Design UCM - Expressway - VCS Control - interconnection?

[gfolens]

I've been looking around to find the preferred design when deploying a UC environment with UCM, Expressway C&E and a VCS control for registration and call control of legacy VC endpoints.

Between UCM & Expressway-C: SIP trunk

For the VCS Control I prefer neighbouring with Expressway because it is easier with the zones and search rules to make a routing plan.

But for each cal going across the Expressway-C  (UCM-> Exp-C -> VCS Control) a RMS license will be consumed.

So is it better to make a SIP trunk between VCS Control and UCM to avoid the use of RMS's? But how to route calls on the UCM when you can only the poor 'SIP Route Pattern' routing function of the UCM?

Any advice / thoughts on this?

rgds, Geert.
 

[Chris Deren]

Why do you have Exp-C and VCS-C both in the path?  They are the same thing, so what is the intent here?  

[gfolens]

You cannot register devices on a Exp-C. For this you need to use a VCS-C to register legacy vc endpoints such as MXP, Polycom, etc.

[Jaime Valencia]

Chris is referring to this:

(UCM-> Exp-C -> VCS Control)

[gfolens]

This are the possible paths:

VC endpoint registered on UCM > UCM > EXP-C > VCS-C > Legacy endpoint registered on VCS-C

or

VC endpoint registered on UCM > UCM > VCS-C > Legacy endpoint registered on VCS-C

The disadvantage of the last one is that on UCM you have less routing possibilities than with using the Exp-C search rules.

Note there's also a EXP-E in the deployment for B2B calls on the Internet.

VC endpoint registered on UCM > UCM > EXP-C > EXP-E > Internet > B2B endpoints