<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.0.6603.0">
<TITLE>Pros/Cons of AD Integration - CCM 4.2(3) and IPCCx 4.0 Premium</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/rtf format -->
<P DIR=LTR><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">I need some pros and cons for AD integration. We are in the middle of an install and have gone down the AD integration path (our choice) with our vendor. Things are not playing so nice so far. First, we want to point to our DNS group of AD servers for redundancy. </FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">This is covered the documentation, but we are having problems. </FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">This is not working so well because there are some bogus IP addresses configured in our DNS group. Our network guys are working on that clean-up. Even when pointed to our main domain controller, still having problems getting IPCC to see updates and changes to users.</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN></P>
<P DIR=LTR><SPAN LANG="en-us"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">We chose the AD path as part of plan to move towards single sign-on across our network. So far it</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">just</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"> seems to be a headache. I believe our vendor is</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">going</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"></FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">to engage Cisco tomorrow for some direct support on our issues. As the Telecom Admin of our company, I don</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">’</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">t have a</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"> <FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">preference</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"> for either directory (AD or DC), as long as it works and is stable.</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"> I would love some feedback from anyone who has been down the AD path</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">.</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial"> </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P DIR=LTR><SPAN LANG="en-us"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">From my reading, it does seem that the AD integration to CCM 5.0 is better than on th</FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"><FONT SIZE=2 FACE="Arial">e 4.x versions. </FONT></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"></SPAN><SPAN LANG="en-us"> </SPAN></P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
<table><tr><td bgcolor=#ffffff><font color=#000000><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.<br>
</font></td></tr></table>