CUCM supercluster can support upto 16 call processing servers, 1 publisher, 2 TFTP servers, and up to 9 media resources servers. It enhanced the system capacity than normal deployment (30k phones). The development on CUCM Supercluster should go for Cisco BU approval via the Cisco Account Team (SE or AM).
Muhammad Amir Raza
What are the versions of UCM software that support megaclusters? Is there any clustering over the WAN requirements with megaclusters as well? For example, could I have all 16 subscribers at different sites clustered across the WAN?
Cisco Megacluster is currently supported on Cisco Unified Communications Manager 6.1 and 7.1. No Megacluster support is planned for 6.0, 7.0, and 8.0.
Current plans are to support megacluster in 8.5 for both MCS Servers and also on the UCS platform.
Clustering over the WAN is supported, but the guidelines found in the CUCM7.1 SRND will strictly be enforced.
That document is located in the Cisco Partner Community, which is accessible only to Cisco partners. Have you reviewed this information about CUCM and mega clusters?
Please post back to this thread if you have additional questions.
Moderator for Cisco Customer Communities
i was wondering if is possible to have access to the mega cluster document.
According SRND 11.x, CUCM cluster limit is 40 000 configuration and registration endpoints.
The problem is that with MRA introduction for BYOD, every user will have a multiple-devices (phone, CSF, android, ios...), therefore potentially the user-endpoit ratio will grow to 4 x user (or even more).
In conclusion the capacity and sizing of the cluster can scale up above the 40k very fast.
Can megacluster approch be good for this scenario or are there other suggested solutions.
Thanks in advance.
Here is some details on the internal Cisco Megacluster page.
Megacluster supports integration with UCCE with the following guidelines:
Note: Becuase of many successful megacluster deployments and upgrades, the process for approving a megacluster upgrade is being simplified to provide quicker megacluster approval.
This process assumes that the CST output submitted to the megacluster team has no errors and are simple upgrade or small expansions of an existing cluster. If you have concerns or errors when you submit your CST, please let the team know to avoid delay in reveiwing the megacluster.
I am sorry this isn't documented well externally to Cisco.
Megaclusters are fully supported, but require a design review first. You need to work with your Cisco Account team to submit the megalcuster for a design review. I lead the team and cordinate the reviews, so you can reach out to me with any questions.
Here’s where Megacluster is called out in 11x SRND, but I think you may have already found that?
Just one main question about the support on Mega Cluster:
- does it have differences or additional maintenance requirements (ex same migration path as a standard cluster? does it has some configuration or maintenance constraints...)
Another question is on the limit of a standard cluster and manage a possible oversubscription:
- CUCM has a cluster wide limit of 40.000 provisioned devices, but there is also a per server limit on registered devices (up to 20k from CUCM 11.5).
Considering that MRA users "are potential " (it is very unlike that an user will register at the same time all his CSF, BOT, TCT, TAB devices), is it possible to provision for ex 30000 users over the 2 Edges and maintain the 1:1 failover design (taking into account that the real registered devices will be only 1/3)?
The idea is to guarantee the 1:1 failover (respecting the 40k global limit), but without the need to scaleup the infrastructure for "potential" devices
The only difference between a megacluster and a standard cluster is the number of subscribers. There are no additional maintenance requirements. Configuration is the same.
In order to leverage more than 10k configured devices per subscriber pair, you need to get Cisco design approval. Same process as megacluster approval.
I am not sure I am following your detail in the last question. Can you please give me some additional detail or specifics?
Thanks a lot. You already answered to my question.
Last consideration can be summarised: ideally Cisco should have designed a "dynamic device type" for MRA to avoid the need of overconfigure devices (ex 5 each real user) that will probably never be used (ex. if an user register his IOS phone will not need the Android at the same time).