[cisco-voip] CUCM 7x with ACME SBC

Tue May 6 12:12:02 EDT 2014

Crowdsourcing and open model is great for uber geeks. Most large enterprises want someone to call and someone that will produce the results in a defined time frame.

The problem is when guy X writes an awesome script that does some amazing things… what happens when he leaves the enterprise and the script breaks as part of an upgrade of what not.

I love the uber-geek stuff as I am one myself, but when it comes to having one’s job on the line, I want someone to save my butt.

Dennis Heim | Solution Architect (Collaboration)
World Wide Technology, Inc. | 314-212-1814

PS Engineering:  Innovate & Ignite.

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Anthony Holloway
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 11:32 AM
To: Matt Slaga (AM)
Cc: cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net)
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 7x with ACME SBC

Matt,

I'd like to point out three things in response to your comment:

 *   LUA scripting support recently moved to:

    *   https://communities.cisco.com/community/developer/collaboration/call-control/uc-manager-sip

 *   Cisco themselves, plus highly qualified non-Cisco people, just like this mailing list, provide support on that forum.

    *   Shout out to Mark Stover<https://communities.cisco.com/people/mstover> who is a top contributor on LUA scripting support and all around excellent SIP resource

 *   A distributed support model has many benefits: free, crowd sourced solutions and diverse problem exposure; to name three

    *   Shout out to the excellent cisco-voip members and Cisco Support/Communities contributors
Therefore, it is my opinion, that Cisco not supporting LUA scripting via TAC, as does ACME, is not a bad thing, rather, we have a large support community of Cisco technical resources and non-Cisco technical resources to call upon and ask for guidance.  And it works quite well.

Is LUA the hot topic on any given Cisco forum?  No, I'll admit that.  But, it's also very new to CUCM and to UC Engineers.  If we shy away from using LUA because of its lack of official TAC support, then we'll never gain the exposure and knowledge required, to have our support communities flourish.

For reference, I have used LUA once to solve a VCS to VzB outbound calling issue where the SDP was too large (If I recall it was over 1200 bytes).  Call flow was:  VCS ---SIP--> CUCM ---SIP---> SBC ---SIP---> VzB

I chose to solve it at the CUCM level because I had LUA there to help me.  Had Cisco simply said "Why give them the option of LUA if we cannot officially support it?"  Then I would have had a no choice, and my solution may have never worked.  I appreciate that it's there and don't look negatively on the feature because of the lack of official TAC support.

Disclaimer: I may have been standing on a soap box when I typed this, but I have returned to slouching in my computer chair.

Respectfully,

On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Matt Slaga (AM) <matt.slaga at dimensiondata.com<mailto:matt.slaga at dimensiondata.com>> wrote:
And, ACME actually supports their LUA scripting through their TAC center.  Cisco passes you off to DevNet.

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>] On Behalf Of Mark Holloway
Sent: Monday, May 5, 2014 3:35 PM
To: Tim Smith

Cc: cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>)
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 7x with ACME SBC

The Acme Packet SBC has a very advanced SIP Header Manipulation regex based language. It also supports LUA. You can write “plugins” for the SBC using LUA to extend it’s functionality. Pretty cool for an edge appliance!

On May 5, 2014, at 5:12 AM, Tim Smith <tim.smith at enject.com.au<mailto:tim.smith at enject.com.au>> wrote:

Hi guys,

I love this combo.
They work really well together and both products have great capability for normalisation HMR on Acme, LUA on CUCM.

Acme HA is fantastic.
Virtual option is great.
Acme docco is comprehensive and quite plentiful!

Jason - I’ve unicasted you some info on one of my deployments.

Cheers,

Tim.

From: cisco-voip [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Holloway Mark
Sent: Saturday, 19 April 2014 5:51 AM
To: Jason Aarons (AM)
Cc: cisco-voip (cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>)
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 7x with ACME SBC

There are Acme guides for CUCM up through 9.x.  Acme is the only non-Cisco SBC blessed by Cisco for CUCM, CVP, UCCE. They’ve even blessed it as a CUSP replacement as it can fill both CUBE/CUSP requirements in CVP/UCCE environments on one box. Much of it had to do with customer frustration of ISR scalability as well as Acme’s High Availability being much more robust and resilient. Anyone interested please email me offline.

On Apr 18, 2014, at 2:34 PM, Jason Aarons (AM) <jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com<mailto:jason.aarons at dimensiondata.com>> wrote:

I haven’t seen any kind of integration guide on Cisco.com<http://cisco.com/> with a ACME SBC.   I can’t imagine Cisco would create one since it would compete with their CUBE product.

Looking on Oracle.com<http://oracle.com/> to see if they have anything.

Lastly I think the customer should upgrade from CUCM 7x to at least 8.5 for SIP Trunks.  Anyone dis-agree?

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

itevomcid

_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto: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/20140506/6acb5697/attachment.html>