Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 


cisco meeting server

can any one advise if he has an idea about new cisco meeting server

Advisor is a good start and the partner community is here Cisco Meeting Server Partner Information (Acano)

Hi Srinivasan,

I would want to know more about Cisco meeting server. I am currently using a VCS based environment (NO CUCM) with MSE 8510 blades, which are announced EoL. If i need to buy more MCU units (8510) in my environment, what option do i Have? Do i need to buy a Cisco Meeting Server instead of the blades? If yes, How do i integrate this Cisco Meeting Server with my existing Telepresence Conductor and MSE 8510s?


It isn't clear if you are running 8510 in MCU code or TP code but if it's the former, while you can migrate your MCU 8510 SW to TP software running screen licensing for a cost, Cisco Meeting server is where the future development and roadmap is focused on. In addition it provides higher scale, more features such as MSFT interop, web RTC capabilities.

So it is best to use this opportunity to migrate the licensing from ports/SL to SMP+ and then bring in CMS 1000 server which is a purpose built UCS-C server optimized for Cisco meeting server or use spec based.

Conductor has no part to play with CMS, it can dynamically adapt based on the connection of the unit.

There are some feature caveats you have to be aware of between TP server/Conductor and CMS code though which is covered in internal/partner slides and hence should be used for designing this properly.

Hello Srini,

we use the MCU 8510 in MCU code. What I am keen to know is - I will need to buy more MCU capacity in the early next year. MSE 8510 will be end of sale by then. I dont want to buy TP server, because my conductor already has 5 MSE 8510s attached and I dont want to create a separate pool to fit in TP server.

therefore, if i need to buy more MCU capacity in the near future, should I be buying the Cisco Meeting Server directly, and connect it to my VCS-C infrastructure?

Yes for future scalability I would recommend investing time and money on CMS vs legacy licensing plus you get more capacity too with lesser foot print

One CMS 1000 can do 96 HD ports at 720 p 30 video and 720 p5 content



What about 1080p30 calls? The limit is 48 ports?

I'd also like to hear about the sizing for 1080p30 calls

It would also be interesting to hear how mixing audio conferences affects the sizing of HD calls. For example the CMS 1000 states it supports 96 HD calls and 3000 audio legs, does that mean it can do 96 HD + 3000 audio simulatenously? Is this for any complexity of audio transcoding (for example G.729)?

CMS is 96 HD or 3000 audio. CMS dynamically adapts to the meeting capacity if you exceed it, it drops the resolution of the other devices. At this time no tool exists that can calculate for me on the fly how many of HD/SD/Audio mixed but there is roadmap items to look at maybe profiles for meetings or set minimum guarantees

In addition if you are a partner check out the VOE Page link here slide 29 it has some more details on load/thresholds. Since this public side of the community I cannot post it here

View the full document

Thanks for the reference, that slide was a bit obscure but I felt that the following white paper cleared things up:

However, this threshold had to do with whether a new conference were accepted according to thresholds, but in no way explained the meaning of "current load" as anything other than a metric, and "load limit" as anything other than a product of so and so calls. Because load limit isn't explained, but rather provided, I can't defer from it the units used to calculate how many conferences can be held simultaenously.

Assuming existing conference threshold = 76800 (80% of 96000 for a CMS 1000), then 96 HD call legs would mean that each HD call leg takes 800 units. I haven't seen a Cisco planning guide which states that a 720p30 call takes 800 kbps, which I'd imagine is the metric being used even though it might not be necessarily so.

Any chance you can help elaborate on the matter?

I agree I don't have more info cisco stance is almost the fact that let the software handle gracefully accommodating endpoints at various resolutions vs give you hard numbers or better a sizing tool

There is roadmap items here but maybe the response is you need to dedicate CMS servers if you want guaranteed quality experience without cutting it close




No chance of someone at Cisco providing how much load each video resolution demands? The rest of the calculations can be performed easily enough.

Recognize Your Peers
Content for Community-Ad