[cisco-voip] IM&P, Jabber, Presence Redundancy Groups, Assigned Presence Server

[Anthony Holloway]

I hear you Daniel, and I appreciate the remarks, however, that will not be
possible in this particular instance.

So, it sounds like I might have turned over every rock already.  The
decision at this point might be the cost benefit of micro managing the load
balances versus the optimal routing geographically.

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 2:50 PM, <daniel at ohnesorge.me> wrote:

> Hi Anthony,
>
> I dare say that the CUPS BU did not give user assignment much thought with
> regards to geographical regions.
>
> What I would do in this instance (and may or may not be possible for you
> to re-design) is to have separate clusters for your East Coast and West
> Coast. This would be achieved by changing the LDAP to point 1 cluster to a
> more specific geographical OU.
>
> For CUCM you can easily set up ILS/GDPR to exchange your extensions
> between cluster and EMCC (Extension Mobility Cross Cluster) is fairy
> trivial. This setup would also support centralised TFTP for phone
> registration and centralised Jabber login. Now when it comes to CUPS, you
> will of course be using Inter-cluster Peering. The downside to this for
> both CUCM and CUPS, there is no redundancy between East Coast and West
> Coast (between your DC's) but this can still be achieved with subscribers
> in each DC.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 26 Apr 2016, at 04:51, Anthony Holloway <
> avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> *My specific environment is*
> CUCM 11.0(1a)SU1
> IM&P 11.0(1)
> Jabber for Windows 11.5(2)
>
> Clustering over the WAN with local failover
> 2x CUCM nodes and 2x IM&P nodes in DC1 (east coast)
> 2x CUCM nodes and 2x IM&P nodes in DC2 (west coast)
>
> *The Challenge*
> I need to *easily* assign users to the proper Presence Redundancy Group,
> based on geographic region of the user.
>
> *My Thoughts*
> First off, I needed to change the *CUCM > Enterprise Parameters > User
> Assignment Mode for Presence Server* setting to *None*, so that if
> someone clicks the *CUCM > User Management > Assign Presence Users >
> Rebalance Users* button, it doesn't destroy the geographic assignments
> I'll have worked so hard to maintain.
>
> Second, I know that the *CUCM > User Management > Assign Presence Users *setting
> takes precedence over the *CUCM > User Management > User Settings
> > Service Profile > IM and Presence Profile*.  Otherwise, I'd just assign
> users to *Service Profiles* by way of *Feature Group Templates* assigned
> to different *LDAP Directory* sync agreements.
>
> Third, *BAT > Users > Update Users > Query* has very little fields to
> filter on.  How hard would it be to add a few more fields in here Cisco?
> There's just no way this is useful.  *BAT > Users > Update Users > Custom
> File* has promise, but because of its mandatory User Template usage,
> it'll need some careful testing with the Ignore Fields option.  I'm not
> excited about that method, unless one of you calms my fears.
>
> What I would like to ask the group is, how are you doing this, or how
> would you suggest doing this?  I.e., Your process to assign users, both
> existing in the system today, and newly synced from LDAP, to their
> geographic IM&P nodes and therefore Presence Redundancy Groups?  I'm not
> quite looking for a SQL query method, or an AXL method, something a
> operations person could manage through the GUI.
>
> Thanks.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160425/fcbdb3f4/attachment.html>