<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:st1 =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US vLink=blue link=blue bgColor=white>
<DIV><FONT size=2>somebody's buying their SE's more food than us.
;)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>Lelio
Fulgenzi, B.A.<BR>Network Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario
N1G 2W1<BR>(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX
(JNHN)<BR>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<BR>Sanity First : Number of days with fewer than<BR>50 messages in my inbox at
the end of the day: buffer overrun</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=sodonnell@CCSINET.com href="mailto:sodonnell@CCSINET.com">Scott
O'Donnell</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=rleetun@co.boulder.co.us
href="mailto:rleetun@co.boulder.co.us">Leetun, Rob</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, April 13, 2006 2:08
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [cisco-voip] Torn apart by
choices - old ornewsolutions?Simplyspeaking: CM5.0 or CM4.x</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006>Rob,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006>A Cisco SE told me the following.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006>As it stands now, the windows version will jump from
a 4.x to 6.x version.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006>The 5.x version (linux/appliance), as it was
explained to me is basically a means to get the linux based version up to
speed.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006>Then there will be a 6.x release on both platforms.
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006>The intention is to have full feature parity on both
platforms when it's released on 6.x.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006>At that point, it will be just a matter of what OS
the customer prefers.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006>That seems like a tough challenge to be but thats
what the internal rumor is.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=535420318-13042006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Leetun,
Rob<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, April 13, 2006 1:39 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Voll,
Scott; Lelio Fulgenzi; candace_holman@harvard.edu;
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [cisco-voip] Torn apart by
choices - old or newsolutions?Simplyspeaking: CM5.0 or
CM4.x<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=144213817-13042006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Our Cisco Vendor is stating that CCM 4.0 train will
change to the 6.0 (win) train in the future. Anyone heard
this?</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Voll,
Scott<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, April 13, 2006 10:47 AM<BR><B>To:</B> Lelio
Fulgenzi; candace_holman@harvard.edu;
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [cisco-voip] Torn apart by
choices - old or newsolutions?Simply speaking: CM5.0 or
CM4.x<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2>Once again to
echo:<o:p></o:p></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy
size=2><o:p> </o:p></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2>4.1 ---- features ------
5.0<o:p></o:p></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2>4.2 -----features -----
5.1<o:p></o:p></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy
size=2><o:p> </o:p></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2>I think I heard 5.1 is
slated for end of this year, (But it’s Cisco, so probably beginning of
2007)<o:p></o:p></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy
size=2><o:p> </o:p></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2>I will be waiting for
5.2 personally, but am really looking forward to the patching / upgrade
process of the 5.x train with active and standby
partitions.<o:p></o:p></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy
size=2><o:p> </o:p></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy
size=2>Scott<o:p></o:p></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy
size=2><o:p> </o:p></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2>PS. The last “dot
oh” upgrade I did, took 23 hours, 3 tac engineers and 6-7
developers.<o:p></o:p></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy
size=2><o:p> </o:p></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal align=center><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>
<HR tabIndex=-1 align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</FONT></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Tahoma size=2>From:</FONT></B><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2> cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Lelio
Fulgenzi<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, April 13, 2006 9:19 AM<BR><B>To:</B>
<st1:PersonName w:st="on">candace_holman@harvard.edu</st1:PersonName>;
cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [cisco-voip] Torn apart by
choices - old or new solutions?Simply speaking: CM5.0 or
CM4.x</FONT><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3><o:p> </o:p></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=2>Agreed on those points.
Sticking with 4.1(3) should provide an easier feature upgrade to 5.0. But from
what I hear, the 4.2 features will be available in 5.1 and that was slated for
release in 2007 or something like that. But you are right....I would use
several years as a guide line. 2 to 3 years.</FONT><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3> <o:p></o:p></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=2>It comes down
to:</FONT><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<UL type=disc>
<LI class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=2>feature availability
(SIP, etc)</FONT><o:p></o:p>
<LI class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=2>upgrade issues
(current features not supported in future version target)</FONT><o:p></o:p>
<LI class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=2>bleeding edge factor
-or- the "dot oh" syndrome</FONT><o:p></o:p>
<LI class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=2>support issues (how
much experience does the TAC have)</FONT><o:p></o:p>
<LI class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=2>stability (are there
all the patches you want in there)</FONT><o:p></o:p> </LI></UL>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=2>and I would also add,
product availability. It's probably alot easier to get 4.1(3) install media
than it would be 4.2 or 5.0.</FONT><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3> <o:p></o:p></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>Lelio
Fulgenzi, B.A.<BR>Network Analyst (CCS) * <st1:PlaceType
w:st="on">University</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">Guelph</st1:PlaceName> * <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City
w:st="on">Guelph</st1:City>, <st1:State w:st="on">Ontario</st1:State>
<st1:PostalCode w:st="on">N1G 2W1</st1:PostalCode></st1:place><BR>(519)
824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX
(JNHN)<BR>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<BR>Sanity First : Number of days with fewer than<BR>50 messages in my inbox
at the end of the day: buffer overrun<o:p></o:p></FONT></P></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial size=2>----- Original Message -----
<o:p></o:p></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>From:</FONT></B><FONT
face=Arial size=2> <A href="mailto:candace_holman@harvard.edu">Candace
Holman</A> <o:p></o:p></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>To:</FONT></B><FONT face=Arial
size=2> <A
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A>
<o:p></o:p></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sent:</FONT></B><FONT
face=Arial size=2> Thursday, April 13, 2006 12:11
PM<o:p></o:p></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>Subject:</FONT></B><FONT
face=Arial size=2> Re: [cisco-voip] Torn apart by choices - old or new
solutions? Simply speaking: CM5.0 or CM4.x<o:p></o:p></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3><o:p> </o:p></FONT></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>To some extent I
agree with Lelio and Scott, but it may be worth it to <BR>you to consider
some other points:<BR><BR> * 4.x will not have SIP lines
for several years at best<BR> * 5.x has the option for SIP
and SCCP<BR> * it could be difficult to upgrade 4.2 ->
5.x because some of the<BR> user features in
4.2 are not duplicated in 5.x for several
years<BR> at best<BR> * 5.x
is a RH Linux train, 4.2 is windows so your considerations
for<BR> hardware, organizational policies or
tech philosophies,<BR> engineering skillset,
etc _may_ be different<BR><BR>Candace<BR><BR>> Subject:<BR>>
[cisco-voip] Torn apart by choices - old or new solutions? Simply <BR>>
speaking: CM5.0 or CM4.x<BR>> From:<BR>> Netfortius <<A
href="mailto:netfortius@gmail.com">netfortius@gmail.com</A>><BR>>
Date:<BR>> Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:33:58 -0500<BR>><BR>> To:<BR>> <A
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A><BR>><BR>><BR>>
You may have already gotten used to my last string of questions here, which
- <BR>> I am not hiding it - are part of my attempt to gain info from the
more <BR>> experienced people, on this subject, regarding a project I am
working on for <BR>> deployment of multi-site IPT & VoIP. I have gone
into some details, for some <BR>> questions I had, but now - reading tons
of material every day, I have become <BR>> very worried about the full
blown solution chosen, vs. what is being promised <BR>> just "around the
corner". Here is where I would appreciate any comments, of <BR>> any
nature, thoughts, experience, "what-if" - anything you can share about
<BR>> this subject:<BR>><BR>> Scenario: multi-site deployment of
Cisco CM, with the following objectives in <BR>> mind:<BR>><BR>> 1.
Replacement of existing old telephony solution, Nortel-based, consisting of
<BR>> PBX in each location, with Cisco-based IP-based communication
systems (and <BR>> not only one-to-one replacement of phones, but also
steps toward unified <BR>> communications)<BR>><BR>> 2.
Installation of Cisco solution consisting of:<BR>> a. CM 4.x (advised by
Cisco) at the HQ + Unity integrated with Exchange 2003 <BR>> and a
handful of IP phones (major testers of the technology) and integration
<BR>> with existing Nortel PBX at the HQ (PHASE 1)<BR>> b. IP phones
in the remote location (complete replacement of everything old, <BR>>
including PBX) + SRST + standalone (storage-wise) Unity (PHASE 1)<BR>> c.
Unified messaging at the HQ, in the "pilot" group, to the best of the
<BR>> abilities and availability of products around CM 4.x (e.g. PA,
among others, <BR>> as an example of what I am getting at) (PHASE
1)<BR>> d. Experience from c> ==> full implementation of unified
messaging at the <BR>> first remote ("upgrade" of the standalone Unity
into an Exchange-tied one - <BR>> is this even possible?!?) (PHASE
2)<BR>> e. remote site used as template fro all other sites (PHASE
2)<BR>> f. full upgrade at the HQ (PHASE 2), with the exception of
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Call</st1:PlaceName>
<st1:PlaceType w:st="on">Center</st1:PlaceType></st1:place><BR>> g. Cisco
IPCC replacement of the existing <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">Nortel</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">Call</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType
w:st="on">Center</st1:PlaceType></st1:place>, after the <BR>> entire VoIP
and IPT has proven reliable to sustain a Customer Service (PHASE <BR>>
3)<BR>><BR>> 3. The unified communications (including messaging) will
eventually adddress <BR>> various business needs, primarily focused on
mobility and real-time <BR>> communications and sharing<BR>><BR>>
Having said all of the above, here are the issues I am struggling
with:<BR>><BR>> - I have (and nobody in my network geeks group) no
real experience with Cisco <BR>> VoIP/IPT;<BR>> - the suggested
solution, from Cisco, revolves around a CM 4.2 and, gradually, <BR>> as
explained above, updates to the point of full unified messaging - still
<BR>> 4.2-based<BR>> - I am getting conflicting messages from our
Cisco group - they advise us to <BR>> do the install with CM 4.2 (which
would end up as a cluster of multiple <BR>> servers, at the HQ), not CM
5.0, but:<BR>> - I am reading and reading, and it appears to me that some
features associated <BR>> with CM 4.2 are dying (e.g. PA), while CM 5.0
seems to open the door for much <BR>> more, but not everything backward
compatible with 4.x<BR>> - tons of features are being advertised as
related to CM 5.0, only, but are <BR>> not ready yet, and are to be
released this year (majority in second quarter)<BR>><BR>> Bottom line
- I am struggling with one major question (with no easy answer - <BR>>
thus appreciating any comments this list may have): should I move ahead as
<BR>> started, with the one site + pilot HQ, on CM 4.2 (PHASE 1), then go
over all <BR>> phases, then analyze what would need to be upgraded to a
5.0 environment, if <BR>> certain additional features would become
available and needed, and not <BR>> backward compatible<BR>>
OR<BR>> should I just put a stop to the CM 4.x analysis and planning, and
redo <BR>> everything (with the delay caused by various products
availability) around CM <BR>> 5.0?<BR>><BR>> As I said - any
$0.02-$64K comments will be really appreciated. I will try to <BR>>
consolidate this type of info, in something useful, if enough data warrants
<BR>> it.<BR>><BR>> Thanks,<BR>>
Stefan<BR>><BR>>
<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>cisco-voip
mailing list<BR><A
href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</A><BR><A
href="http://portal.mxlogic.com/redir/?1jLtOXzXydPqtXLCzBdxCX9IDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oTvHTLssCCqehNEVdTdSBiRiVCIByV2Hsbvg5bdSaY3ivNU6CSrEIc6Qkm63hOMUYOCrd7b9I5-Aq83iTqlblbCqOmdbFEw1doMd46Hr6pEw85zh1oDmlLEq82VEwGuwq8aNd44fc6y2BjSVOH2x8oAGIumd455LQHa158Qg2gS_RPh1m9Ew4xJzwYTfM-u0USyrhdFTpopvjuvhdyvr01XER">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</A><o:p></o:p></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>cisco-voip mailing
list<BR>cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<BR>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>