[cisco-voip] Expressway Design for new startup

[Ki Wi]

Guys,
any comment? Ideally going spark is the best but the lack of voice
gateways/ direct sip trunk support seems to force us back to hybrid model?

Regards,
Ki Wi

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Ki Wi <kiwi.voice at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi James,
> you are right regarding the phone registration on Spark directly. However,
> for the voice gateway connectivity for voice countries, looks like we will
> have to go via Hybrid method. :(
>
> If that's the case + customer have MPLS today. I will prefer to have the
> voice traffic over MPLS. At least we can tell them that when using
> deskphone, quality is guarantee.
>
> Regards,
> Ki Wi
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 3:12 PM, James Buchanan <james.buchanan2 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I don't believe that's the case. According to Cisco, you register the
>> phones directly to Spark. Check out
>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/unified-communications/hosted-collaboration-solution-hcs/datasheet-c78-736823.html#_Toc444123188
>> .
>>
>> This could eliminate the need for a UCM at all as well as voice gateways
>> if I understand it correctly.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> James
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Ki Wi <kiwi.voice at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi James,
>>> It definitely make more sense. However, if this is to go to spark, I
>>> will need similar equipment upfront as well.
>>>
>>> First create a UCM cluster.
>>> Establish hybrid spark connectivity (this requires additional expressway
>>> C instance for host connector stuff on top of expressway C&E pair)
>>>
>>> Since I have 3 locations with voice gateways, it make sense to have 3
>>> expressway (C&E) at least? If not, I can imagine that when I'm in US
>>> calling someone US, the spark will connect to the UCM cluster located in
>>> SG via that only expressway located in SG. The voice quality will be very
>>> bad due to latency. The PSTN option directly via spark is very limited
>>> currently.
>>>
>>> The setup is more or less the same eventually. Most likely we might be
>>> able to save on CUWL license cost if those roaming users doesn't need a
>>> phone profile in CUCM?
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:16 PM, James Buchanan <
>>> james.buchanan2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if a cloud-based solution such as Spark wouldn't make more
>>>> sense than implementing an on-premise system.
>>>>
>>>> James
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:14 AM, Ki Wi <kiwi.voice at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Group,
>>>>> I have this customer requirement where they have 3 locations
>>>>> (Singapore, US and UK) . Majority of their users will be on the move
>>>>> (around the world). Users have to connect to the phone system via Internet.
>>>>>
>>>>> The intention is to have the UCM cluster in Singapore and have the
>>>>> expressway C/E pair in all the 3 locations mentioned. With the help of
>>>>> GeoDNS solution, the jabber shall be able to look for the nearest
>>>>> expressway to connect to. Optimize resource assignment (ie.
>>>>> CFB/xcoder) nearest to them shall be taken care of by configuring device
>>>>> mobility related profiles.
>>>>>
>>>>> Will this work? Since they have small amount of users, having multiple
>>>>> clusters might not make sense and the users will be roaming across cluster
>>>>> often + I don't see any benefits by doing so?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Ki Wi
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> cisco-voip mailing list
>>>>> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Ki Wi
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Ki Wi
>



-- 
Regards,
Ki Wi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20160607/64780af5/attachment.html>