<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"/>
</head>
<body>
<p>So I still don’t see a compelling reason to tell a customer not to go with Exchange 2010 and dump Unity / Unity Connection if they already own the E-CAL for exchange 2010 as part of their EA agreement with Microsoft? To tell them they have more nobs to turn is not going to go very far. I am looking for real technical limitations of Exchange 2010 Vs. Unity Connection.</p>
<p>
<span> </span>
</p>
<div style="margin: 5px 0px; font-family: monospace;">
<br/>
On February 23, 2012 at 5:03 PM Nate VanMaren <VanMarenNP@ldschurch.org> wrote:
<br/>
<br/>
> It’s not very bad at all. But Unity Connection 8.5+ is a much more full featured voicemail system, and you get nice single inbox. There are a lot more knobs in Connection to control how stuff works.
<br/>
>
<br/>
> Just depends on the needs.
<br/>
>
<br/>
> From: bill@hitechconnection.net [mailto:bill@hitechconnection.net]
<br/>
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 2:14 PM
<br/>
> To: Jason Aarons (AM); Nate VanMaren; Gr
<br/>
> Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net
<br/>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.5 integration with Exchange 2010 for Voice mail
<br/>
>
<br/>
>
<br/>
>
<br/>
>
<br/>
> So beside these two things why is the Exchange 2010 UM so bad? I am having a hard time from a competitive standpoint convincing someone NOT to dump unity / unity connection and move directly to Exchange 2010 UM when they have the E-CAL already as part of their enterprise agreement.
<br/>
>
<br/>
>
<br/>
>
<br/>
> On February 17, 2012 at 5:02 PM Nate VanMaren <VanMarenNP@ldschurch.org<mailto:VanMarenNP@ldschurch.org>> wrote:
<br/>
>
<br/>
> > Yea there isn’t really “ports” that you have to worry about on the SIP integrations, just max number of calls.
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > You will still need a VM pilot and profile, and then a route pattern that points to the sip trunk that is pointed at exchange UM.
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > http://www.agileit.com/Blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=820
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=13591
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > From: Gr [mailto:grccie@gmail.com]<mailto:[mailto:grccie@gmail.com]>
<br/>
> > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 3:00 PM
<br/>
> > To: Jason Aarons (AM); Nate VanMaren
<br/>
> > Cc: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>
<br/>
> > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.5 integration with Exchange 2010 for Voice mail
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > Thanks Nate, Jason! Valuable information, I will keep this in mind.
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > Another question is we just create voice mail pilot in cucm and route it to sip trunk and then in exchange 2010 we create voice mail pilot and the actual voice mail ports?
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > Thanks,
<br/>
> > GR
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > Sent from my iPhone
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > On 18/02/2012, at 4:35 AM, "Jason Aarons (AM)" <jason.aarons@dimensiondata.com<mailto:jason.aarons@dimensiondata.com<mailto:jason.aarons@dimensiondata.com%3cmailto:jason.aarons@dimensiondata.com>>> wrote:
<br/>
> > I think I understand that Exchange 2010 has a crappy sip stack. Good info. <lol>
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net%3cmailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net>> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net]<mailto:[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net]><mailto:[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net]> On Behalf Of Nate VanMaren
<br/>
> > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 11:03 AM
<br/>
> > To: gr11; cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net%3cmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
<br/>
> > Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.5 integration with Exchange 2010 for Voice mail
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > Two things off the top of my head.
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > 1. Exchange has a crappy sip stack. So you have to use a MTP on the SIP trunk because it won’t deal with RTP source/destination changes in a session. Like when someone does a supervised transfer to voicemail.
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > 2. Exchange has a crappy sip stack. So if you want correct caller name on the voicemail on call transferred to voicemail, you have to run the transfer through an app that waits for the transferee to complete the transfer to send the call to exchange.
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > Voicemail preview takes a lot of hardware. I think our boxes are quad core with 8/16gb of ram and 4-5 calls will max out the CPU.
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > -Nate
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > From: cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net%3cmailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net>> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net]<mailto:[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net]><mailto:[mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net]> On Behalf Of gr11
<br/>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 5:17 PM
<br/>
> > To: cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net%3cmailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net>>
<br/>
> > Subject: [cisco-voip] CUCM 8.5 integration with Exchange 2010 for Voice mail
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > Hi List,
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > I am providing the CUCM8.5 integration with exchange 2010 for a customer for their voice mail needs. The customer has an old unity server that will be decommissioned and voice mail functionality will be provided by exchange 2010 UM.
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > Anyone who has done this before, any pitfalls or things to be aware of? We are going to use a third party gateway for SIP Trunk termination to/from CUCM and exchange
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > Thanks,
<br/>
> > GR
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> >
<br/>
> > itevomcid
</div>
</body>
</html>