Associating a CUC with a different CUCM

[RFC_2549]

Hello,

we have 2 CUC in a site (pub e sub), that we can call "site A". At the moment they are working with a CUCM in the "site A" but we need to make it work with a different CUCM, a CUCM in the site "B", since the CUCM in the site A is going to be shut down.

The 2 CUC have now a SIP trunk to the CUCM of the site A, in the next days they will have a SIP trunk with the CUCM in the site B. Can You please help me to find out what IP addresses I need to change on the CUCs to make them work with the new CUCM? For now I have only looked on the changes on the CUCM side without encountering problems, but since I'm not experienced with CUC I was wondering if I'm losing something. At the moment I saw that on the CUC the IP address "reference" to the CUCM are under "port group" "Edit Servers" but anyone knows what are all the places were the CUCM is mentioned? 

Thank You
Kind regards

[b.winter · Accepted solution]

Normally those 2 locations in CUC:
Phone System --> Choose the phone system --> Edit --> CUCM AXL Servers
Port Group --> Choose the port group --> Edit --> Servers

The guide to follow:
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/unified-communications/unity-connection/200851-Configuration-Example-for-CUCM-non-secur.html

[Maren Mahoney]

@b.winter provided a link to the right guide. If the CUCMs are known to CUC by FQDN rather than IP address, you'd need to change the FQDNs in the same place as you would the IPs. Reset the Trunk on the CUCM end and also reset the Port Group on the CUC side.

Be aware that changing the integration in CUC this way that it will 'move' the integration full to the new CUCM cluster. The Site A cluster will no longer be able to reach CUC. If you need both to work for a while that is possible. Let us know and we can help.

Maren

[Jonathan Schulenberg]

Also ensure that user mailboxes are not AXL-integrated with the current CUCM. If they are you will need to use CUC BAT to make them local or LDAP-integrated instead.

[RFC_2549]

Many thanks to all for the simple but exaustive replies!