CME and Unified messaging

[thisisshanky]

The faq for CME definitely indicates CME can integrated with Unity in Unified messaging configuration, but the following document only indicates VM integration (and not UM).

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/voicesw/ps2237/prod_configuration_guide09186a00801c4185.html#wp1227093

I dont see any problems why UM cannot be integrated with CME the same way as described in above link. Any thoughts ??

[thisisshanky]

Anybody??

[rversluis]

Works just fine. I have had it running for over a year - CME and Unity UM.

[thisisshanky]

The next question, is whether that is a supported configuration from Cisco. (TAC supported)

[rversluis]

It should be fully supported. To me, the only difference between Unity UM and Unity VM is the location of the exchange server. With Unity VM the Exchange server is set up on the same box, and in UM the exchange server is somewhere else.

The front end connection between CME and Unity would be the same regardless of the back end message store configuration.

[thisisshanky]

I agree totally. The frontend is totally using SIP while Unity should take care of the Exchange portion. I am still wondering, if I suggest this to my customer, and he installs all this, and one fine day he calls TAC and hears a Big NO to this design.

Have you ever had to call Cisco TAC on any issues with this setup ?

[rversluis]

I have not called TAC regarding this, so am not able to answer the question.

To me, Unity is Unity, so there should be TAC support. Our install on this was a special situation, although it has been in use for over a year.

Everywhere we do a unity box, we also are installing at least one, usually two CCM boxes. CME installs have been with Unity Express, and we have proposed CME with Stonevoice SSAM.

Due to the (apparently arbitrary) limits on phone counts with CME, and a few features that CCM has (attendant console, Caller Name display with NI2 PRI, G729 over WAN, >3 on conference call), there is a crossover point at about 50 phones that makes a 7815, SRST, and Unity a better deal than CME with either Unity Express or Stonevoice.

I really like CME, and the feature growth on it has been great so far. Right now, the MCS-7815 and 100 user CM4.1 combo is still better.

[Markus Schneider · Accepted solution]

You can definitely run UM with CME and it is fully TAC supported. As mentioned earlier, the Unity backend (VM-only, UM with Exchange, UM with Domino, ...) is independent of the integration. The same design considerations, for that matter, apply as well. I.e. since with UM you've got to have the mailstore off-box, you need to have adequate bandwidth between the mailstore and Unity (i.e. no WAN links between the two) or you'll likely experience delays logging on and such.