<div>Making sure we're clear - the recommendation (for multiple reasons) for a separate cluster is when using UCCE. UCCX/IPCCX doesn't (in my opinion) warrant a 2nd cluster - the versioning requirements are nowhere near as tight and the upper-bounds of scaling aren't a concern (300 agent max, etc.)</div>
<div><br clear="all">Matthew Saskin<br><a href="mailto:msaskin@gmail.com">msaskin@gmail.com</a><br>203-253-9571<br><br>July 18, 2010 - 1500m swim (in the hudson), 40k bike, 10k run<br>Please support the Leukemia & Lyphoma Society<br>
<a href="http://pages.teamintraining.org/nyc/nyctri10/msaskin">http://pages.teamintraining.org/nyc/nyctri10/msaskin</a><br><br><br></div>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Lelio Fulgenzi <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lelio@uoguelph.ca">lelio@uoguelph.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Wow. We'll definitely have to take a look at things. No wonder people have talked about putting IPCCx agents on their own cluster in the past. Upgrade planning benefits aside, it sounds like a good idea.
<div class="im"><br><br><br>---<br>Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<br>Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<br>(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)<br>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>
Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it. <br> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)<br><br><br>----- Original Message -----<br></div>
<div>
<div></div>
<div class="h5">From: "steve siltman" <<a href="mailto:steve.siltman@assurant.com" target="_blank">steve.siltman@assurant.com</a>><br>To: <a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a>, <a href="mailto:lelio@uoguelph.ca" target="_blank">lelio@uoguelph.ca</a><br>
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 1:33:09 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern<br>Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Phone limits per server<br><br><br><tt><font size="2">I might be able to help with this as I've been working with Cisco on this very discussion for weeks. </font></tt><br>
<br><tt><font size="2">I'm using v7.x on 5 Clusters. I too read that these 7845 servers can support 7500 phones per server and 30,000 phones per cluster. Cisco told me that this is true in a perfect world</font></tt> <br>
<tt><font size="2">but Call Center agents use CTI and 500 agents is the max per server with 2000 agents max per cluster. I freaked out because thats a 15:1 ratio. </font></tt> <br><br><tt><font size="2">Another thing Cisco came back with is that if these agents use CVP and don't use an IP IVR then that number doubles to 1000 agents per server and 4000 agents per cluster.</font></tt> <br>
<br><tt><font size="2">A little better but as Wes said, a massive performance hit.</font></tt> <br><br><tt><font size="2">Here's more info:</font></tt> <br><a href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/ipcc_enterprise/srnd/75/c7ccmsrv.html#wp1061120" target="_blank"><font face="Calibri" color="blue" size="3"><u>http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/cust_contact/contact_center/ipcc_enterprise/srnd/75/c7ccmsrv.html#wp1061120</u></font></a> <br>
<br><font face="Arial" size="3">In a deployment with Unified CM 7.0 and Unified CVP (no IP IVR), each Unified CM cluster (four primary and four backup subscriber servers) can support up to about 4,000 Unified CCE agents. This limit assumes that the BHCA call load and all configured devices are spread equally among the eight call processing servers with 1:1 redundancy. (See </font><font face="Arial" color="#002f80" size="3"><u>Unified CM Redundancy</u></font><font face="Arial" size="3">, for redundancy schemes.) Each of the eight Unified CM servers (MCS-7845-H2/I2 or later High Performance Servers) would support a maximum of 500 agents. In a failover scenario, the primary server would support a maximum of 1,000 agents. These capacities can vary, depending on your specific deployment. All deployments must be sized by using the Cisco Unified CM Capacity Tool or the Unified Communications Sizing Tool.</font> <br>
<br><br><br><tt><font size="2">Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:47:48 -0500 (EST)<br>From: Lelio Fulgenzi <<a href="mailto:lelio@uoguelph.ca" target="_blank">lelio@uoguelph.ca</a>><br>To: Wes Sisk <<a href="mailto:wsisk@cisco.com" target="_blank">wsisk@cisco.com</a>><br>
Cc: <a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br>Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Phone limits per server<br>Message-ID:<br> <<a href="mailto:1338453699.2032011268232468344.JavaMail.root@simcoe.cs.uoguelph.ca" target="_blank">1338453699.2032011268232468344.JavaMail.root@simcoe.cs.uoguelph.ca</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br><br>When you say massive performance hit, what do you mean? Just a rough guess. <br><br>Case in point, we have Unity Express boxes, IPCCx boxes. Does each CTI port shave the load capacity down by 100 phones or something? <br>
<br>We also have a Cistera appliance that uses CTI super provider to monitor all 8000 phones or so. <br></font></tt><br><font face="sans-serif" size="2"><br>Steve Siltman<br>Senior Network Engineer - Cisco CCVP<br></font>This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, distribution, copying, forwarding or other use of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message and all copies and backups thereof. Thank you.</div>
</div></div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>cisco-voip mailing list<br><a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br><a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>