[cisco-voip] UCCX Flex Licensing

Tue May 12 09:29:32 EDT 2020

I mean I’d imagine the demand is just not there. Lots of places may not have contact centers and/or may need UCCE as well. It doesn’t make sense for a non core telephony feature to be included. It’s also almost always going to be at a much lesser seat count than the overall company seat count.

Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518
w: www.heliontechnologies.com | e: MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com
From: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 9:14 AM
To: Myron Young <mdavid_young at hotmail.com>
Cc: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>; Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
Subject: RE: [cisco-voip] UCCX Flex Licensing

[EXTERNAL]

Ok. Thanks for confirming. Not sure why they have yet to move that into the suite. ☹

From: Myron Young <mdavid_young at hotmail.com<mailto:mdavid_young at hotmail.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 9:11 AM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>>
Cc: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>>; Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX Flex Licensing

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to IThelp at uoguelph.ca<mailto:IThelp at uoguelph.ca>

Its still a separate pricing for UCCX. Collab is for call manager, unity, CER, SRST, CUAC and some other stuff with the option to add on Webex calling

On May 12, 2020, at 9:07 AM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>> wrote:

So, you found that UCCx is now included in the Collab EA suite? Or are you still being priced separately for UCCx?

From: Myron Young <mdavid_young at hotmail.com<mailto:mdavid_young at hotmail.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 8:18 AM
To: Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>>
Cc: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>>; Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX Flex Licensing

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to IThelp at uoguelph.ca<mailto:IThelp at uoguelph.ca>

Yes, I’m going through the analysis right now to present benefit of going EA instead of yearly Smartnet for our Call Manager and UCCX licensing and the cost difference makes it really hard to say no when you look at the numbers over 3 or 5 year period

On May 11, 2020, at 8:20 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca<mailto:lelio at uoguelph.ca>> wrote:
 After all that I want to ask...

Is UCCx included in EA yet? Or still separate.

Sent from my iPhone

On May 11, 2020, at 8:03 PM, Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>> wrote:

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Guelph. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. If in doubt, forward suspicious emails to IThelp at uoguelph.ca<mailto:IThelp at uoguelph.ca>

A port is a port.

Chat/Email and Advanced Outbound Campaigns (predictive/progressive dialing) require Flex Premium so agents doing those functions would need premium.

Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518<tel:443.541.1518>
w: www.heliontechnologies.com<http://www.heliontechnologies.com/>
 |
e: MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>
<image235579.png><http://www.heliontechnologies.com/>

<image491683.png><https://facebook.com/heliontech>

<image202110.png><https://twitter.com/heliontech>

<image675695.png><https://www.linkedin.com/company/helion-technologies>

From: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com>>
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 7:11 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>>
Cc: Pawlowski, Adam <ajp26 at buffalo.edu<mailto:ajp26 at buffalo.edu>>; Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX Flex Licensing

[EXTERNAL]

Why did they have to borrow the same names for the licensing levels?  It's like when Cisco decided to call UCCX CAD+Finesse Mixed mode, while on CUCM mixed mode already meant secure communications.  Anyway.

Ok, so, a port is a port in Flex?  There is no concept of a premium port or a standard port then?  Any kind of inbound port can do any kind of feature?  The only licensing levels are for Agent/Supervisor capabilities?

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 6:07 PM Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>> wrote:
You need to dissociate flex std/prem from L-CCX std/pre. Every feature on flex is the equivalent of the L-CCX premium level from a capabilities standpoint.

Does that make sense?

Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>

Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518<tel:443.541.1518>
w: www.heliontechnologies.com<http://www.heliontechnologies.com/>
 |
e: MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>
<image001.png><http://www.heliontechnologies.com/>

<image002.png><https://facebook.com/heliontech>

<image003.png><https://twitter.com/heliontech>

<image004.png><https://www.linkedin.com/company/helion-technologies>

________________________________
From: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway%2Bcisco-voip at gmail.com>>
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 7:03:47 PM
To: Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>>
Cc: Pawlowski, Adam <ajp26 at buffalo.edu<mailto:ajp26 at buffalo.edu>>; Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX Flex Licensing

[EXTERNAL]

My man!  Always coming through!  So, the Supervisor one is true but the admin one is bogus, right?  I mean, about the Premium requirement for each.

So, what is still confusing to me is, in the past, the Premium seat also got you 2 premium IVR ports.  Does a standard flex seat get you 2 standard ivr ports?  Thus, a mized std/pre felx deal is going to net you a mixed std/pre port solution?  How does that work?

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 4:36 PM Matthew Loraditch <MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>> wrote:

A-FLEX-CC has Standard and Premium Licenses.

These are different from non flex licensing.

Standard is inbound agent licensing essentially

Premium is supervisor licensing,   email/chat agents, outbound campaign licensing.

2 CTI ports per agent/license.

Admin still works no specific license needed as long as admin isn’t also supervisor/agent, HA is included, outside of the 3 features above, it’s like perpetual premium with SQL, etc included.

See here for specifics:

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/unified-communications/cisco-collaboration-flex-plan/datasheet-c78-741220.html Table 8.

License enforcement is only in UCCX 12.5. Older versions don’t know and you end up with Perpetual Premium with HA feature set but with a license that expires at the end of your contract term.

Suffice it to say if you don’t need 12.5 features you could ride the gravy train for a while.

Licensing is still concurrent users.

There are grace periods so if you need to test something you can make the admin a supervisor or something w/o breakage, just remember to remove later.

If your customer has on-prem premium, with perpetual trade-in credits you are close to the cost of SWSS and should probably try and get them to move.

Matthew Loraditch
Sr. Network Engineer
p: 443.541.1518<tel:443.541.1518>
w: www.heliontechnologies.com<http://www.heliontechnologies.com/>
 |
e: MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com<mailto:MLoraditch at heliontechnologies.com>
<image001.png><http://www.heliontechnologies.com/>

<image002.png><https://facebook.com/heliontech>

<image003.png><https://twitter.com/heliontech>

<image004.png><https://www.linkedin.com/company/helion-technologies>

From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>> On Behalf Of Anthony Holloway
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 5:21 PM
To: Pawlowski, Adam <ajp26 at buffalo.edu<mailto:ajp26 at buffalo.edu>>
Cc: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX Flex Licensing

[EXTERNAL]

But seriously, a premium license to administer the system?  Does this include the appadministrator account too?  Do you have first hand experience with it?

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 4:16 PM Pawlowski, Adam <ajp26 at buffalo.edu<mailto:ajp26 at buffalo.edu>> wrote:

This was the information I heard as well, and the purchase quantities are based on feature utilization and concurrency.

From: cisco-voip <cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net>> On Behalf Of Brian Meade
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 5:07 PM
To: Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway%2Bcisco-voip at gmail.com>>
Cc: Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] UCCX Flex Licensing

Pretty sure when buying as A-Flex-CC that it always just gives you Premium licensing on the CCX side.  Had this cause an issue with a customer that was staying on Enhanced for the extra CTI ports for many years.

On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 4:23 PM Anthony Holloway <avholloway+cisco-voip at gmail.com<mailto:avholloway%2Bcisco-voip at gmail.com>> wrote:

All,

Anyone already deal with this themselves?  I am reading/being told something I cannot swallow as the truth, because it seems so ridiculous.

I am being told that you need a Premium license to even login as a Supervisor at all.  Like, not for extra functionality (silent monitoring), but just as a basic license requirement to even sign in.

Also, I am being told a Premium license is required for Administrative users too.  Like, even the app admin account.  So what, completing a fresh install now requires a Premium license?

Are either of these true?  Can you confirm from your own tests that this is in fact how Flex works in UCCX on-prem?

_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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/20200512/a9e8231c/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image725633.png
Type: image/png
Size: 9409 bytes
Desc: image725633.png
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20200512/a9e8231c/attachment-0004.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image156944.png
Type: image/png
Size: 431 bytes
Desc: image156944.png
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20200512/a9e8231c/attachment-0005.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image105789.png
Type: image/png
Size: 561 bytes
Desc: image105789.png
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20200512/a9e8231c/attachment-0006.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image883549.png
Type: image/png
Size: 444 bytes
Desc: image883549.png
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20200512/a9e8231c/attachment-0007.png>