Problem with deploying Cisco Jabber and Voice/Video traffic on separate networks

[CSCO12593384]

Hi all,

We have a situation where customer has separate networks for VoIP and data. Those networks are separated phisically, as well as logically. They bought Cisco UC solution(CUCM, CUC and IM&P v11) and want to use Cisco Jabber on computers. The problem is that BE6k servers will be in so called "VoIP" network and are not reachable by computers.

Can anyone propose the solution where network architecture wouldn't be changed and the customer could use Cisco Jabber as well as voice/video calls?

Is there a possibility to only install IM&P server in the "data" network so that the computers running Jabber can communicate with the server, and then make IM&P server communicate with CUCM server?

Thanks in advance!

[Leszek Wojnarski]

Hi,

The only solution that I can think of that wold not violate the existing setup, would be to implement Expressway (MRA) internally within the data network, this way Jabber clients would need to have access to VCS-E IP address that would be within data network, rest of the infrastructure could stay in Voice network.

This solution I suggest has some cons like: all traffic will traverse VCS, you will not be able to control your deskphone via CTI, phoneboook will  be UDS based. Also there is always a question about scale that needs to be considered (how many Jabber Clients are we talking about?).

Regarding your seconds question there is now way to install IM&P in Data so that it can proxy SIP registrations to CUCM.

Leszek

[Jaime Valencia]

Unfortunately this is a situation in which this should have been explained to the customer before buying the solution, so they understood that changes to their network would be required for this to work.

No, you cannot install IM&P on a network where there is not going to be communication to CUCM as now they're all part of the same cluster and require database replication, even if that would work, then you would only have IM&P, as devices go directly to CUCM for softphone registration.

Even using MRA as Leszek suggest, forcefully requires that the EXP-E has access to both networks to work, but as he mentions, this requires more resources and planning for scalability.

If they want to get the full benefits of the solution, they need to change their network. If they don't want to do that, then they need to understand that without connectivity, this simply won't work, and they would have to stick to just IP Phones. They need to compromise if they want this to work.

[CSCO12593384]

Thank you for your answers.

The customer knew the problem and bought the solution, because they primarily wanted to upgrade their old CM system. They don't want to change the current topology, but they asked if there is a possibility for it to work. Customer has about 300,400 Jabber clients.

Since we have two BE6k servers, is there a possibility to install one server(publisher) in "voip" network and the other(subscriber) in "data" network, and then just try to make database replication work and for softphone registration, they would use subscriber server?

[Leszek Wojnarski]

Hi,

If you setup one Server in Voice and once in Data, then for all replication, SDL communication to work, you would also need to have routing between those two IP addresses enabled, and from what I understand from your previous emails routing between those two Subnets is not there which is the main trigger for starting this subject.

And you'd need to have routing between those two subnets for the calls from Jabber to Phone to work. And I know you could potentially use features like TRP to workaround this, but would only make the solution more messy, not talking about lack redundancy.

All the solutions like placing IM&P or CUCM in different VLAN will cause more issues than good.

So my the recommendation would be same as mentioned before by Jaimie:

1. Change the network setup to make routing working.

2. Only if 1 would not be possible then I'd go with Expressway internal solution - with this you'd have features like IM&P, Phone calls, Visual Voicemail on Jabber clients.

you can read more on this here:

http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/voice_ip_comm/expressway/config_guide/X8-5/Mobile-Remote-Access-via-Expressway-Deployment-Guide-X8-5.pdf

Leszek

[CSCO12593384]

Yeah, that's the idea, to enable routing between those two. That wouldn't be much change in topology, but I don't know if it would work. From customer's side, I think that they would agree for that change. Routing between those servers, only for replication purposes and everything else would be prohibited.

[Leszek Wojnarski]

What I meant by changing the routing was to change the routing in the way you have full routing and traffic between Voice and Data network, not between only two servers, as if you enable only between servers then, jabber clients will still not communicate with the phones.

Leszek

[CSCO12593384]

Ok, I understand that, but in a scenario where they only want to use Jabber for communication between computers?

[Jaime Valencia]

It *might* work, but this is far from ideal, no redundancy whatsoever of all features for either IP phones or Jabber, which I assume is the reason you originally bought two boxes, CUCM won't be aware of the fact you're blocking communication, so it would still try to extended the call to Jabber and IP Phone, no deskphone mode, this would require customer education and the whole point of sharing your DN between your IP Phone and Jabber so you can answer in either would be defeated, etc.

Plus, if you only open communication between the two CUCM servers, and not full mesh, there will be no phone presence status as that goes via the SIP trunk between CUCM and IM&P.

Not to mention that this would require careful design to make sure you don't try to use resources from the other server which phones cannot reach.

I honestly think they're just going to have a really poor user experience because of this.