wrote:
> 
> 
> I hit send too fast.
> From what I saw, it does expire in a couple of days( I think 90 days) but the demo license does come preinstalled.
> 
> Mark Holloway <mh at markholloway.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> When installing CUCM 9 in VMWare, does it include a non-expiring demo license like prior versions?  
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> 
>  
>  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20120910/d993cd32/attachment.html>